The Fine Print

JoAnn A. Post, a Lutheran pastor and author of a reflection for the magazine The Christian Century, tells the story of a friend. The friend had terminal cancer and had come to terms with it. She was tying up loose ends, preparing for the end of life. She planned for her funeral and worked out the distribution of her estate. Post says that while family and friends were very sad at this, no one tried to talk her friend out of what she was doing. It seemed wise that she was accepting her mortality.

And then, a friend showed her friend an ad in a magazine that seemed to promise what she longed for the most: a new unpronounceable drug that would give her more time. Time to spend with family, time to read the books she wanted to read, time to do things that were going to be left undone. Time. The ad did not promise that the cancer would be cured, but it did promise more time to live life to the fullest.

We have all seen these ads both in print and on TV. They make these great promises and show people living what can only be described as an idyllic life. But at the bottom of the ad or at the end of the commercial, there is something else: a list of side effects that could prove deadly and a caveat to see one’s doctor to explore if the drug would be right for a person. Post said her friend might not have read the fine print or did not want to really believe it (after all, those things happen to other people). So, against the advice of her family and the cautions of her oncologist, her friend began treatment. Two months later, she was dead due to the many side effects. Post claims that the “cancer didn’t kill her. It was the fine print.”

The people of Israel wanted a king. Now, this might not have been all the people. But those who mattered wanted a king. They wanted to be like the other nations that surrounded them or were the major empires to the south and east of them. They looked at Samuel, saw that he wasn’t getting any younger nor that his sons followed their father’s ways. Therefore, they wanted to take matters into their own hands and have themselves a king.

Samuel is not pleased by this request. He is wanting to keep with the old ways, of having a judge who is appointed by God to lead the people and to be a guide to them. So, he talks to God about this. I am sure the reply that he received was a surprise. God says to go ahead and appoint a king. This is not a rejection of Samuel but a rejection of God. The people have been going their own ways for some time now and Samuel is feeling the rejection that God feels. Samuel is to go and tell the people what will happen to them when they have a king reign over them.

And so, Samuel goes and gives the people “the fine print”. A king will take the sons of the people and put them in his armies. They will be appointed as chariot drivers and horsemen. Those who are not will be the runners in front of the chariots (i.e., cannon fodder). The king will appoint some as leaders of thousands and of fifties of the army.

Not only that, the people will be made to do what is known as corvee, forced labor for the king. They will have to plow his fields and grow his crops, make implements for the palace, and make weapons for the armies.

The king will take their daughters as well. They will be put to work as perfumers, bakers and cooks. They will be put to work in the court of the queen.

The prime food sources will be taken and put to the king’s use and his officials as special gifts for support. A tenth of all the produce will be taken and given to the courtiers as well.

The king will take many other things from the people. In fact, each statement about what the king will do begins with the word take. But the harshest term of all is that the king will make them his slaves. This was meant to recall the times of the Exodus and just what a king, the pharaoh of Egypt, would be willing and able to do to the people. And when all this occurs, the people will cry out to God because of the king, but there will be no answer from the God whom they have rejected.

One would think that this fine print would be a deterrent. It seems fairly harsh and downright frightening. But the text tells us that the people did not listen. They wanted a king. They wanted a king to govern them, to go out and fight their battles for them. Here is the real reason for wanting a king. There were those around them who were willing and able to invade and take the land from the people. If only there were a strong leader who would go out and fight the battles and the invaders for the people. How quickly they forgot that God had given them a victory over the Philistines shortly before the request for a king. How quickly they forgot the Lord who had delivered them from their enemies during the times of the judges. No, what they wanted was a strong man who would lead them into battle, on whom they would be able to see and say that because of him they were victorious. They wanted a king.

Samuel did his best to dissuade them and, in the end, he gives in. After this meeting with the elders of Israel, he anoints Saul to be the king over the people. And Saul starts off well. He leads the nation into battle and is successful. He is humble and gives honor to the Lord. But then character flaws begin to show up and the one who was anointed will eventually be cut off from being king. Samuel is eventually told to go and relate to Saul that he is no longer to be king, a difficult task to do. But from here until the exile, there will be a king on the throne. They will be, except for a few, just as Samuel told the people, they will take and rule rather than be the leaders that God wanted them to be.

We often do not read the fine print. How often do we scroll through online statements until we find the “I Accept” button and click it to move on? Or how often do we sign a contract without looking at what is there before us? How much do we give up because we do not read the fine print?

When we want, like the elders of Israel, security and have someone lead us through our problems we often will give up freedom and justice for the sake of security and “law and order”. But what happens when we read the “fine print” that Samuel gave to the people of Israel and to us? Bruce C. Birch asks this question: “At what point do our loyalties to human institutions have to give way to the higher loyalty we owe to God?” There have been many examples of those who stood up to human authority. Martin Luther stood up to the church, Dietrich Bonhoeffer stood up to the government of Germany under Adolf Hitler, Martin Luther King Jr. stood up to the state to call for justice in civil rights, Oscar Romero stood up to the use of violence to bring about change. The last three all lost their lives in their pursuit of justice. There are others who have paid the ultimate price for their standing up for what is right. Some have been killed by the state and others by those who want to keep the status quo. But we are called to stand with God in the pursuit of justice no matter what the cost. Birch also has this to say about this passage of scripture: “In 1 Samuel 8, God gives Israel the freedom to choose a king, but God does not give up the claim to divine sovereignty. We, too, have the freedom to participate boldly in making the decisions of public life, but is we read this chapter carefully we should do so with some degree of humility (and repentance?) in recognition that human power is only subordinate to divine power.” When we want our security at the expense of justice and mercy, we have missed the fine print. Then like the woman in Post’s story, it is not the mistake that gets us into trouble, it’s the fine print. But there is good news. There is grace in God. That grace is extended to us even when we miss the fine print if we turn back to God. Will we read the fine print from now on or will we continue to blithely ignore the warnings that God issues to us to remind us of God’s authority over our supposed security? What will it be?