Love Your Enemies

“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”

It’s a quotation that’s got a lot going for it.

For a start, it’s biblical. As we shall see later, it comes from the Old Testament part of our Bible, in Leviticus chapter 24.

Secondly, it’s fair. When it comes to justice and retribution, you can’t get fairer than an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

Thirdly, it’s very memorable.

In 2016, when Donald Trump was campaigning to be the Republican’s candidate, a radio host asked him if he had a favourite verse or story from the Bible that’s impacted his thinking or character.

Trump replied:

“Well …I think many.

I mean …you know … when we get into the Bible …I think many.

So many.

Look, an eye for an eye, you can almost say that.”

“That’s not a particularly nice thing …[but] we have to be firm and have to be very strong.

And we can learn a lot from the Bible, that I can tell you.”

“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” It’s biblical, it’s fair and it’s memorable.

But like many Bible verses, it can be misused when taken out of context. …sometimes with devastating consequences.

---------------

(Pause)

On 3 June (2017), you will remember that a terror attack took place on London Bridge. A white van mounted the pavement and was deliberately driven into pedestrians.

The van crashed, and the three male occupants ran to the nearby Borough Market pub and restaurant area, where they stabbed people with long knives. Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, stated that the attackers were "probably" Islamist terrorists.

Eight people were killed and 48 were injured, including four unarmed police officers who attempted to stop the assailants.

It was the third terrorist attack in Great Britain in just over two months, following a similar attack in Westminster in March and a bombing in Manchester in May.

The secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain was one of many people who condemned the attack. More than 130 imams condemned the attackers, refused them Islamic burials, and said in a statement that the terrorists did not represent Islam.

---------------

On 19 June, just two weeks after the London Bridge attack, a similar white van was driven into pedestrians in Finsbury Park, London, injuring at least ten people.

This time, the terror attack occurred near the Muslim Welfare House, 100 yards from Finsbury Park Mosque.

A group of Muslims had earlier performed, night time prayers held in the month of Ramadan, when they came across a collapsed man at a bus stop. While rendering first aid they were rammed, and ten were injured. The collapsed man died at the scene.

Witnesses say that the driver of the van, a 47 year old man from Cardiff, had shouted… "I want to kill all Muslims" …"this is for London Bridge" …"I did my bit" …"you deserve it".

Responding to the attack, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby said:

“The freedom to worship without fear is a right we cherish as a nation and was won at great human cost over many years.

“The appalling attack on Muslims in Finsbury Park is an attack on us all and on the culture and values of our country.

“At a time when we are all grieving the loss of so many precious people in London and Manchester, this brutal attack can only compound the trauma.

“Violence only begets more violence - it serves only the interests of those who would terrorise others.”

---------------

(Pause)

No doubt some people will argue that this copycat terror attack simply an extreme example of the biblical principle, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth?”

But as Martin Luther King once said, “If we do an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, we will be a blind and toothless nation.”

So let’s take a look at what the Old Testament passage actually says.

Leviticus 24:17-22

God said to Moses.

“Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death. Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution—life for life. Anyone who injures their neighbour is to be injured in the same manner: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury. Whoever kills an animal must make restitution, but whoever kills a human being is to be put to death. You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.”

The first thing to notice is that the context of these verses is the law court.

Notice verse 22:

“You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born.”

These are instructions (or guidelines) for judges, with the aim of ensuring that the punishment fits the crime.

They were never intended as guide for a government’s foreign policy, as Mr Trump might like to interpret them.

Neither can they be used to justify the unlawful revenge of vigilante groups or individuals, as the van driver from Cardiff might think.

These verses had a very specific application - that of the law court.

(Pause)

A second point is that, when ensuring that the punishment fits the crime, some biblical scholars think that these verses were meant to define the maximum punishment.

Brutal dictatorships are notorious for inflicting punishments that far exceed the crime. For example, one person in a village defies the regime, and the punishment is to make an example of them by killing their entire family.

But some scholars interpret these verses are to be understood as defining proportionate punishment as:

“No more than an eye for eye. …No more than tooth for tooth.”

And the third point is that, in Old Testament times, most teachers of the law did not take these verses literally.

In other words, if a man was attacked and had a tooth knocked out, the courts would not sentence his attacker to have a tooth knocked out.

Instead, he would be required to pay an appropriate level of financial compensation that matched the crime.

---------------

(Pause)

“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”

It might be biblical, fair and memorable. But it was only ever intended for the law court, and even there, it was not usually taken literally.

However, rather worryingly, it’s a phrase that some people like because it sums up their attitude to life.

And it’s not just Donald Trump who would say it was one of their favourite verses in the Bible.

People were saying it in Jesus’ day too.

On the Sermon on the Mount, in Matthew chapter 5 verses 38-39, Jesus says:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”

This time the context is not the law court.

Instead, Jesus is speaking to ordinary people who want to follow him.

And in this context he rejects one memorable saying about eyes and teeth, and gives them a new memorable saying about their face.

“Turn the other cheek.”

You won’t find many people saying that their favourite Bible verse is “Turn the other cheek”.

It might be biblical …and it might be memorable …but it’s not popular.

Partly because it so unfair.

And partly because is perceived to be sign of weakness.

There is no getting around the fact that turning the other cheek is unfair. It’s an expression of ‘grace’, and grace is always unfair.

However, turning the other cheek is not a sign of weakness. In fact, as we shall see later, turning the other cheek sometimes requires great courage and bravery.

---------------

And having urged his disciples to turn the other cheek, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus then says, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”.

It’s the same message that we heard this morning in our reading from Luke’s gospel.

Jesus said (Luke 6:27-29),

“But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them.”

“Turn the other cheek” and “Love your enemies”

Both phrases are biblical, memorable and unfair. But they are the Jesus way.

(Pause)

But just as “an eye for an eye” can be taken out of context and misused with devastating consequences, so can these verses of Jesus.

And so, before thinking about how they can be used, I want to clear about one way in which they should never be used.

“Turning the other cheek” does not mean that we don’t confront evil or the abuse of power.

I read an article this morning that said the white supremacist movements in America are have been re-energised during the past year.

“Turning the other cheek” does not mean that we passively ignore the evil of racism.

(Pause)

In recent years there have been many examples of brave people coming forward to report the abusive behaviour of a church member, a family member or someone else.

In some cases the abuse happened many years ago, and although they told someone at the time, nothing was done about it. And, shamefully, the church was sometimes complicit in sweeping it under the carpet.

And so I say again, “Turning the other cheek” does not mean that we don’t confront evil or the abuse of power.

And so if you are at risk of harm, or you are aware of someone else being at risk of harm, please have a word with my wife (Jan Pringle) who is currently our acting Parish Safeguarding Officer.

(Pause)

That’s an example of how these verses of Jesus should not be used. But now let me remind you of a world-famous example of how they were used as Jesus intended.

The City of Coventry was bombed many times during the Second World War by the German Air Force (Luftwaffe). The most devastating of these attacks occurred on the evening of 14 November 1940.

It was carried out by 515 German bombers. The attack, code-named Operation Moonlight Sonata, was intended to destroy Coventry's factories and industrial infrastructure, although it was clear that damage to the rest of the city, including monuments and residential areas, would be considerable.

At around 8 pm, Coventry Cathedral, was set on fire by incendiaries for the first time. The volunteer fire-fighters managed to put out the first fire but other direct hits followed and soon new fires broke out in the cathedral. Accelerated by a firestorm, the flames quickly spread out of control. During the same period, more than 200 other fires were started across the city, most of which were concentrated in the city-centre area, setting the area ablaze and overwhelming the fire-fighters.

In one night, more than 4,300 homes in Coventry were destroyed and around two-thirds of the city's buildings were damaged. The raid was heavily concentrated on the city centre, most of which was destroyed.

An estimated 600 people were killed in the raid (the exact figure was never precisely confirmed), with another 900 badly injured and 400 sustaining lesser injuries.

The raid reached such a new and severe level of destruction that the German Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, later used the term "coventried" when describing similar levels of destruction of other enemy towns.

(Pause)

Following the destruction of the Cathedral, the Provost, Dick Howard, made a commitment not to seek revenge, but to strive for forgiveness and reconciliation with those responsible.

During the BBC radio broadcast from the Cathedral ruins on Christmas Day 1940 he declared that when the war was over we should work with those who had been enemies ‘to build a kinder, more Christ-child-like world.’

It wasn’t a popular message at the time, and it must have taken much courage to say it.

The words “Father Forgive” were inscribed on the wall of the ruined chancel and two charred beams which had fallen in the shape of a cross were bound and placed on an altar of rubble.

Three medieval nails were formed into a cross, and the Cross of Nails quickly became a potent sign of friendship and hope in the post war years, especially in new relationships with Germany and the developing links between Coventry and the cities of Dresden and Berlin.

The Community of the Cross of Nails has its origins in this courageous vision, and today 200 Partners form part of this Community as they work and pray for peace, justice and reconciliation within their own communities and countries.

The vision of the Cathedral eventually changed the culture of the City. Now the whole city is branded as a city of peace and reconciliation.

(Pause)

This whole movement began through the actions of one man who took the Jesus seriously when he said “Turn the other cheek” and “Love your enemies.”

But Jesus wasn’t just speaking to the great and the good. He was speaking to ordinary followers like you and me.

Just imagine the impact of everyone here taking seriously the words of Jesus, …in our homes, in our places of work, in our neighbourhoods.

What sort of reputation do you have?

Someone who believes in an eye for an eye? …or someone who turns the other cheek?