Do Unto Otters - Weaseling Out of Mentioning Jesus
Last week, at the library, we borrowed a truly magnificent book for Ouldlet #3 - Laurie Keller’s Do Unto Otters: A Book About Manners
It’s a charming morality tale about a rabbit who has new otter neighbours. How should he treat them? What if they’re not nice? The answer, of course, is to do unto otters as you would have them do unto you. Brilliant. Genius. So ingeniously cute is the whole thing that scholastic went ahead and made it and some other books of Keller’s into a set of short films, Scrambled States of America & More Stories By Laurie Keller
So far, so good. The book is great fun to read and we all had fun imagining the lovely ways the rabbit could be nice to the new otter neighbours. How excellent, I thought, to weave such a universally helpful notion into a kids’ book - and a book which adults would love too.
And then I turned to the back cover…
Those of you who have been around the traps on apologetics would have seen this one coming. Let’s first note the glaringly obvious difference between Socrates and what the bunny was taught. Socrates says don’t do to others what you don’t want them to do to you. But bunny is taught to do - to be proactive - and it turns out that despite all the claims to the “golden rule” having a long provenance it is striking that much of it is in the negative, i.e. the “don’t do to others…” approach. Lots of the “greats” affirm this; Socrates, Confucius, the Buddha etc. But it’s only at the break of the 1st Century that you hear something radically different,
Matthew 7:12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
and here is the truly golden rule from the lips of Jesus. In everything, in all situations one ought to look for the needs of others first - to prioritise them over ourselves. Not simply to avoid upsetting or harming them but the radical opposite; to look for their benefit above all things. And no wonder the other “greats” don’t go there because it’s simply too much. But this, says Jesus, is the Law and the Prophets distilled.
And then, of course, He goes and does it and for some reason our culture would rather be reminded of anything but him. So we quote Socrates even when Socrates doesn’t support the argument that we’ve been making (that bunny should be proactively nice to those otters) because the alternative, to give credit to Jesus where it is due, well that just couldn’t happen.
Do Unto Otters is a great book, but the Socrates quotation on the back cover betrays an attitude to Jesus that is so pervasive in our culture. We teach our children to be nice to the otters but we’d all rather have Socrates. Let’s face it, given the choice most of us would just rather than we and the otters left each other alone. Jesus’ call to love them sacrificially is just a little too much, isn’t it? It’s ok for the kids, but then they don’t have to seriously consider what might be at stake, and so for this and a host of other reasons we weasel out of bringing Jesus into play.
The alternative, of course (and I know I’m mixing my Biblical metaphors here) is to go the other way.
Mark 10:15 I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.
These days, the moral call that Jesus makes is good enough for the children, even if His name isn’t. For the adults, we think, something else is needed. Wrong. Do unto otters, my friends, because Jesus told us to. And, more than that, follow the one who not only taught what the fulfillment of the Law and Prophets was - to love others sacrificially - but who Himself fulfilled it.
Comments
Facebook comments are closed.
15 comments
David, this is a great piece. One of your best, IMO. From the title on down, plenty of good wit, but most of all insightful and challenging.
Your ending points out a great failure in the church that ultimately impoverishes the surrounding culture:
Our churches are full of adults who want nothing to do with Jesus, wringing their hands and complaining about the lack of a dynamic children’s program. There is high demand to give the children at church that which the parents will not nurture in word and deed at home.
[1] Posted by Timothy Fountain on 8-31-2012 at 05:46 AM · [top]
Is Jesus a great moral teacher or is he the incarnate Son of God? If he is simply a great moral teacher (who gets selectively quoted so we don’t have to deal with the difficult things) who cares what he said (great doesn’t mean authoritative). But if He is the Son of God this is one part of the Trinity of the Creator God, then what He says is authoritative because of who He is, not because we happen to like what He said.
The Church is not running away from what Jesus said, but from who He is because they no longer believe. They are embarrassed. And maybe we don’t need to go to a church like that. TEC for example.
[2] Posted by Br. Michael on 8-31-2012 at 06:02 AM · [top]
thanks Tim
[3] Posted by David Ould on 8-31-2012 at 06:40 AM · [top]
Does anyone know the author’s religion?
[4] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 8-31-2012 at 09:58 AM · [top]
Well, David, at least we can take some consolation in the fact that the citation still uses “B.C.” rather than the tortured politically correct “BCE”.
[5] Posted by evan miller on 8-31-2012 at 01:39 PM · [top]
I’m glad you were able to ferret this story out. Its not necessary to badger people, just stoat the truth clearly. Then they can marten themselves up instead of being untidy gluttons.
[6] Posted by MichaelA on 9-2-2012 at 07:06 AM · [top]
I am glad that you make the point about the difference between what Jesus said and the negative version of the Golden Rule. I think its something that is obvious to some and not so much to others. It should be spelled out clearly and often.
I remember picking up a book once with the theme that the teachings of Christianity and Islam were not that different after all. It was set up so that one of Jesus’ teachings was on one page and one of Mohammed’s teachings was on the opposite page. For any careful reader flipping through the book, like me, it was clear that calling the quotes from Mohammed parallel to those of Jesus was in fact just an exercise in stretching it as far as it could go. But no where was this more clear to me than in the two versions of the Golden Rule. Mohammed also used the negative form.
But it wasnt a total waste of my time. The great thing about the time I spent with this book is that I don’t think I would have even noticed the difference in the two versions if they hadn’t been put side by side. So I guess I can thank the author for that at least.
[7] Posted by StayinAnglican on 9-2-2012 at 06:41 PM · [top]
Excellent MichaelA!
[8] Posted by S. Hamilton on 9-3-2012 at 07:14 PM · [top]
You know that’s actually a picture of a stoat, right?
[9] Posted by The Little Myrmidon on 9-13-2012 at 07:19 PM · [top]
yes, but the picture was so good I thought it would be a decent stand-in for a weasel.
[10] Posted by David Ould on 9-13-2012 at 07:22 PM · [top]
I think weasels and stoats are pretty much the same thing, so disregard my caviling comment.
[11] Posted by The Little Myrmidon on 9-13-2012 at 07:27 PM · [top]
It’ sable to be a stoat or a weasel
sable, get it?
....
[12] Posted by MichaelA on 9-18-2012 at 01:20 AM · [top]
Michael, I don’t get it. I just don’t get it.
You are much too subtle. Are you trying to be progressive?
[13] Posted by episcopalienated on 9-18-2012 at 07:19 AM · [top]
From a fun film about murder, progressives (communists actually) and sables:
“Arkady Renko: Too many people in our society disappear. They fall into a gulf.
Professor Andreev: What sort of gulf?
Arkady Renko: The gulf between what is said and what is done.
Professor Andreev: You may not be much longer for this world, my fine imprudent fellow.”
- Gorky Park
[14] Posted by MichaelA on 9-19-2012 at 01:04 AM · [top]
MichaelA:
Ooh! Ooh! I saw that one!
There were loud guffaws from the audience when the Prosecutor said this to Arkady Renko:
Naturally, I cheered at the end when Arkady released all of the sables from their cages.
In the novel, a KGB agent accuses him of suffering from something called patho-heterodoxy syndrome because of his relentless commitment to discovering the truth.
I wonder if the folks at 815 know about that. It might be the only condition they’d still be willing to recognize as a form of heresy.
[15] Posted by episcopalienated on 9-19-2012 at 04:11 AM · [top]
Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.