The Bible does not contain a developed doctrine of human rights, but when that doctrine did arise in Christian thought, the biblical tradition of justice provided human rights with a distinctive foundation and character. Biblical justice is focused primarily on the restoration of relationships (Marshall 2001b). As people are reconciled to one another, and to God, they become more human. It is only through restored relationships, or reconciliation, that we are enabled to take up our calling as a global human community made in the ‘image of God’ (Gen 1:27). [click for more about the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament & Human Rights]
According to the New Testament, being ‘in Christ’ establishes a new equality of participation in community: the classical sources of human conflict — race, class, wealth and gender — are to be transcended rather than perpetuated. This striking egalitarianism, one of the most distinctive and counter-cultural features of the early Jesus movement, is classically expressed in Gal 3:28: ‘There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus’ (cf. 1 Cor 12:12-13, Rom 10:12; Col 3:9-11). The followers of Christ are thus called to embody a new kind of human community, establishing true freedom, rather than individual liberties that can lead to alienation and division.
The language and ideal of freedom lies at the heart of the biblical tradition, but it departs from the contemporary emphasis on freedom as personal autonomy in a number of respects. To begin with, the key presupposition for all that is said about freedom in the Bible is humanity’s continuing dependence on God as creator. This necessarily means that freedom can never mean absolute autonomy. We are not free to live in ways that are inhuman, for example; we are free to be the creatures God made us to be.
Throughout the biblical tradition, liberty is understood primarily as emancipation from oppression. And in the Old Testament, this typically means freedom from external oppression — from servitude, forced labour, military opposition, indebtedness, imprisonment, injustice, and so on. The exodus from Egypt and the return from Babylonian exile are models in the Hebrew Bible (or, Old Testament) for what freedom means.
The New Testament also thinks of freedom in terms of emancipation from external conditions (e.g., Luke 1:67-79; 1 Cor 7:21-22), but it extends the conception of freedom to embrace emancipation from guilt, from self-centeredness and alienation, from anxiety and greed. One may be free from all kinds of external coercion, but still have an inner life characterized by despair, anxiety, bad habits and poor relationships. One may have all one’s legal and moral rights respected, but still feel ‘unfree’ (see Cronin 1993).
Nevertheless, Jesus prioritizes the Hebrew Bible’s protection of human rights over its requirements for personal piety or ritual purity, even though purity legislation forms the largest component of covenant law. Jesus asserts that justice and mercy are more important than ceremonial cleanliness, in part because a commitment to upholding the rights and dignity of the disenfranchised exposes one’s true motivations in observing God’s law.
This is why, especially in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus advocates a ‘hermeneutics of mercy.’ The Sermon on the Mount opens with the declaration ‘blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy’ (5:7). Twice Jesus quotes Hosea 6:6, ‘I desire mercy not sacrifice’ (9:13; 12:7), thus underlining the importance of humanitarian compassion for understanding God’s will. Later Jesus tells the Pharisees that all the law and prophets ‘depend’ or ‘hang’ on the double commandment to love God and love one’s neighbor as oneself (22:40). Mercy is the true meaning of the law; mercy is the heart of God’s justice; mercy ‘fulfills all righteousness’ (3:15). The law can only be interpreted rightly when it is viewed from the perspective of its ‘weightier’ demands for ‘justice, mercy and faith’ (Matt 23:23).
It is striking that in Jesus’ statement in Matthew 23:23 ‘faith’ (pistis) is mentioned last, not first. The term pistis here may designate the ethical quality of honesty or integrity, but more probably it refers to one’s relationship with God, demonstrated concretely in faithfulness to God’s law. The same ordering of elements is found in Micah 6:8: ‘He has told you, O mortal, what is good, and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.’ It is not that one first gets to know God, then a commitment to justice and mercy follows automatically. Instead it is through doing justice and defending the poor that true knowledge of God comes (cf. Jer 9:23; 22:15-16; Amos 5:21-24; Isa 58:6). Hence, Jesus teaches his disciples to pray for the justice of God ‘on earth as it is in heaven’ (see Herzog 2000).
Justice cannot be achieved within a community simply by enumerating rights to freedom, equality and solidarity; there must also be an inner momentum driving people to transcend those instincts to self-preservation and private advantage that fuel conflict and competition. For the first Christians, this momentum was supplied by the self-giving love of Jesus. In coming to earth, Christ emptied himself of all claims to divine privilege in order to live and die for the benefit of others (Phil 2:3-7), even his enemies (Rom 5:6-10).
Accordingly, in defending the rights of the marginalized, Christians are called to seek the good of their neighbor, even at the expense of their own ‘rights’ and freedoms (1 Cor 8). Being free not to exercise freedom is, for Paul, a supreme testimony to his freedom (1 Cor 9:1). Yet the renunciation of rights presupposes that genuine rights do actually exist and are legitimate, and that on occasions it is appropriate to claim these rights vigorously (cf. Acts 16:37; 25:11). But where the rights of competing parties come into conflict, Christian love may require we waive our rights in order that the rights of the other may be upheld.
Sometimes Christians make this point by emphasizing responsibility rather than rights. But a stress on responsibility or duty without a corresponding stress on rights reduces love of neighbor to paternalism and risks supplanting justice with charity. When rights and duties are both affirmed, when both are related to a shared vision of the common good, and where individuals avoid exercising rights to the detriment of others and are even prepared to forgo rights for the sake of others, authentic community can emerge.
The practice of hope is an essential element of Christian commitment to justice, moving decisively beyond despair to a realistic embrace of the future. By envisioning an alternative reality, hope is inherently subversive. It represents a protest against the injustice of the present order of things; it denies the ultimacy or finality of existing social structures and centers of power; it encourages belief in an open future and motivates work for change; and hope sustains people through times of suffering and oppression with the reassurance of God’s presence and God’s ultimate triumph over all pain (Rev 21:4).
Christian hope, it must be said, is inclusive of all creation, not just of humanity or, worse still, one small part of humanity. ‘For the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God’ (Rom 8:21-22). From this perspective, human rights and environmental rights are inextricably united.
A distinctive feature of the New Testament’s future orientation is the conviction that God’s awaited reign has already commenced in the present. The kingdom has already come, in Jesus, but has not yet come in its fullness. This also gives a distinctive twist to Christian human rights thinking. It means that no system of human or environmental rights can be accorded absolute value; all are provisional and all stand under the judgment of God, accountable to God’s will and purpose. This is not to justify political quietism or detachment from the cause of human and ecological rights in the world today. Quite the contrary. Biblical accounts of the redemption of creation are not only intended to inspire hope, but also to inspire actions that are consistent with our future hope for a renewed earth, freed from destruction, violence and injustice.
To that end, we work and pray.
Dr Christopher D. Marshall
References
Cronin, Kieran (1993), Rights and Christian Ethics. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hays, Richard (1996), The Moral Vision of the New Testament.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
Herzog, William (2000), Jesus, Justice and the Reign of God.
Louisville: Westminster John Knox.
Marshall, Christopher (2001a), Crowned with Glory and Honor:
Human Rights in the Biblical Tradition. Telford: Pandora Press.
________ (2001b), Beyond Retribution: A New Testament Vision for
Justice, Crime, and Punishment. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.