If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also. Matthew 5:39b
That was basically the judge’s message to Megan
Rice ‒ an 84
year-old nun ‒ and
her two accomplices. All three, peace activists. Each slapped with a three-year
jail sentence.
Their crime? In 2012, they broke into and
vandalized a bunker at the Y-12
National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Holding the nation’s primary
supply of bomb-grade uranium, the facility is known as the “Fort Knox of
Uranium.”
Why did they do it? They were worked up over the close-to six-hundred billion-dollar defense budget ─ billions of which the activists believed could be diverted
to improve the standard of living of the average American and our poorest
citizens, in particular.
Now, we could wrangle
over the “rightness” of the break-in, as well as its effectiveness. For example,
I’m not convinced about the vandalism: splashing bottles of blood on a bunker
holding bomb-grade uranium.
But dig deeper into the activists' motives and you get Michael Walli, convicted along with Megan Rice, telling the
judge, “I
was acting upon my God-given obligations as a follower of Jesus Christ.”
That may be true, even
exemplary. But did the activists think they would get away with it? No. They
cut wires that set off alarms. They had time to vandalize the bunker, sit down,
sing hymns, pray together … inside the facility. Two hours after the alarms first
went off ─ two hours ─
security guards finally arrived and arrested the trio.
Heads rolled after that.
And it wasn’t the heads of the activists.
Fact is: Megan Rice and
her team started out that evening expecting
to break into the Y-12 complex. They expected
to be caught. They expected to be
convicted. They expected to be
punished. And at their trial, they dared the judge to slap them with harsh
sentences.
As a matter of fact, Rice
challenged the judge to sentence her to life in prison, even though sentencing
guidelines called for far less: six years. “Please, have no leniency with me,”
she argued.
So, Rice’s sentence? She
expected six years’ confinement. Pleaded for a life sentence. Got three years.
But that plea for a life
sentence: At 84, does that sound like a person who wants to be happy to the end of her days? On the one
hand, incarceration for a cause … on the other, happiness.
Well, it sounds exactly like the
type of person Jesus hopes each of his followers will be when he tells them:
“If anyone strikes you on
the right cheek, turn the other also.
“If anyone wants to sue
you and take your coat, give your cloak as well.
“If anyone forces you to
go one mile, go also the second mile.”
And we are left to wonder, Is Jesus suggesting that our primary pursuit shouldn’t be the pursuit of happiness? … because, I don’t know
about you, but I would rather not
get sucker-punched in the face. Period. But, given Jesus’ limited
options of one or two black eyes, I’d be happier
with just one.
I would rather not
get sued and lose in court. But, losing my shirt … or losing my shirt along with (I
think Jesus is saying here, more or less) my shorts? I’d be happier losing just my shirt.
And the one-mile/two-mile option? Factoid: A Roman
soldier ─ presumably
on foot himself ─ had the right to press you into carrying his heavy armor for up to one mile along the dusty
roads of Palestine.
So, I’d rather not
get coerced into carrying the armor at all.
But, given only Jesus’ two choices, I’d be happier being forced to lug it one
mile … rather than two.
And I’d really like to keep the cash burning a hole
in my pocket to myself. But I’d be happier
giving a buck to one panhandler … rather
than shelling out one-buck-after-another to every panhandler in the hand-out
gauntlet, otherwise known as Downtown Crossing.
And when Jesus talks about loving friends and enemies? My hunch is that ‒ outside of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, these days ‒ few mentally-healthy people talk about being
dogged by personal enemies. And yet, I’d be happier
hanging out with my friends … while giving myself full license to avoid the
Dementors who delight in sucking the very life out of me!
Bottomline: When Jesus finally talks about being “perfect”
─ as
perfect as God!?! ─ I’d rather
be happy than perfect … if “perfect” means sustaining a string of black eyes …
submitting to a slew of indignities … and losing it all by giving it all away
to people who may or may not be the “deserving poor.”
Read: Happiness might be possible … if happiness were the point. But it isn’t. At least, it isn’t in
Jesus’ book. What is the point? What does Jesus think we should be in pursuit
of?
Answer: Meaning. Purpose.
Perfection ‒ not as in moral purity, but the experience of
a life that is complete. Fully-developed in God’s eyes. Nothing missing. No
essential parts ─ like expansive awareness, widened charity, laser-like
commitment ─ nothing of God’s very essence left out.
It’s a life whose key
mark is justice: pursuing what we are owed as persons created in the image of
God … making sure our neighbors get ─ from us ─ from the system we support ─ what they are owed.
And, at a very minimum,
what are we all owed? Dignity.
For example, in Megan
Rice’s case, securing dignity means seeing that all God’s children are raised in secure homes and
communities free from the threat of war. No child ─ no person ─ a victim.
Complication: Asking for
a life sentence, when six years will do, in Megan Rice’s case … or submitting
to an extra black eye on top of the first, the way Jesus puts it: Looks like
voluntary victimization. What does that
have to do with human dignity?
Most days we'd say, absolutely
nothing. And yet, Jesus’ audience might look at it differently.
That’s because they live
in a “shame culture.” In a shame culture, you put a lot of effort into
maintaining your “honor” ─ saving face ─ in your community.
Now, in Roman-occupied
Palestine, who’s likely to slug you? A Roman soldier. Let’s say this soldier
were to slug you on the right side of
your face. (As will soon be obvious, Jesus specifies the right cheek as the target to make a teaching point.) If the soldier
hauls off with his left fist ─ which would be natural against a victim’s right cheek ─ in that culture, he’s dealing the blow shamefully.
That is ‒ and as a leftie
(on so many levels), I object ‒ as we’ve learned on many other occasions, to Jesus’ audience, the left hand is bad
karma. Why? Well, before Charmin came along (and those cutesy bears doing in the woods what bears do), personal hygiene was different. And
you want to save one hand ─ the usually-dominant
right hand ─ for “clean” activities (like preparing food, eating, and carrying
out religious rites).
So, to punch you on your right cheek with his left hand? Literally, fighting dirty, the
attacker brings shame on himself.
To get his licks in without being shamed, the attacker must
use the back of his right hand to slap your right cheek. Who
were the people most likely to be back-handed? Slaves, women, and other persons
considered somehow “lesser” than this Roman soldier.
So ─ back-handing you ─ not
only is your attacker hurting you physically, he’s robbing you of your dignity.
You are lesser-than. You are subhuman.
But Jesus indicates the
soldier can rob you of your dignity only if you let him. Read: To re-assert
your dignity, Jesus says, “Recover. Stand up straight. Offer your left cheek for
another glancing blow ─ not as the attacker’s
subordinate, but as the soldier’s full equal.”
Of course, you may get slugged a
second time (this time with the soldier’s “shame-less” right fist), but you will have claimed what you are owed: not a punch, but the dignity God has given each
of us to possess and exercise and nurture in our neighbors.
You will have pursued
meaning, purpose, justice … not happiness.
Bottomline: Like Megan Rice and her companions, like
the centuries-long train of resistors treading the path before them, like
Jesus … in the face of right-able wrongs, we, too, have no right to remain
silent. We, too, have no right to do nothing. We, too, have no right to be
happy.
But we do
have a right to pursue a life of meaning. As Jesus
himself proves: It’s the perfect life,
the only life worth living.
Amen.
