AGAINST THE CURRENT

Have you ever walked down a street with a group of people headed in the same direction?  Whether acquainted with them or not,  it seems as if there is an unspoken, yet general consensus of the acceptable pace that you should be walking.  Your steps may even become synched with those around you, creating a symphony of strides along the pavement. Then you realize, in the middle of this sonata, that you are actually inclined to go in the opposite direction.  It can be intimidating, gazing at all the mystified faces and probing eyes that beckon to know the reason that you are disrupting the flow, yet their bewilderment and disapproval will not negate the fact that you need to go the other way. This is the predicament I find myself in today. I am looking forward at oncoming traffic during a very volatile time.  I feel as if I am standing in the moment of cautious anticipation, as though awaiting the thunder to crash moments after seeing lightning illuminate the sky. Nevertheless, my goal is clear and my conviction is strong so I will endeavor to swim against the current, challenge perspective and encourage that we seek to view the affairs of life through the lenses that God looks through rather than our own.

 "Someone must pay!"...These few, energized and passion-filled words carry with them the official notice that there has been a failure to settle arrears. It denotes that there is a standing debt that must be resolved and someone is required to accept responsibility for it. It bellows a demand for justice. Unfortunately, this demand, all too often refers only to the aspect of justice that reflects retribution. It calls for justice to exercise its authority and administer to the respective party exactly what they deserve. Rarely, though, does this request summon justice as a whole. Not only welcoming the side that drives the gavel to the sound block announcing punishment, but also the side that soothingly conveys the message, “the debt has been satisfied”. This other “face” that I am referring to is restoration. Restoration is defined as “the return of something to a former owner, place or condition”. It implies that someone or something is placed back in the original state prior to the catalyst of change. It is as much a part of justice as is retribution, but a very distorted and inaccurate picture can be painted if left unacknowledged. Restoration battles to show itself as a worthy co-representative of justice but is often overshadowed by its counterpart. This concept of unadulterated justice is illustrated in Ezekiel 18:20-29. Two scenarios are given: one is of a righteous person who ceases from doing right and begins to do evil. The other is of a wicked person who ceases doing wickedness and begins to do good. The righteous person, who begins to do evil, dies. The wicked person, who begins to do good, lives. At this particular time, I don’t want to begin a dialogue about what defines righteousness and wickedness…that’s for another discussion.  Rather, let’s highlight the point that justice is administered in both scenarios, but not with the same method.  Retribution is assigned to the wayward, righteous person. Restoration is assigned to the reformed, wicked person.  Was the administration, in both cases, not considered just? If a person commits a crime and carries out the sentence imposed, at the end of the sentence, is it not equally just to release the person because they fulfilled their obligation? If their detainment was prolonged due to non-compliance of the enforcers, would that not be considered unjust?        

I am willing to step out on a limb and say that we, as human beings, acknowledge and understand that consequences do follow offenses. I am not, however, as confident to defend our awareness that once amends have been made then punishment becomes void and liberation or release is in order. Indeed, someone must pay for the debt that is owed and well deserved punishment must be executed on the guilty. That is justice, right? With that said, what if the debt has already been paid? What if punishment has already been administered? What position does that then place the guilty? It is, then, the responsibility and in the nature of justice to exonerate. The apostle John puts it in this way: “He [Jesus] Himself is the sacrifice that atones[makes amends] for our sins[offenses]  and not only our sins[offenses] but the sins[offenses] of all the world”(1 John 2:2). All of the offenses, of every person has been punished and dealt with in the life of Christ Jesus.  Retribution is evident in His death on the cross, therefore we are released from it. Justice must be true to itself and afford us the restoration that is now due. Now, I understand that this concept may be logical and even acceptable in theory.  The difficulty presents itself when it is applied to actual situations such as the Trayvon Martin case. It strums anger and unforgiveness within many, only to lead them to utterly reject the idea that provision has been made for the guilty to walk free.  The perception of justice then becomes distorted and we are left with a Quasimodo-like depiction of it.  Could it be possible, that what we have considered and claimed to be “justice” is actually a form of revenge? Absent of mercy and focused on punishing in return for being injured. I am in no way proposing that we minimize or make light of the loss incurred by wicked and selfish acts. Neither am I condoning wrongful deeds committed against one another.  I am suggesting that we take a closer look at what justice really is so that we are not found guilty of the injustice that we so ardently oppose.  Jesus gave His life not only for the victim, but also for the culprit. His actions conveyed His desire for us to know justice in its entirety and to experience the mercy that travels with it. Would we really want God to allocate the justice to us that we dole out to others?  Jesus was punished… that we may be released.  Justice served.