Aug
13
Do We Want God to Be Like Batman?
Jesuit priest/journalist Thomas Reese recently wrote a piece for “Religion News Service”, in which he discusses Pope Francis and some of his critics (within Catholicism) on the topic of God’s mercy vs. justice.
“Deep in our hearts, we want Batman for God, someone who will beat up our enemies and punish evildoers. We really don’t respect a God who is a wimp, who turns the other cheek. We want a God who gets mad and gets even. We want a kick-ass God.
We want this, of course, for other people, not for ourselves. For ourselves, there are always extenuating circumstances. Sins are mistakes, lies are misstatements, infidelity is independence, and irresponsibility is being free. We easily argue that ‘everyone does it’ and that the end justifies the means.
For ourselves, we want a God who is merciful and understanding, but for others we want a God who punishes.”
Rather than citing the usual turn-the-other-cheek passage, he refers to the-wheat-and-the-tares in Matthew 13, saying,
“In his parables, Jesus often says something surprising or shocking when he wants to make a point. In this parable, Jesus wants to emphasize that God does not act like we think he should. He does not act like we would act if we were God….
Matthew is telling them in this parable that they must leave such judgments [i.e., who is a child of the kingdom vs. who is a child of the evil one] to God. Or as Francis said, regarding LGBTQ Catholics, ‘Who am I to judge?’ [Ed. note: Ugh!]
We must have patience. Justice will come, a day of reckoning will come, but it must not be rushed. It is not the job of Christians, it is not our job, to decide who are the wheat and who are the weeds, who are the good guys and who are the bad guys; that is for God to decide.”
Well, it is certainly true that God does not act like we would if we were God. (By that, I assume he means if we were in God’s position as Sovereign over all Creation.) And I agree wholeheartedly that God is the ultimate Judge. He will be the One administering both final judgment (Rom. 2:5-6; 2 Cor. 5:10) and grace and mercy (John 3:16; Eph. 2:8-9). But, Reese tries to make more out of the wheat and tares parable than I think is appropriate.
Throughout the article, Reese builds a position that says it is wrong to want to “pull up the weeds” (i.e., destroy evil). It might even be wrong to “judge” that someone is under moral condemnation, lest “we risk being impatient, intransigent, even violent toward those who have fallen into error.” At the same time, he acknowledges that Christians cannot pretend that evil does not exist in the world and “all is well”. He includes things like abortion and euthanasia as ways that the culture exercises violence (quite true!) but warns Christians against turning to violence in turn. Or, something like that.
I would be curious what Reese — or Francis, for that matter — considers “violence” in this context, given how the culture is increasingly deciding that things like words, thoughts, and silence/inaction (regarding a particular topic) constitute “violence”. I for one disagree with that new, cultural redefinition of violence. I also think actual, physical violence (within reason) is sometimes necessary to fight evil, though it should normally be left to law enforcement and the military. Self-defense against bullies, thieves, and anyone threatening bodily harm to you, a family member, or possibly another non-combatant, would also justify violence.
Setting the “violence” question aside, there is some truth in what he said, of course. We must be careful not to assume that someone currently unrepentantly sinful could not become a Christian in the future. We must be careful of our own attitudes and be both winsome and tactical in what we say whenever possible, yet confront others with hard truths when needed. Christians need to point out when certain beliefs and behaviors are contrary to biblical teaching — particularly when the person(s) in question claim to be Christians — and that continued unrepentance from such leads to eternal damnation (Gal. 5:19-21; 1 Cor. 6:9-11).
Furthermore, on a societal level, God Himself established earthly government with the responsibility of punishing those who do evil and praising those who do good (1 Peter 2:13-15). Sometimes, acts of mercy may be acceptable, particularly when certain extenuating circumstances may warrant it. But, Christians are perfectly justified (pun intended) in demanding and fighting for justice. (This includes in both the personal and socio-political realms.) I think this is evidence of being image-bearers of God, since throughout the Bible He requires justice from the people and most especially their leaders, who are supposed to be acting on God’s behalf.
On a side note, I wrote an article about Romans 13 and obedience to the civil government that some of you may be interested in.
Now, back to the Caped Crusader…
Batman was probably singled out for Reese’s article because he — Batman, not Reese — is the most recognizable, street-level vigilante (though he is much more than that). He is not known for his mercy, though he actually exhibits mercy all the time. But, even those heroes better known for their nobility, virtue, and restraint (e.g., Superman and Captain America) are imperfect beings, and I would not want to be ultimately subject to their judgment, either.
So, no, I don’t want God to be like Batman. Or, even like Superman. When we recognize sin for what it is and how we are constantly guilty of it, we know we don’t deserve mercy. But, those of us who have accepted the Gospel message and become followers of Jesus Christ can be assured that we will receive it. Only the triune God, Yahweh, is able and worthy of trust to perfectly balance true justice and mercy, as they are both based on His own character.
