Blog Archives
When Civil Servants Aren’t
In the western world, Wikipedia suggest that the term “Civil Service” goes back to 1829 and the expansion of the British Empire — namely that the British government needed people with administrative and managerial skills to manage the resources, the production, and the commerce that took place in their various colonies. The basic principle behind such management, of course, is much older and we see ample examples of this through history. One very early example of this is the work of Joseph while he was serving in Pharaoh’s court.
The word “Civil” goes back to the Latin word, civilis, which refers to a citizen in a given region or city. In turn, behavior that was considered “civil” was understood to reflect that kind of behavior that promoted good will amongst those people who happened to be living in said community. The notion that those who govern are servants, of course, is also a Biblical one, finding its roots in Romans 13:4. When you put these ideas together, you get the notion that a civil servant is someone, ordained by God, whose role is to serve or otherwise benefit the people of a given region or city, promoting the well-being of all who live in said place. They were to be both civil in their behavior and to have the mindset of a servant, seeking the good of the whole, not their own personal agendas.
While the impetus for this essay was originally the shameful behavior of Representative Brian Sims, namely in his bullying of pro-life protesters in his district, the problem is more widespread than that. Sims, himself, is a predator who accosts women and youth, mocking and harassing them in the hopes of driving them off — seeking to use intimidation to rob them of their Constitutional right to peaceful protest. He is an embarrassment to the legislature of our Commonwealth and has made himself a laughing-stock to pundits nationwide. The only thing that surprises me is that he has not been slapped with a harassment lawsuit, but perhaps he already has.
I expect that it is safe to say that most of us expect better from those in political office. The problem is that while there are numerous men and women who do seek to govern with civility and integrity, it is the noisy, ignorant minority, modeled by Representative Sims, that stand out and give a bad name to all. Rhetoric and false information seems to drive much of our modern political process rather than reasoned dialogue and debate (no dear friends, mud-slinging and sophistry is not legitimate debate; legitimate debate is the reasoned exchange of ideas in the hopes of reaching a conclusion that is logically and morally best!). Again, Representative Sims is not representative of the many civil servants that I have had the privilege of knowing over the years, though sadly he is drawing attention away from that which is good given his antics.
So, where am I going with this? First of all, shame on all of our elected officials whose work revolves around their personal agendas. A leader puts their personal preferences to the side for what is best for the whole community. A leader seeks what is true and faithful to those standards that are established for the good of the community. In other words, if you are a Federal official, the Constitution of the United States is your measure and standard. For Representative Sims and others who lead the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it is the Pennsylvania Constitution. For local officials, it is the local ordinances. For leaders in church, it is the Bible and the Constitution of the Church or Denomination.
Second of all, Civil Servants should be just that. What does that mean? In Biblical language, that means they have a lot of repenting to do. In more pragmatic, political language, we, the citizens, need to take our elections seriously and vote these self-centered, hate-mongers out of office. Folks like Sims are doing little more than wasting tax-payer money and undermining, rather than promoting, the good of the Commonwealth.
And, so what is the end in all of this? Friends, get involved in the political process. Vote and actively support candidates that not only support Christian values but also who understand the role of a “Civil Servant.” And, as you do so, make sure that you behave with civility. Back when Mitt Romney and Barak Obama were debating, each running for president, my son, then about 11 years old, took an interest in politics for the first time. So, we allowed him to stay up past his bedtime to watch the debates and then to discuss them. Even at 11 years old, he kept saying to me, “Dad, he didn’t answer the question he was asked.” Yes, and it was true of both candidates. If an eleven-year-old can notice sophistry like that, why do we tolerate it? How good it would be if political debates consisted of people actually concerned about solving the problems that face our society in a civil way and not in a way centered on personal or political gain.
Counterfeit Reality
“And they stripped him and laid a scarlet cloak on him. And they twisted together a crown from a thorn vine and put it on his head with a reed in his right hand, and they knelt before him and mocked him saying, ‘Hail, king of the Jews.’ And they spat on him and took the reed and beat him on the head.”
(Matthew 27:28-30)
“And they clothed him with a purple cloak and they put on him a crown woven from a thorn vine and they began to recognize him: ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ And they were striking him on the head with the reed and spitting on him and bowed the knee to worship him.”
(Mark 15:17-19)
“And the soldiers wove a crown from a thorn vine and put it on his head and clothed him with a garment of purple. And they came up to him and said, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ And they gave him blows.”
(John 19:2-3)
There are so many details that are part of the passion account that are contained in these few short verses. I suppose that the first of the details that we should address, though, is that of the apparent discrepancy in the color of the tunic placed on Jesus by the soldiers. Matthew describes it as scarlet while Mark and John describe it as being purple. The obvious answers that are based on a similarity in the words don’t really apply well here as there are two very distinct words being employed by the Gospel writers. The word for scarlet is ko/kkinoß (kokkinos) and the word for purple is porfurouvß (porphurous).
Historically, the scarlet robe was one worn by the Roman soldiers as it could be prepared and dyed cheaply where the purple would be worn by society’s elite, given the cost of purple dye (in those days extracted from shellfish). There is some debate amongst commentators as to what is being emphasized in this difference in colors recorded. Some seem to stretch the text in favor of spiritualizing the colors into a representation of blood but that is a stretch that is further than the text really permits. Those with lower views on scripture simply write it off as an error, yet again, yet that comes from those with no commitment to an inerrant text of scripture. So, where shall we go from here? Some suggest two cloaks, one red and one purple, and while plausible, is unnecessary to make sense of the text.
To begin with, we must ask what it is that these Roman soldiers are doing. The obvious answer is that they are mocking him — making him out loosely as a king and giving him “honor” before they destroy his life. The elements of royalty are all there — the cloak, the crown, and the staff. Yet in each case, the elements are a twisting of the reality — Calvin calls them “counterfeits.” The crown is made of thorns. The rod of rulership is made out of a flimsy reed, easily broken. And here we arrive at the cloak — what ought to have been the purple cloak of royalty, but in this case made out of a red Roman soldier’s tunic. All counterfeits…all a warping of the reality that they are meant to symbolize. And, in the case of Matthew, he focuses on the specifics of what transpired while Mark and John focus on what those specifics represented.
How often, though, we are surrounded by counterfeits in life and in the church. When people act in a way that puts on a false front, we call them hypocrites. But we find more than just hypocrites in our midst. Sadly, we often find outright liars. We find gatherings that profess to be Christian churches, but they teach a doctrine of men, not the Word of God in the scriptures. We find supposed mercy missions, but those who run the ministries line their pockets while giving only leftovers to the ones they claim to serve. We find government officials who call themselves “civil servants” yet the only ones they seek to serve is themselves. The list goes on and on, but how it calls us to live with integrity — that we make “what you see is what you get” our motto and model. That we seek to worship God in spirit and in truth should be our highest aim…not to tear down others to line our own nests.
Loved ones, this account is more about the mockery of Jesus than it is about the counterfeit that the Gospel writers help us see through, yet how often we are engaged with counterfeits in this world of ours. Reject the counterfeit that you see and call for repentance while honoring Christ in word and deed.