Hermeneutic of Love
What happens if we decide to take Jesus as the model for interpreting scripture?
When Jesus is asked by the Pharisees, in Mark 12, how to prioritize ethical choices, or 'which is the greatest commandment?' it is one of the few questions that he answers directly and not with another question or a story. He says that the most important commandment is love. Loving God with all your heart, mind, body, and soul, and loving your neighbor as yourself.
Theologian Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza suggests that we engage in a dialectical process, using our critical faculties to ask if our interpretation of the text is seeking to end relations of domination and exploitation, and keep that as our main criteria of interpretation. It seems like something like this is being demostrating in Jesus’ response to the Pharisees.
The first command that Jesus refers to here is found in Deuteronomy 6. It is known as the Shema and is one of the most central prayers in the Jewish faith, recited twice a day. The other command, about loving your neighbor is from Leviticus, and one of 613 commandments given in the Torah. The way that Jesus puts these two passages together is very important. The text in Deuteronomy is followed by promises of conquest, of taking over the land of their neighbors if the people are obedient to God. But by putting the Leviticus command to love one’s neighbor beside it with equal weight Jesus is negating this imperialist impulse in Deuteronomy. Jesus is giving the love of neighbor priority over every other command. And in case anyone wants to interpret love as killing their neighbor, there is also a helpful story in Luke 10 that Jesus tells about the good Samaritan. He clarifies that loving your neighbor means having mercy and making an effort to seek their well being.
It does not seem too radical to suggest that we take Jesus as our model, particularly if one considers themself a follower of Jesus. He engages in a dialectical and questioning process with both scripture and traditions, and elevates the well being of people over literal readings of the text. In practice this can look lead to an approach that says, “Yes it appears that scripture says slaves should obey their masters, that women should remain silent in church, that homosexuality is unnatural. My religious leaders assure me that this is the one correct understanding and interpretation, and that we must submit to the authority of the Bible in this issue. But, this reading is causing me to harm other people. It is leading me to condemn and reject people beloved by God. Perhaps I need to question this a bit more.”
People might call these kinds of questions ‘deconstruction’ now. Or it might be called a hermeneutic of suspicion, but it is a suspicion directed not only at the Bible, but at our own understanding. If instead of relying on a supposedly literal reading or traditional interpretation we engaged with scripture the way that Jesus did, we would only accept interpretations that prioritize the well being of people. We would ask with him “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?”
This is a question that gets at the heart of whether we act towards others with love, and what we think that means. Love entails a deep responsibility and power to impact others, what theologian Beverly Harrison calls “the power to act-each-other-into-well-being”. Jesus reveals to us a loving God who desires to be with us. He knows our weaknesses and has compassion on us. He is not scared away by sin, but invites us into relationships of repentance and reconciliation; he places love over all, and welcomes us. Jesus invites, but doesn’t impose. As Harrison says, “The fateful choice is ours, either to set free the power of God’s love in the world or to deprive each other of the very basis of personhood and community.”
Jesus’ teaching about being Lord of the Sabbath and choosing the well being of people over the literal interpretation of the law is not popular with the Pharisees. They see Jesus heal a man on the Sabbath and rather than rejoice they begin to plot to kill him. Not to draw too close a parallel, but I would say that this is still the case today with Christians who do not rejoice over the liberation of people of color, of women, of people with different expressions of gender and sexuality.
In taking Jesus as our example of how to engage with Scripture, we can also see how the Bible can be empowering and a source for liberation and human flourishing. In summing up the law as love he refuses to accept any interpretation that prioritizes the letter of the law over the liberation, healing, and well being of people.