Showing posts with label guilt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label guilt. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Ignorance of the Law Is No Excuse

Ignorantia juris non excusat is a legal principle holding that a person is liable whether or not the offender knows that law exists.  Mankind does not like a strict, disciplinarian, all-or-nothing approach to governance.  Guilt remains, though a judge may be lenient in the administration of judgment because of ignorance or in cases of mental deficiency or incapacity.  Martin Luther noticed this when he wrote: "In the affairs of government there is room for invincible ignorance, as when someone is at fault because he is encumbered by sickness or is insane" (Lectures on Genesis, Gen 12:17).  Where leniency goes awry is in the application.  Attempting to mitigate the effects of our wrongful actions to our fellow man, we excuse ourselves by claiming ignorance or diminished mental capacity in hopes of escaping the due penalty for willful actions.  What is meant to administer mercy in justice becomes a weapon to allow unbridled expression of our innate depravity.

The same principle of inexcusable culpability is in effect before God.  He has established a law consistent with his character against which all offenses are capital.  The first statute imposed on humanity was simple and clear: do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen 3:17).  Obedience is required; disobedience carries the death penalty.  As the Lord continued to reveal more of himself through his commands, the norm never changed.  Man responded by excusing himself rather than acknowledging the problem.  Luther continued:
But these ideas [of invincible ignorance] should not be carried over into religion and matters of conscience.  We are born with the blindness of original sin.  That evil is invincible in the sense that it holds even the regenerate captive; but this does not make it excusable, the way the scholastics have declared invincible ignorance excusable, so that it directly excuses…, that is, does away with sin entirely.)
Ibid, Lectures on Genesis

The reasoning went like this: if the nature of the offense and its penalty could be sufficiently ignored, it never existed at all.  But while people and nations have done this to one another on a regular basis, "God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap" (Gal 6:7).  You and I are guilty, without excuse.

To deal with both the demands of the law and our inability and unwillingness to abide by it, God the Son took on our human nature, fulfilled all the righteous requirements, and freely accepted in himself the full penalty due to us (Rom 3:21-26;1 Pet 3:18).  This he did, not because we deserved any of it, but because he loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8).

Monday, July 13, 2009

Guilty by Association

One of the most unfair concepts I encountered when growing up was "guilt by association." I had one friend in particular that was watched by the local authorities. More than once I was followed by the local police to make certain impropriety did not break out. that upset me, because I had done nothing wrong. The problem came because of my friend. His wrongdoing reflected on me. The principle at work here is referred to as the doctrine of community responsibility. The idea goes something like this: what one member of a group does, affects the whole and the individual members of it.

There are examples to be found in Scripture. One comes from Israel's desert wandering. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram had sinned in their rebellion of Moses' authority (Numbers 16). They were clearly guilty, and judgment was meted out on them "with their households and all the people who belonged to Korah and all their goods" (verse 32). That seems unjust. The action is stark, especially when compared to YHWH's later message to Ezekiel in 18:20 that
The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
How are these seemingly disparate ideas reconciled? Innocent people suffered the consequences of Korah's sin. The real question is: were they innocent? Jacob Milgrom in his book Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics (p. 32) asks the question, "What of the innocents who will suffer along with the sinners?"
The priestly doctrine of collective responsibility yields a corollary. The "good" people who perish with the evildoers are not innocent. For allowing brazen sinners to flourish, they share the blame.
A classic example of this is given in Acts 2:22-24, 36. Peter is preaching to the crowd and says,
Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it....Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.
Whom they crucified? Most likely none in the crowd were there. Though the Sanhedrin instigated the whole thing, yet the people shared in the defilement because the leaders were acting as representative of the whole and therefore needed repentance. And lest the sin of a leader is deemed the only type to affect the whole, remember how Achan coveted goods from Jericho and took them. After the defeat at Ai, YHWH told Joshua
Israel has sinned; they have transgressed my covenant that I commanded them; they have taken some of the devoted things; they have stolen and lied and put them among their own belongings. Therefore the people of Israel cannot stand before their enemies. They turn their backs before their enemies, because they have become devoted for destruction. (Joshua 7:11-12)
The entire nation of Israel is considered to have sinned and now bears the brunt of God's judgment for one man's sin.

The church is described as a spiritual house, a body, and a family. These are apropos for application purposes because each metaphor helps us see that when one part of the unit is not functioning as it should, the whole is defective. All are affected. As we go about our daily business before the Lord Jesus Christ in this world, remember that our lives are intertwined with other believers in a way that allows no place for sinful indulgence.