How do you define the worth of a
person? Is it by what they do; is it how
much they have; or is worth ascribed via different means? Whether we admit it or not there are obvious norms
woven into our social fabric which say a person’s worth is based on their
ability to contribute to and enhance the society to which they belong. Those who cannot contribute are seen as
drains on community resources and therefore drains on society and we show it. One example of this, offered by Hauerwas and
Vanier, is seen in the way the people
who are considered “normal” contributors in the world have found subtle ways of
hiding or segregating the so-called “abnormal” non-contributors in the world (e.g.
mentally or physically disabled, blind, deaf, homeless etc…).[1] This has been done to greater and lesser
degrees through the formations of various institutions that intentionally keep the
often vulnerable non-contributors out of sight, out of mind and without a voice.[2]
So should we now say that people are more commodity than human? Have subjects
been turned into objects? I propose that
life is much more important than this. Perhaps even a sacred thing from
conception onward, and take notice of the word onward because the average pro-lifer
only seems concerned with beginnings.
Throughout both the Hebrew
Scriptures and NT there is a moral ethic which says that human life is of
unsurpassable worth. This begins with
the outworking of human creation in which Yahweh authors life (Gen. 2:7; Psa.
139:13-16), shares the enterprise of creating with the biological world (Gen.
1:11), but then explicitly makes humankind in his very image (Gen. 1:26-27). However, we must ask to what extent do we
bear God’s likeness? The usual erroneous ways of concluding this either begins
with anthropomorphisms (i.e. projecting human attributes onto God as if God
were also made of bone, flesh, brain, organs and so forth), or we ascribe all
of God’s overwhelming power, absolute control, autonomous nature and unilateral
action onto humanity. The problem with the second is that it would then make
the entire “natural world available for human manipulation and exploitation”
which would have led to self-destruction long ago.[3]
Conceivably we might then take it
to mean that God shared his power in more productive ways such as offering
humanity the unique capacity to be intentionally-faithful, to love, to will, to
imaginatively create, to be relational and care for the rest of creation in
ways that it cannot in return do for us. Subsequently, when God gives humans the
God-like permission to fill the earth, subdue it and take dominion over it
(Gen. 1:28) it might be better understood that we were and are to take
responsibility for it in creative word and conscientious deed, as appose to
coercion and violence. Psalms 8 echoes
this as it seemingly draws from the Genesis 1-2 polemic against chaos with
Yahweh’s ordering the cosmos and then establishing humanity as a center of
sorts for helping maintain that established order (8:3-5). In verses 5-8 humanity is celebrated as royal
personhood that again has authority and responsibility to order and care for
creation for the sake of “establishing justice and righteousness.”[4] Therefore, humanity is a little more than some
arbitrary addition to a biological universe, but has a multifaceted purpose
that is privileged to help bring order as-well-as the potentiality to usher in
its restoration, hence the God/human Messiah with all restorative teachings and
implications.
Likewise, God early on made declarations of
human life being beautiful and worthy of respect and saving. In the Levitcal law for Jubilee the Israelites
were commanded to never take advantage of one another but to care for each
other’s needs especially concerning those with less (Lev. 25:13-17; 35-36). So
also, it is said that oppressing the weaker and poor is altogether an insult to
the world’s Maker. Instead, it is in kindness we honor Him and display morality
and integrity (Prov. 14:31-32). Perhaps
most profound of all is when Jesus says what you do, or do not do, for the
least of these you have in turn done to Me (Matthew 25:45). The connection between Creator and personhood
exists as an intimate connection that we not only hinder by disconnecting the
two, but commit a holy offense. Therefore,
it is in this image-bearing way that human life has a sacred purpose and
responsibility to care for and make new avenues of togetherness and community
that include all persons from least to greatest. This idea of community, as I
have demonstrated in past posts, must be done even when the only benefit is for
that of another.
So, why is it that we still
struggle to make this a consistent feature in our life ethic and mind-set toward
the other? Perhaps it is because we fail
to see that our socially formed ideas and practices, which disable others, have
left us unaware of two things: first, those deemed lesser in society share a
core commonality of humanity, but secondly we have become blind to our own
inefficacies and need for care, grace and mercy. My initial attention toward those who are
disabled is indicative of the bigger problem whereby we build and protect
self-images. There is not one who is free
from absolute dependence, yet we belong to a world that, at its core, believes
a person is stunted if they are not self-reliant. The reality is we come into this world
relying on the care and mercy of others and we often go out of this world relying
on it as well. The in between time where
many believe they have reached independence is a lie because within any
societal context one’s daily needs for human necessity often rests in the hands
someone else (doctors, farmers, water sourcing, clothing makers, and so forth). We would then be remiss to think that this dependent
feature does not overlap into things of the unseen. Humanity bears the image of
a God that oversees our needs in both and intimate and broader sense. So what all
this points to, or attempts to point to, is that God in turn desires a people who
will do what He does within their societal existence as ambassadors of His
Kingdom that defines human life and worth as that of a chosen consecration.
[1] Stanley Hauerwas & Jean Vanier. Living Gently in a Violent World
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press 2008), 29.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Terrence E. Fretheim. God and
World in the Old Testament: A Relational Theology of Creation (Nashville,
TN: Abingdon Press 2005), 48-49.
[4] Walter Brueggemann. The Message of the Psalms (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Press 1984),
37.
No comments:
Post a Comment