Laws z mercy

Saturday. Sofa. Coffee.

Rules and laws are necessary; a source of immediate, useful wisdom of generations that have gone before. The body of rules and laws that grow through the decades, centuries, millenia, are not perfect, but rather a work in progress marked by the timeless pattern of two steps forward, one step back, a rhythm that probably had its beginning when our ancestors decided that walking on their hands to the dinner campfire was making the meat too gritty.

Frustration sets in when we feel like the value of our generation's contribution may be questionable. And it is easy to sit in judgment of a particular moment in the past when our ancestors made horrible mistakes, so easy to see in hindsight. But if one steps way back for some perspective, the direction is generally forward, advancing civilization and humanity in positive ways.

But rules and laws have limitations, at least the way we humans choose to use them. We want to know the minimum daily requirement.

Rules and laws become our standards for how little we can do to get by, or how much we can do and still stay on the good side of the law.

That sounds worse than it is. In fact, that is probably a good definition for rules and laws. The Rule of Law, even imperfectly executed, has been and continues to be a foundation for the advancement of human civilization. Or if not the advancement, then at least it has prevented us from killing each other off until we can come up with something better.

Rules and laws are not enough.

There must be something more that drives us to exceed the minimum daily requirement if things are going to get better.

Take the ten commandments, the tablets God prescribed to cure human ills. Ten rules. Simply and clearly stated. (Perhaps because Moses could not have carried more than two tablets, we'll never know.) But those who were called to follow the Decalogue also felt called to define them. After a few hundred years the Commandments became a way to be good enough, but also an excuse for not "getting better." I haven't murdered, coveted, adulterated, swore falsely, stole, forged graven images or false gods or worshipped any other god, haven't worked on the sabbath, haven't mistreated my parents, and haven't used God's name in vain, so I'm okay. Nothing else is required.

Jesus tried to straighten this out. He often said "It was written . . ." or "It has been said . . ." and then He would say "but now I tell you . . ." Murder became a matter of what is in your heart. Adultery came to include what is in your thoughts. Other gods are all the things that we give a higher priority than we give to God. According to Jesus there is no minimum requirement. If one were able to flawlessly follow the law as He described, there would be no room for improvement. There would be perfection.

The original ten commandments were much more manageable. More black and white. Or terra cotta and black. (I am ignorant of the geology of Mt. Sinai)

And we like black and white. If the written law is our only standard, we have some wiggle room.

If our only standard is to satisfy the law, we can still pollute the air and water. Maybe not as much as we would if environmental laws did not exist, but a certain amount is legal, so that makes it right, doesn't it?

We can still take advantage of employees. Maybe not as much as we would if labor laws did not exist. But some things are still legal, so that makes it okay, doesn't it?

We can still rent out substandard housing. Maybe not as much as we could if housing laws did not exist. But we can still get away with a lot. If it were wrong, we couldn't get away with it, could we?

We can still ignore the cry of the needy. After all, we pay taxes for welfare programs. I've got no choice. The government takes my money to give them. If they're still crying, that's not my problem is it? I follow the law, that's enough isn't it?

Rules and laws serve us well. They are necessary.

But they are not enough.

Take the U. S. Congress for instance.

A majority party with sixty votes doesn't have to listen to what anyone else thinks. A minority party with forty one votes can stop anything that the huge opposing majority is trying to do.

Those are the rules. That is the law.

That makes it okay, doesn't it?

.