Historical series, 2. Delivered at Yorkminster Baptist Church, Toronto, Ja 6 1994

Huras, William D.

English

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 30Issue 2 Festechrift: Faith Elizabeth Rohrbough Article 811-1-2005High office requires high standardsWilliam D. HurasFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Sermons is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationHuras, William D. (2005) "High office requires high standards ," Consensus: Vol. 30 : Iss. 2 , Article 8.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol30/iss2/8HISTORICAL SERIES, 2High Office Requires High StandardsWilliam D. HurasBishop (Ret.), Eastern Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church InCanadaKitchener, Ontario(Editor’s Note: This sermon is re-published here by permission of TheLaw Society of Upper Canada GAZETTE, Vol. XXVII, Number 3/4,September/December 1993, pp. 213-216. The Rev. Dr. William D.Huras was Bishop of the Eastern Synod of the Lutheran Church inAmerica from 1978 to 1985, and, following the formation of theEvangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, Bishop of the EasternSynod of the ELCIC from 1986 to 1998. The sermon was preached,by invitation, at Yorkminster Baptist Church, Toronto, Ontario, 6January 1994, at the special Divine Interfaith Service preceding theopening of Her Majesty’s Courts in Ontario. We are grateful to TheLaw Society of Upper Canada GAZETTE for permission to re-publish it.)IntroductionI remember a public school teacher who told us that we would notgraduate from grade eight until we had read Alice in Wonderland. Asthe years go by her unusual requirement seems ever more wise. I alsoremember a theological professor who had a similar request. Thebook he considered a must for all of us to read was Dostoevsky’sCrime and Punishment. Here, too, I find the years have onlyenhanced his wisdom.I share these personal experiences because they lead me to askyou today, what book would you make required reading for the newlawyer or judge? The Bible, or your faith community’s most holywriting, would be excellent, of course, but we assume you’ve read it.A legal text like Black’s Law Dictionary doesn’t qualify. We assumeyou’ve read that, too! It would have to be a work of fiction that wouldsomehow seduce the reader into discovering her or his humanity inspite of the burden born by academic and professional achievement.105Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2005I would hope that such a book would catch the spirit of what we areabout in this service. In so doing, it would both acknowledge thattranscendent power to whom we are all accountable and, at the sametime, expose our finite humanity.These two truths constitute our focus for this day. Perhaps theyare two sides of the same coin.The TranscendentBoth passages of scripture read this morning affirm the transcendentbefore which we all stand in awe and reverence.In Leviticus we read: “You shall not render an unjust judgement,you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great; with justiceyou shall judge your neighbour … I am the Lord.” Here there is aclear acknowledgement of the transcendent which judges evenjudges. The word is true for all, but particularly for those whose lifeis lived close to those things which bring justice and law among us.St. James says it too: “Be not deceived, every perfect gift is fromabove.”Both readings draw us out of our insular world and into thecontext of the Creator of all.Such an affirmation is needed by all and even sought by many. Itis a word, however, that is often eclipsed by religious parochialismand competition. Indeed, what is perceived as religious rivalry andnarcissism has permitted many in our society to lose all sense ofreligion.Edward Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,seems almost to describe the religious landscape of our society whenhe says that: “the various modes of worship which prevailed in theRoman world were all considered: by the people as equally true; bythe philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equallyuseful.”One of the challenges before society today is that of recognizingthe multiplicity of religious expression among us while, at the sametime, retaining that reverence which healthy religion affirms. Butwho has the audacity to define healthy religion? No doubt each wouldconfess her own, or his own, tradition to be healthy. Surely, though,one definition has to be that sense of the transcendent whichconfesses the sanctity of human life. It is here that Raskolnikov fellshort. Dostoevsky’s hero or anti-hero saw no value in the life of an106 Consensushttp://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol30/iss2/8elderly and lonely person; his needs prevailed over those of thatunimportant recluse. In selfishly taking another life he lost meaningfor his own life.No matter how our individual religious convictions may differ, Ibelieve they must acknowledge that transcendence which affirms thedignity and the worth of each member of the human family. For me,that surely is the sine qua non of religious health.The Human DilemmaRegrettably, however, we know that it is impossible to speak of ahigher power and of justice while still walking in ways that denyboth. Our generation knows all too well that neither the cassock of thepriest nor the robe of the magistrate can guarantee character andintegrity.Long before Sigmund Freud, St. James alluded to our ability totalk the language of faith while we fail to live a life of faith when hesaid: “But be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceivethemselves. For if any are the hearers of the word and not doers, theyare like those who look at themselves in a mirror; for they look atthemselves and, on going away, immediately forget what they werelike.”When we look at ourselves we see what we want to see. Thecredentials may be there: the ability to articulate well may be there;the zeal of religious conviction may be there … but, of themselves,these do not guarantee noble character nor integrity. How issomething like noble character realized? How is it nurtured? How canyou teach integrity?It is not unusual for preachers, when they gather by themselves,to ask if sermons change anything. It is true that Emerson identifiedthe sermon as the greatest benefit of the Judaic-Christian tradition.Nevertheless, most preachers, at least those who have been preachinga while, would admit that sermons seldom change character. Sermonsare known to be able to affirm convictions already held, but theyseldom change these convictions.An article in The Globe and Mail of two years ago brought theissue of integrity and character into rather clear focus. Rabbi GunterPlaunt wrote about a meeting held in a suburb of Berlin 50 years ago.The year was 1942. The Second World War was in its early stages.Pearl harbour was less than two months past. Hitler’s armies hadHigh Office Requires High Standards 107Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2005made significant advances into Russia. The outlook for the AxisPowers was rather favourable. Reinhard Heydrich called the meeting.Adolf Eichmann served as recorder. To be sure, the names conjure upimages of criminals and demonic personalities, but the meeting wasattended by about a dozen or so people, half of whom had Ph.D.’s.Some of them could probably quote Virgil and Homer in theiroriginal Latin and Greek. Some could probably even quote thescriptures we read this morning. Some were trained in law andjurisprudence.They would be seen as respectable citizens in society. They werethe kind you’d like your daughter to marry … or your son to be. Onewould certainly expect to find strength of character and integrityamong such persons. The luncheon was brief. The task identified andaddressed. It took only a few hours for this group to decide the fateof the Jews in the conquered territories of Eastern Europe.We ask: How could these educated leaders do this? The veryquestion betrays our bias that somehow education changes ourcharacter and of itself gives us integrity.We ask: Did they see themselves as devils perpetrating ultimateevil? Probably not! Did they then see themselves as devout citizensdoing what was right? How could they?We can only conclude that they did not allow the truth topenetrate their inner minds and hearts. This then brings us to a furtherconclusion: Humanity has an unlimited capacity for evil and self-deception. It is naive to assume we outgrow it or that education canwipe it away. I believe that this insight into the human dilemma isalso a sine qua non of religious health.ConclusionOur service today is a prayer that we might receive the gifts ofcharacter and integrity.High office requires high standards. High standards require morethan text books and codes of conduct. Training, position, degrees,civil respectability and, yes, sermons, do not automatically make ushealthy instruments of justice. In making our prayer for these gifts,we confess our human condition and look to the Transcendent togrant us such favour. Our current insight into our own darker sidemay make that prayer sound cynical, but I pray not! Our prayer isboth our confession and our hope.108 Consensushttp://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol30/iss2/8Lewis Carroll brings us back to this truth in a charming way. InAlice through the Looking Glass, Alice says, “We can’t believeimpossible things,” to which the Queen replied, “I daresay youhaven’t had much practice. When I was your age, I always did it forhalf an hour a day. Why, sometimes, I’ve believed as many as siximpossible things before breakfast.”To believe in character and integrity might be difficult. Not tobelieve, however, is to discard them altogether.Today we pray for these gifts. May the Lord give us the strengthto do our duty, and the love to do it well, so that we, you and I, mightcontribute to justice and kindness in our land.High Office Requires High Standards 109Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2005

High office requires high standards

Scholars Commons

Consensus
Volume 30
Issue 2 Festechrift: Faith Elizabeth Rohrbough Article 8
11-1-2005
High office requires high standards
William D. Huras
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus
This Sermons is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by an
authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.
Recommended Citation
Huras, William D. (2005) "High office requires high standards ," Consensus: Vol. 30 : Iss. 2 , Article 8.
Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol30/iss2/8
HISTORICAL SERIES, 2
High Office Requires High Standards
William D. Huras
Bishop (Ret.), Eastern Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church In
Canada
Kitchener, Ontario
(Editor’s Note: This sermon is re-published here by permission of The
Law Society of Upper Canada GAZETTE, Vol. XXVII, Number 3/4,
September/December 1993, pp. 213-216. The Rev. Dr. William D.
Huras was Bishop of the Eastern Synod of the Lutheran Church in
America from 1978 to 1985, and, following the formation of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, Bishop of the Eastern
Synod of the ELCIC from 1986 to 1998. The sermon was preached,
by invitation, at Yorkminster Baptist Church, Toronto, Ontario, 6
January 1994, at the special Divine Interfaith Service preceding the
opening of Her Majesty’s Courts in Ontario. We are grateful to The
Law Society of Upper Canada GAZETTE for permission to re-
publish it.)
Introduction
I remember a public school teacher who told us that we would not
graduate from grade eight until we had read Alice in Wonderland. As
the years go by her unusual requirement seems ever more wise. I also
remember a theological professor who had a similar request. The
book he considered a must for all of us to read was Dostoevsky’s
Crime and Punishment. Here, too, I find the years have only
enhanced his wisdom.
I share these personal experiences because they lead me to ask
you today, what book would you make required reading for the new
lawyer or judge? The Bible, or your faith community’s most holy
writing, would be excellent, of course, but we assume you’ve read it.
A legal text like Black’s Law Dictionary doesn’t qualify. We assume
you’ve read that, too! It would have to be a work of fiction that would
somehow seduce the reader into discovering her or his humanity in
spite of the burden born by academic and professional achievement.
105
Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2005
I would hope that such a book would catch the spirit of what we are
about in this service. In so doing, it would both acknowledge that
transcendent power to whom we are all accountable and, at the same
time, expose our finite humanity.
These two truths constitute our focus for this day. Perhaps they
are two sides of the same coin.
The Transcendent
Both passages of scripture read this morning affirm the transcendent
before which we all stand in awe and reverence.
In Leviticus we read: “You shall not render an unjust judgement,
you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great; with justice
you shall judge your neighbour … I am the Lord.” Here there is a
clear acknowledgement of the transcendent which judges even
judges. The word is true for all, but particularly for those whose life
is lived close to those things which bring justice and law among us.
St. James says it too: “Be not deceived, every perfect gift is from
above.”
Both readings draw us out of our insular world and into the
context of the Creator of all.
Such an affirmation is needed by all and even sought by many. It
is a word, however, that is often eclipsed by religious parochialism
and competition. Indeed, what is perceived as religious rivalry and
narcissism has permitted many in our society to lose all sense of
religion.
Edward Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
seems almost to describe the religious landscape of our society when
he says that: “the various modes of worship which prevailed in the
Roman world were all considered: by the people as equally true; by
the philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally
useful.”
One of the challenges before society today is that of recognizing
the multiplicity of religious expression among us while, at the same
time, retaining that reverence which healthy religion affirms. But
who has the audacity to define healthy religion? No doubt each would
confess her own, or his own, tradition to be healthy. Surely, though,
one definition has to be that sense of the transcendent which
confesses the sanctity of human life. It is here that Raskolnikov fell
short. Dostoevsky’s hero or anti-hero saw no value in the life of an
106 Consensus
http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol30/iss2/8
elderly and lonely person; his needs prevailed over those of that
unimportant recluse. In selfishly taking another life he lost meaning
for his own life.
No matter how our individual religious convictions may differ, I
believe they must acknowledge that transcendence which affirms the
dignity and the worth of each member of the human family. For me,
that surely is the sine qua non of religious health.
The Human Dilemma
Regrettably, however, we know that it is impossible to speak of a
higher power and of justice while still walking in ways that deny
both. Our generation knows all too well that neither the cassock of the
priest nor the robe of the magistrate can guarantee character and
integrity.
Long before Sigmund Freud, St. James alluded to our ability to
talk the language of faith while we fail to live a life of faith when he
said: “But be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceive
themselves. For if any are the hearers of the word and not doers, they
are like those who look at themselves in a mirror; for they look at
themselves and, on going away, immediately forget what they were
like.”
When we look at ourselves we see what we want to see. The
credentials may be there: the ability to articulate well may be there;
the zeal of religious conviction may be there … but, of themselves,
these do not guarantee noble character nor integrity. How is
something like noble character realized? How is it nurtured? How can
you teach integrity?
It is not unusual for preachers, when they gather by themselves,
to ask if sermons change anything. It is true that Emerson identified
the sermon as the greatest benefit of the Judaic-Christian tradition.
Nevertheless, most preachers, at least those who have been preaching
a while, would admit that sermons seldom change character. Sermons
are known to be able to affirm convictions already held, but they
seldom change these convictions.
An article in The Globe and Mail of two years ago brought the
issue of integrity and character into rather clear focus. Rabbi Gunter
Plaunt wrote about a meeting held in a suburb of Berlin 50 years ago.
The year was 1942. The Second World War was in its early stages.
Pearl harbour was less than two months past. Hitler’s armies had
High Office Requires High Standards 107
Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2005
made significant advances into Russia. The outlook for the Axis
Powers was rather favourable. Reinhard Heydrich called the meeting.
Adolf Eichmann served as recorder. To be sure, the names conjure up
images of criminals and demonic personalities, but the meeting was
attended by about a dozen or so people, half of whom had Ph.D.’s.
Some of them could probably quote Virgil and Homer in their
original Latin and Greek. Some could probably even quote the
scriptures we read this morning. Some were trained in law and
jurisprudence.
They would be seen as respectable citizens in society. They were
the kind you’d like your daughter to marry … or your son to be. One
would certainly expect to find strength of character and integrity
among such persons. The luncheon was brief. The task identified and
addressed. It took only a few hours for this group to decide the fate
of the Jews in the conquered territories of Eastern Europe.
We ask: How could these educated leaders do this? The very
question betrays our bias that somehow education changes our
character and of itself gives us integrity.
We ask: Did they see themselves as devils perpetrating ultimate
evil? Probably not! Did they then see themselves as devout citizens
doing what was right? How could they?
We can only conclude that they did not allow the truth to
penetrate their inner minds and hearts. This then brings us to a further
conclusion: Humanity has an unlimited capacity for evil and self-
deception. It is naive to assume we outgrow it or that education can
wipe it away. I believe that this insight into the human dilemma is
also a sine qua non of religious health.
Conclusion
Our service today is a prayer that we might receive the gifts of
character and integrity.
High office requires high standards. High standards require more
than text books and codes of conduct. Training, position, degrees,
civil respectability and, yes, sermons, do not automatically make us
healthy instruments of justice. In making our prayer for these gifts,
we confess our human condition and look to the Transcendent to
grant us such favour. Our current insight into our own darker side
may make that prayer sound cynical, but I pray not! Our prayer is
both our confession and our hope.
108 Consensus
http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol30/iss2/8
Lewis Carroll brings us back to this truth in a charming way. In
Alice through the Looking Glass, Alice says, “We can’t believe
impossible things,” to which the Queen replied, “I daresay you
haven’t had much practice. When I was your age, I always did it for
half an hour a day. Why, sometimes, I’ve believed as many as six
impossible things before breakfast.”
To believe in character and integrity might be difficult. Not to
believe, however, is to discard them altogether.
Today we pray for these gifts. May the Lord give us the strength
to do our duty, and the love to do it well, so that we, you and I, might
contribute to justice and kindness in our land.
High Office Requires High Standards 109
Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2005


https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1179&amp;context=consensus

High office requires high standards

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Wilfrid Laurier University

Scholars Commons