Justice and the Covenantal Law: Reflections on MLKJr Day

In his open “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” (1963), Pastor Martin Luther King, Jr. quotes the Book of Amos in order to address the moral laxity of his fellow Southern clergymen during the Civil Rights era, both those who saw his non-violent methods as extreme and those who thought his methods were not violent enough. The quote in full:

“But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.” (Amos 5:24)

The Book of Amos was one of the earliest prophetic books to be written (between 765 and 760 CE). Amos, an older contemporary of Hosea and Isaiah, lived in the kingdom of Judah but preached in the northern kingdom of Israel. He was not a professional prophet but a rich, educated landowner. His written work expresses a deep concern for social justice, but, as I would like to point, a very specific understanding of social justice.

Amos articulates a standard conception of what creational monotheism means to the world and to Israel. Yahweh is the creator god and is thus the god of all people, Jews and Gentile alike. God expects the same level of moral and social purity of the all nation as he does Israel. God shows no partiality. Israel liberated and elected Israel so that they could make him known throughout the world. Their special calling is that of vocation and does not give them liberty to ignore ethical and social concerns. Indeed, election by God means that those elected have a duty to live according to the responsibilities and purposes clearly taught in the covenant. Part of those responsibilities is care for the poor. So important is this that the book of Amos elevates social justice and morality above religious practices and ritual observances.

The context of Amos 5:24 is the prophetic denunciation of the “sacrifices and meal offerings” of a people who have failed to keep the covenant, which is constituted by justice, fairness, and concern for the poor. As a wealthy landowner himself, Amos condemns the rulers and the rich for burdening the poor with taxes and regulation while exempting others through bribes. What’s more, after having behaved unfairly, these elites then proceed to publicly display their devotion to God through ritual sacrifices and observances. Yahweh will have none of that. He will not honor their sacrifices. He will not be pleased with their outward show of devotion. Instead, he will bring judgement and exile upon them. This prophecy was fulfilled in 720 BCE.

Yet when progressive Christians quote and echo Amos and the other prophets concerning “justice”, they too often divorce the term from its biblical context, preferring to use it a vague, abstract, philosophical designation to be used for whatever societal issue they themselves deem “unjust”. These supposed “injustices” are derived more from personal preferences, biased worldviews, societal trends, philosophical fads, causes célèbres, and economic ignorance than from the biblical witness. Indeed, progressive Christians will denounce as biblically unjust the Bible itself. But one cannot talk about the justice of the Bible apart the covenantal context. When Amos and the other prophets use the term “justice” they are speaking specifically about the covenant between Yahweh and Israel, the Law (Torah) from which it derives, and the commands contained within that Law. Amos is not speaking about an abstract sense of justice for which each successive generation can make-up for themselves as their preferences see fit. He’s talking about very specific commands encompassing the whole of the Law (Torah). Fairness for the poor, widows, orphans, and homeless derives from the Law. Now … what that fairness looks like, how these principles are applied, how it manifests itself for each generation may differ, BUT these applied principles should not contradict the commands of the Bible from which the principles stem. This is why when we consider justice we must always go back to the Bible for what that looks like. Otherwise “justice” will manifest itself as self-serving preferences reflecting the biases and vices of our fluid worldview. History shows that such “justice” ultimately favors the strong and harms the weak.