Sirach would have had no use whatsoever for these sorts of evasions. He was adamant: God has made very clear what is acceptable as human behaviour. God has set before us two paths, called in biblical terms the path of life or death, or the path of good or evil. We can choose either one — God does not force or predestine us for either one. The choice is ours alone.
If we chose the path of evil, there are consequences. Checking into rehab or claiming victimhood does not let us off the hook. Wouldn’t it be refreshing to see people — especially public figures — step up and accept responsibility instead of lying or making excuses? While there is much truth to what Sirach wrote, it is also the product of a time very long ago. Sirach does not display an awareness of or sensitivity to the layers and depths of the human personality — nor should he be expected to.
In the more than 2,000 years since he penned this work we have learned much about the role of environment and upbringing in the development of human character, as well as the many shocking internal contradictions that we live with. That does not mean that everyone gets a free pass, but we should not be blind to the many ways in which a human being can have his or her perception of reality and sense of right and wrong warped and distorted, especially in the early years of life. That is why such care must be given to quality family life, humane working conditions, economic justice, healthy entertainment and a good example by leaders. Good ethical behaviour does not just happen, and the choice between right and wrong rests on all of us.
God is not merely an extension of our own opinions, prejudices, fears, and desires. That was Paul’s conclusion and he made it the core of his theology in his letter to the Corinthians. Certain individuals in the community were causing division and havoc by claiming superior knowledge, wisdom, and eloquence. Paul insisted that God did not think much of human wisdom. God had His own wisdom and values that were at odds with ours and therefore chose a symbol of shame, loathing and fear to reveal them: the cross. The cross signified weakness, renunciation of power, honour and prestige, and total trust in God.
The fact that the rulers of the age felt threatened and crucified Jesus was proof that they — and most others — understood little or nothing about God. God has prepared tremendous and wonderful things for those who love Him, but this presumes that we listen to and are willing to be guided by the Spirit.
Matthew and Sirach had a lot in common. Both emphasized the role of human will in living a healthy ethical and spiritual life. Matthew’s Jesus denied that he had come to abolish any part of the spiritual tradition of Israel. In fact, during his extended discourse that we call the Sermon on the Mount, he raised the bar considerably. It was not enough just to avoid negative behaviour. Jesus challenged his listeners to go to the very source of sin — the human heart and mind — and root out negative thoughts, desires, and words.
Using hyperbolic shock language, he insisted that one should gouge out an offending eye or cut off an errant hand. In other words, if there are parts of ourselves that we do not like, then we should go to work on ourselves unsparingly. Take appropriate measures today — later on it may be too late.
These are not exactly comforting ‘feel-good’ words but the truth seldom is. They are, however, hopeful — they show us that we are not passive victims to fate or any other power. A determined heart, self-knowledge and honesty, joined with God’s grace, will carry us far in our quest to live in harmony with the image of God impressed on our souls.