Email Excerpt on Justice and Righteousness

What appears below was originally written to two of my sisters and one sister-in-law.  I have been updating this small local group recently on my latest housekeeping woes and conquests, and one of the people who couldn't be there for a recent Wednesday evening meeting at church invited my response to the presentation on an assigned topic--after another had already weighed in with a favorable review..  I will redact some of the personal references.

Several people to whom the email was directed asked permission to share it with others.  I granted it and then realized that I could share it here and make it more widely available.  

***********

I too thought the topic was generally good. I especially liked the distinction between social justice A and B.  [This was taken from a book by Thaddeus J. Williams:  Confronting Injustice Without Compromising Truth.]

I guess I don't see the same urgency that _____ sees in our knowing all the details of how corrupted various terms have become, given the fact that we generally don't ourselves attach the same corrupted meanings to the terms and do not generally align ourselves with those who do.  Maybe it's partly because I just can't happily blend into a world of detailed analysis, etc.  I'm all about the big picture, and it's quite enough for me to know that word meanings often change over time, but the Word of God doesn't, and we have guidance there about what we are called to do and to be.  As _____ pointed out, our group efforts at Center are directed toward biblical justice--not the corrupted kinds of social justice that he referenced.  The more relevant concern involved here seems to me to be political activism related to these issues.  On that front, Anabaptists in general seem in many cases to have completely lost their way.  

I remember something Ervin Hershberger* said about capital punishment--which was a current issue at that time.  He said something along these lines.  "If we say anything on this topic, I think we would need to speak up in opposition to it.  But I'm not sure that it's important that we do speak up, given the fact that punishment of evildoers is a legitimate government function."  I feel a little bit the same about the social justice issues that many Christians have become uber-vocal about.  It is within the "rights" of the government to reward good and punish evil.  It is also a basic tenet of a democratic government that all are equal before the law.  Equal opportunities and equal rights are included in the equality equation, and government should promote equality.  To parse all the ways that government gets it wrong is sort of beside the point.  We know that they will not/cannot operate by Christian principles.  As Christians, however, we are duty-bound when we speak to stand with the marginalized (which may at times include people whose values do not align with ours) rather than the oppressors.  As a purely practical matter, I can't see that it makes sense for anyone (all Christians are marginalized to some extent) to point "guns" at others who are marginalized.  Don't we all know that those "guns" can easily be wrested out of our hands and pointed back toward us?  IOW, if we do not show generosity and love toward others, it's unlikely that it will be shown to us.  

There's a lot in this broad category of justice and righteousness that I still need to think more about.  To mention a few: 

1.  "Systemic" terminology.  I personally feel no need to argue against the concept that certain kinds of discrimination are so deeply embedded in a society and have been present so long that they're baked into many ways of being and doing that we may not recognize as such.  This makes it a systemic problem.  I think systemic problems are a thing.  

2.  "Intersectionality" terminology.  I don't see the problem with this general concept--that many people have more than one area in which they may be discriminated against.  Of course it might be misused at times, but it can also be a valuable tool in understanding people where they live.  Surely the recent poverty simulations** made that clear.  

3.  "Group guilt for private sins."  Certainly in the Old Testament God often held people responsible for the sin of others in their tribe (e. g. Achan).  I think Paul in the New Testament often felt the weight of the sins of the Jewish people, even after he was transformed by meeting Jesus.  Jesus certainly did:  "How often I would have gathered you under my wings as a hen gathers her chicks, but you would not."  (memory quotation).  I just don't see the need to make it clear to the world that I am not guilty of white people's sins, or of other sins that members of our "tribe" have committed.  One reason for this is that I can not justifiably claim to be fully aware of my own wrongs [i.e. wrongdoing].  Another is that self-defense runs counter generally to humble service. 

4.  "Critical race theory."   Isn't that closely related to the "systemic" term?  As such, and for other reasons too, I have no interest in teasing out all the reasons for being upset about anything related to critical race theory.  I think it's a nothing-burger as long as we think straight about systemic issues, group guilt for private sins, intersectionality and Biblical justice. I believe that ____ did not mention this term last night at all. That seemed good to me. 

************

*Ervin Hershberger was from Meyersdale, PA.  He was the long-time editor of a publication for which my father, David L. Miller, also had major responsibility.  He was active at Calvary Bible School for decades and was one of my dad's closest friends.  He was widely respected across the entire Beachy constituency.

**The poverty simulations happened at church.  A group from a Mennonite church in Hutchinson orchestrated the activity. It's a little hard to explain, but basically it involved assigning temporary identities and circumstances to people who then did some role playing in keeping with those assignments.  It was designed to show how people in poverty often face challenges on multiple levels, meaning that even if they work very hard to do well in one area, another obstacle can sink their efforts into overall failure.