THE LETTERS OF LAW AND THE FACE OF JUSTICE

Credits: NIV website

There must be a strong connection between the letters of law and the face or presentation of justice. For societies to develop and progress, there must be a link between what the makers of the law graft, what the interpreters of the law decides and declares, and what the seekers of justice and the onlookers perceive about what is grafted and interpreted. Justice, they say, must not only be said to have been done, it must necessarily be seen to have been done. There is no development and progress if the makers of the law claim to have done a good job, the interpreters and declarers of the law claim to have done wonderfully well but the wider members of society are seeing injustice. When these makers and interpreters of the law claim to have done the right thing but the average person in the society, including the intelligent ones, perceive injustice because they suspect that someone must have removed the blindfold from the eyes of the lady of justice so that the judgment given was done with her eyes open, trust is eroded. Why will someone summarize a judgment with the words of the late Russian Writer, Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn, “We know they are lying, they know they are lying, they know we know they are lying, we know they know we know they are lying, but they are still lying”?

It is possible that the perception of the wider society is wrong. It is possible that there is no such desecration of the temple of justice and there is no such violation of the lady of justice. However, why is it possible that the makers of the law and the interpreters are doing one thing but intelligent people in the society are seeing something else? What is creating the gap between what is claimed to have been done and what is seen and perceived to have been done? What is causing this trust deficit? Is it because of what someone has termed “implausibly undeniability”, that is, when a person struggles to explain away something that’s actually true, because the truth has suddenly become inconvenient or politically incorrect?

The danger of having this kind of unsettling situation is that it opens up the ugly doors of oppression, suppression and autocratic tendencies. The reason is not far-fetched, what the makers of the law have done and what the interpreters of the law have declared are considered the letters of law, but and unfortunately so, because it is entirely different from the face of justice, what is seen, perceived and felt about the judgment by the wider society, people will express themselves in different ways and the intelligent ones especially, will make efforts to bring the declared judgement out to the open court of public opinion for discussion, arguments and a “second trial”. They will try to bring out facts missed either by the makers of the law or its interpreters. This in most cases does not go down well with the executors of the law because as Denise Diderot noted, “those who fear the facts will forever try to discredit the fact-finders”. Efforts then will be made to silence those discussing the judgment and connecting the dots with what is seen and felt. Clampdown will set in and more actions, which the wider society will consider as further injustice, will be taken by those who want to execute the interpreted law. At the end, the conclusion will be that the government is an oppressive government. The society retrogresses. How can a society where this exists redeem itself?

There are no simple recommendations. But two things ae on my mind now. The first is that there should be humility on the sides of the executors of the law to listen to the discussions going on in the public space and engage with them with the assurance of reforms that will correct whatever has been perceived to be wrong. This will give hope to the populace that the future will be better. The second thing is that truthfulness should be embraced in all the dealings of the government with the citizens. Truth is the thing that can heal a wounded conscience and sets the society free.

The challenge of justice

"I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies. Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them. Though you bring choice fellowship offerings, I will have no regard for them. Away with the noise of your songs! I will not listen to the music of your harps. But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!” Amos 5:21-24 NIV.

We all desire justice and want to see it done. Anytime we witness evil around where we are, what everybody will be looking to see is justice. We look to see justice done at the gates (Amos 5:15) by man towards his fellow man or by God towards the man He created. This happens because we are moral agents. God is the Source of Moral Law and man being in His image is not only expected to do justice, he himself wants to also see that justice is done. Ultimate questions of justice are directed at God because we live with the inexplicable consciousness that the Judge of all the earth must do what is right. (Gen.18:25). The scepter of His kingdom is a scepter of justice. (Ps.45:6).

As God’s people, those around us expect us to do what is right and just. God Himself commands us to do justice. Justice has to do with fairness, impartiality, and not being even-handed toward others in our dealings with them. Aristotle said that “justice in this sense then is not part of virtue but virtue entire nor is the contrary injustice a part of vice but vice entire.”² In support of Aristotle’s argument is Dr. Ravi Zacharias who in the context of love said that “justice is an intrinsic part of virtue. You can judge without loving, but you cannot love without also being just”³. This is true since God is love and he that does not love his neighbor is a murderer (1 Jn.3:15), a noise maker (1 Cor.13:1) and knows not God (1 Jn.4:8). Love then is ultimate virtue. We cannot claim that we love when we do not dispense justice. In other words, we cannot claim that we are Christians when we do not do justice.

No wonder when the nation of Israel neglected this important virtue, God lost interest in all other activities, ceremonies and rituals of their worship life. From the passage in Amos above, it seems God is saying, “your assemblies, your feasts, your tithes and offerings, your songs and music are nothing to me when you do not do what is right and just towards others. Inasmuch as the activities are important, but their value is rated based on how you are letting justice roll on like a mighty flood and righteousness like a never-failing stream!”.

Societies are not transformed just because people talk much about justice. Societies change because people see and feel justice. The impact of the church then is not going to be much in our society just because we make the most noise and speak about justice. Our influence and impact will be strong when our members and the outside world see and feel that we do what is right. Ethical living is not an option for the church and church members, it is a requirement for us all. It is good to declare prosperity upon the people but it is not going to transform the society. Our societies will be transformed when we do what is right and treat both ourselves and others around us fairy and reasonably as the gospel which we preach demands. I have argued severally in the church circles against the structure whereby the system favors and makes a few persons at the apex free and very rich in the midst of and at the expense of a struggling membership. God, in rebuking the leaders of Israel of injustice, accused them of feeding on the choice and fat sheep while the weak, the sick and the poor were neglected. (Ezek.34). In Dr. Martin Luther’s days, the indulgence-preachers were so mean that Dr. Luther argued in his 50^th thesis “Christians should be taught that, if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence-preachers, he would rather the church of St. Peter were reduced to ashes than be built with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.”¹ Permit me to say that it’s like we are back to this scenario once again where Cathedrals and Church Investments are “built with the skin, flesh and bones of the sheep”, as it were, and the welfare of the members are not prioritized.

As goes the church, so goes the society. The political leaders cannot do otherwise from what they see the prophets and pastors do. At anytime there is a stark difference between what the political leaders do and what the prophets and pastors do, the later always rebuke the former in God’s name. But when they are doing the same thing, the later will not have a moral justification to rebuke the former. The result is that the society will be so filled with injustice both in the church and the outside that God’s judgment becomes inevitable.

Note also that within our context, justice is not just how the law is applied but also how we conform to truth and God’s righteousness in all our dealings. As individuals, justice should be seen in the way we relate with our spouses, neighbors, work colleagues, and all our relationships in general, as a matter of fact. In our business dealings and how we handle people of high and low estate, we must do to others what we will like them do to us assuming we are the ones in their estate. Welfare and social actions are supposed to be part and parcel of the Church concerns. When we are privileged to be in the position to defend the defenseless, speak for the voiceless, protect the weak and dispense equity and judgment to the vulnerable, what do we do? Without doing justice, our profession is vain and our preaching will be noise.

We preach the cross because that is the place where love and justice intersected. It is the centerpiece of the gospel of Jesus Christ. God has demonstrated that He is not only a God of justice in His Essence but also that He does justice in practical ways. Sin was judged at the cross; the requirements of justice were met at the cross; and love was shown at the cross whereby we are set free. The one that accepts this sacrifice on the cross receives a transformed heart. It is with this transformed heart that we can do justice and bring about transformation in our society. As God’s saved people, we have to be committed to doing justice and righteousness and not just speaking about it. Justice is not done because it is held as a belief or doctrine or spoken of by men, it is considered done because the people who look for it see and feel that it is done.

 “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” Mic 6:8 ESV.

“…But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!” Amen

Reference

1. Evangelical Lutheran Church, (2019). The 95 Theses, Assessed 25/11/19 ONLINE: http://www.zionlutheran-ssm.org/95.pdf
2. Zacharias, R. (2019). The Logic of God: 52 Christian Essentials for the Heart and Mind. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan USA.
3. Ditto.

Dr Martin Luther Jnr Quote

I love this quote. It encourages me and sets me into action for what I ought to do now I am alive and strong.

“You may be 38 years old, as I happen to be.
And one day, some great opportunity stands before you
and calls upon you to stand up for some great principle,
some great issue, some great cause.
And you refuse to do it because you are afraid.
You refuse to do it because you want to live longer.
You’re afraid that you will lose your job,
or you’re afraid that you will be criticized
or that you will lose your popularity,
or you’re afraid that somebody will stab you,
or shoot at you or bomb your house;
so you refuse to take the stand.
‘Well you may go on and live until you are 90,
but you’re just as dead at 38 as you would be at 90.
And the cessation of breathing in your life is but the belated announcement of an earlier death of the spirit. You died when you refused to stand up for right. You died when you refused to stand up for truth. You refused to stand up for justice.”
-Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
From the sermon “But, If Not”
delivered at Ebenezer Baptist Church November 5, 1967.
He was assassinated five months later on April 4, 1968.
From here