acting as corporate citizens in the neighborhood, or Christian social agencies. We see then that the teaching on vocation, inextricably tied to some neighbor or sets of neighbors, gives us a helpful theological lens to interpret the nature and aims of justice. All who call for justice appeal to the law of love, and then typically move to discuss how such love should be practiced. They do not do so in some unbiased way, but from some vocational stance, according to the calling God has given them at this or that time in their lives. In so doing, they have been advocating for some neighbor. Consequently, the models of justice that we propose address, or should address, the needs of specific neighbors and reflect on the best means to help them. Lutheran theology calls us to keep the neighbor at the center of our law, vocation, and justice talk. We realize that various models of justice attempt to define the who and the how of justice by speaking from a particular place where one learns to love that neighbor whose life one is fighting for. II. Who Is My Neighbor?: Benefits and Limits of Defining the Neighbor in Models of Justice A neighbor-shaped view of law and vocation makes us aware that every model of justice constructs the neighbor in a certain way. Everyone who calls for justice does not only have a neighbor, but a neighbor in mind. We think of, define, or conceptualize our neighbor in a particular way. Each one constructs a picture of his or her neighbors. Ideally, a reason for doing so may be to get a consistent and broad grasp on the needs of neighbors in order to serve them better. When we become aware of this often implicit dynamic at work in appeals to and proposals for justice, we also realize no picture of the neighbor is wholly complete and thus no model of justice is meant to encompass every expression of what living rightly or justly in the world entails. Models of justice as aid or relief, sustainable development through partnerships, restoration and/or rehabilitation, and preparation for the gospel, assume various definitions of the neighbor. We can learn something from each of these heuristic models, understanding also that their concerns at times intersect in real-life approaches to the justice. Such models have their benefits and limits. If we conceive of the neighbor theologically as one who receives the aid of a loving God, that picture of the neighbor will lead to a model of justice as aid or relief.15 Such model in turn may yield a picture of the church in which Christians become instruments of God’s compassion to help neighbors meet their immediate and long-term needs. In this approach to justice, the neighbor appears primarily as the passive yet joyful receiver of God’s gifts and blessings through his people. While the passivity of humanity tends to highlight well the gratuity of God, it also tends to encourage an understanding of mercy as a one-way street from the giver who serves as the mask on earth of a merciful God to the poor receiver in need of God’s provisions. Moreover, while such a view of justice takes as its starting point the generosity of God’s people, empowered by the gospel and poured out to many through their vocations, it does not yet necessarily move beyond generosity towards a more active engagement with the poor in the community that can also address some of the deeper structural causes of injustice affecting him or her.16 It is evident that a passive-receptive model of the neighbor will have its benefits and limits in articulating and implementing a theology and practice of justice. Concordia Journal/Spring 2013
121