CASE I

Sat, 15 Jun 2013
CASE I


The judge adjusts her glasses. She sees the defended and she sees the complainant; and thinks the same thing about the law to herself. ‘Why do they need to pay somebody for this?”  She asked herself this question, but she doesn’t deny her paycheck. She has learned to trust the system and follow her lifestyle within the legal conductive manner; moreover, she trusts the process. However, she sees the complainant, a mother and she looks at the defended, the mother’s son; and this case has to do with money. 

Again she needs to assess background and character to understand the nature of why a mother would find herself in the right to bring her son to court and sue him for no other reason than money. This is a modern day scenario, but the judge does consider herself a Christian. Jesus we know now was not guilty of any crime. Nevertheless, the fear of knowing the same thing in Jesus’ days while a trustworthy legal system would bring the gravel down towards him giving a judgment for the accusation on Jesus’ life; crucifixion on the cross is terrifying. Knowing that Jesus was innocent, why in this modern day scenario, would a mother’s love for her child feel undignified by the relationship of money? The judge asked the opening question after reviewing the case she decides to start with the defended. She wants to access rather or not she may label him with a good character or not.  “Tell me about your relationship with your mother.” 

 Now we all know that Jesus was silent. He spoke a few words within his trail, but towards false accusation he said nothing. Now if this defended, the son, thought to himself that he was innocent perhaps he would desire to do the same thing which is remain silent. Even if he knew that he rightly owed his mother some money but did not feel that it was righteous for her to bring him to court, he would appeal towards the same view-no argument; silence. We know that Jesus was above reproach because he held his tongue in silence against false witnesses, neither accusing the guilt nor defending the truth. He allowed the law to display itself. Where the law lies between righteous and truth there is a judge. When a mother who may very much love her son find herself between right and wrong towards him there is a judge. Perhaps, she has been through hard times. Perhaps she is simply financially broke and desperately needs money. Perhaps she is trying to teach her son a hard lesson on life, regardless, there is a judge. When our days come between life and truth of death may we pray for the eyes of honest witnesses to hear the goodness of our solid faith? For when all is said the silence of the judge won’t change the circumstances of the gravel coming down on our souls separating those who are knowingly seeing our guilt upon the ones who are claiming to be innocent. After all who claims to be innocent?