The divine self-description given to Moses begins with an emphasis on love and forgiveness, but ends with a statement that on first reading seems paradoxical or simply contradictory:
Yet by no means clearing the guilty, But visiting the iniquity of the parents upon the children and the children’s children to the third and fourth generation.
How does this relate to the forgiving, loving God already described? These are words worth a struggle. Biblical scholar Adam Clarke suggests that a literal translation of the first clause is “in clearing he will not clear.” Further, in the second clause “visiting” strikes most English readers as an active verb. One modern translation (The Bible in Basic English) renders this clause as “will send punishment on children for the sins of their fathers.” Yet the Hebrew, paqad, that is translated as visiting is much more passive in tone than send, meaning to pay attention to, or be listed, or numbered, or watched over.
Three sources of guilt are listed: iniquity, transgression, and sin. The Hebrew for iniquity in this case is ‘avon, which can also mean perversity. ‘Avon is derived from the primitive ‘avah which means to be distorted or twisted, altered from an original form. Transgression, the Hebrew pesha, is derived from the root pasha and involves being in rebellion. Sin, or chatta’ah, is derived from chatah which means to miss, miss the mark, to miss oneself, lose oneself, or wander from the way and become lost.
To look at God’s entire monologue again, we might have it read:
The Lord, the Lord,
A God merciful and gracious,
Slow to anger
And abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness,
Keeping steadfast love for the thousandth generation,
Forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin,
Yet in forgiving, not forgiving those who insist on distorting their true self, rebelling against their original purpose, and losing their true identity.
Those choosing to be lost will be used as an example to their children and their children’s children to the third and fourth generation.
When I took high school Latin I can recall Miss Tapper occasionally responding to my earnest efforts with, “That is a very free translation sir” But she usually agreed I captured the original intent. Assuming this paraphrase of Exodus has some integrity, what does it tell us of God, the image and likeness in which we were created?
Love does not interfere with the beloved’s freedom to choose.
As a parent, spouse, and friend we learn early and often that true love can mean restraining our inclination to interfere. True love often refrains from action. In love we accept the beloved, even when the beloved – in our perspective – is clearly going the wrong way. We will even refrain from expressing our fundamental character, in order to create a space where the beloved can find and express his or her own character.
Finding our true self will sometimes involve losing our self, choosing the wrong path, and going astray. We will also allow our beloved this freedom.
I would use very different language to describe it, but I practice similar restraint in developing my most talented colleagues. More frightening is when I have to refrain from interfering with clients who persist in bad choices. We can learn from our mistakes. We learn much more from making our own choices than following the instructions of others. Principles, frameworks, and guidance can all be offered. But if I truly value the colleague or client, and his or her development, I must be willing to allow the colleague or client to take the risks and make the mistakes that have been so important to my own development.
If the beloved persists in repeating the same mistakes, choosing the same wrong paths, and insisting on demonstrably bad choices we may eventually intervene. If the intervention fails, we may intervene again. But if attitudes and behavior remain the same, finally we are likely to withdraw. We will not stop loving, caring, and being ready to fully engage our beloved. But we will recognize the freedom they have to choose, even to choose badly.
Refraining from action – and thereby preserving the freedom of others – is a fundamental characteristic that we share with our creator.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment