Often, the question of the rule of law and the rule of love seem to clash or contradict one another. In 2015, many parts of the world, especially Europe, experienced an influx of migrants due to the conflict in Syria. Europe was challenged between self-protection, the rule of love, and neighbor-love. The question of accepting migrants displaced from their homeland due to war or other human situations remains relevant to this day. Those who opened their borders to refugees were seriously criticized and, in extreme cases, lost their political positions. This situation is a complex one because those who criticized and opposed the welcoming of migrants have reasons, some of which are justifiable. These include state laws, fear of the unknown, self-preservation, socio-economic, and even religious reasons.
The few people willing to extend solidarity and hospitality often based their reasons on the tradition of neighbor-love and the idea of the common good and human well-being. On the other hand, they were seen as betrayers of the laws of the land. This complexity of choosing between solidarity and rule of law underlies the politics of our world today.
The Necessity of Discernment
This question of law and tradition is an enduring one and was even a problem in Jesus’ time. Moreover, it plays out in different contexts and various human situations, such as abortion debates, divorce, and same-sex relationships. On what criteria should decision-making or legitimization of right actions be based?
This question has become more complex with the postmodern undoing of master narratives and tradition, and the quest for fluid identity. What is freedom, and how should it be asserted? What rights do parents have in the training and discipline of children? And, what is self-affirmation, and where is the boundary between self-centeredness and self-affirmation?
Hence, even as the Catholic Church talks of the signs of the times and diversity, the intricate questions are: Whose diversity? Whose signs and whose times should determine the legitimization of the right decision and action?
Furthermore, the intricacies of these debates affect people’s understanding of reality: Is there still anything like Truth, and how or where can one identify it? What can one hold onto as identity in today’s world? Where is the boundary between love or mercy and right judgment? Hence, self-doubt and indecisiveness cloud our judgment in our times.
Above all, Charity
Today’s readings offer us some clues for navigating between the law of justice and the rule of law. In the first reading, Isaiah announces the vindication of the oppressed and the needy. The second reading warns the community of believers against partiality in dealing with people and in the ordering of the life in the Church. The Gospel presents us with the periscope of the healing of the deaf man whereby the people proclaimed the kindness and mercy of God. Justice and acts of kindness stand out in all Jesus’ intervention with humanity. However, Jesus’ ministry is punctuated with sincerity and authenticity.
Namsoon Kang, in her Cosmopolitan Theology, says that Jesus’ call to the Christian life as born again should be a mandate and invitation to a practice and discourse of prophetic critique and transformation of self, world, and others (pgs. 112-113).
If Christians could stand against injustice, commit to doing good, starting with self-cultivation and then extending it to the planet and others, there might be less displaced and poor people in our world since war and acts against humanity would possibly be drastically reduced. With justice and right judgement people everywhere would have enough for the sustenance of their basic human needs because there would be no more manipulation of the poor. Possibly, people would tend to consume less and there would be more tendency for equal distribution of earthly goods and preservation of earthly goods. There possibly would be more self-acceptance and a greater spirit of sacrifice for the spouse, children, family, for love and even for our world.
Conclusion
A heart set on doing God’s will and keeping his commandments can discern the will of God. Whatever act we do for the good of others and justly done will never stand as judgment against us. What quenches the spirit are those actions attached to self and their gratification, especially when they fail to nourish the life of others. Not only the decisions for or against justice, but also the good we fail to do could stand as judgment against us. This means that even being neutral or not acting is also to be reckoned as irresponsibility. Hence, justice warrants that one engages with situations that challenge the good of humans and the planet and takes a stand against such acts. But above all, charity is demanded in the way one pursues these justices for the earth and for humanity.
