Posts Tagged ‘discernment’

Truth/untruth. God/not god

January 30, 2021

Mark 1:21-28

Epiphany 4 – 2021

Marian Free

May I speak in the name of God Earth-Maker, Pain- Bearer, Life-Giver. Amen.

During the week a candidate for the Liberal Party in Western Australia was asked to resign. Andrea Tokaji had written an article on a website suggesting that there might be a correlation between the roll out of 5G Towers and COVID -19. Ms Tojaki also claimed radiation destroys human immunity to airborne viruses, a theory that is not accepted by doctors and which has not been supported by credible scientific studies. Over the past four to six years truth has become a causality of ego and conspiracy. Phrases like ‘fake truth’ and ‘alternative truth’ have been uttered by world leaders and their spokespersons who present their own view of the world, current events and scientific research as ‘truth’ even in the face of evidence that clearly points in another direction.

The internet has given us access to a vast amount of information. With a few strokes of a keypad we can settle arguments about the capital of Uzbekistan, the life span of bilbies or the composition of the sun. Within seconds we can find references to topics that forty years ago would have taken hours of research to uncover. At the same time, the internet has also provided a platform for misinformation and conspiracy theories. It is easy, as we have seen, to promulgate wild fantasies such as that promoted by QAnon (a secret group of Satan-worshipping, cannabalistic, pedophiles is running a sex trafficking ring and that high ranking Democratic Party officials are among its members). Or, less wild, that there is a link between 5G and COVID.

That said, truth has always been something  of a slippery animal. Scientific research has not always been objective –  tobacco companies have funded research into the positive effects of smoking. Before the internet, charismatic leaders could convince their followers to believe their reality – even if it led to the deaths of millions of people. When there are no objective measures (like tickets) event organizers or protesters have always been able to  exaggerate the number of attendees in order  to inflate the success of their event.

Religions, even our own, are not immune from the tendency to find evidence to support a particular viewpoint; from the emergence of charismatic leaders who convince their followers to behave in ways they otherwise would not; or to present themselves as more successful than they are.

So where does that leave us? What is truth and how do we recognise it? More particularly, how in the context of something as ephemeral as faith, can we properly discern what is real, what is true?

There is not enough time, nor am I fully qualified to answer those questions but I believe that the gospel and the reading from Deuteronomy today challenge us to consider how we discern what is of God and what is not. In Deuteronomy God promises to raise up a prophet who will speak everything that God commands. God says: ‘Anyone who does not heed the words that the prophet shall speak in my name, I myself will hold accountable. But any prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, or who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded the prophet to speak—that prophet shall die.’ It is a serious threat – one that does not seem to have been heeded by Jesus’ contemporaries. Today’s gospel is about the recognition of one who speaks as God.

So how do we know who is speaking for God, who is speaking God’s truth?

As I said, I am no expert, but I suggest that in order to answer the question we have, at the very least,  to rid ourselves of our egos, our self-interest and of everything that ties us to the minutiae of our earthly existence. In other words, to truly hear and to truly recognize God, we have to silence all the competing voices that struggle to be heard. As Jesus himself suggests, we should not even worry about ‘what to wear and what to eat’. Like Jesus, we should not be overly concerned with our personal comfort and security. We should try not to worry about what other people think about us. For only if we let go of our own desires and fears will we learn to hear the distinction between authenticity and inauthenticity, will we be able to understand whether a speaker (or the internet) is feeding our own fears or offering practical information and we will be ready to listen critically to those who are making promises and to decide whether they are feeding their egos (or ours), and to question whether their ‘facts’ are supporting one, or another, agenda.

Doing all those things might help us to discern fact from fiction, but how do we know that someone is speaking on behalf of God – is God? Here, we are more fortunate than the scribes because generations before us have affirmed that Jesus is God. If we didn’t know that, where would we begin. Again, I can only make suggestions, but it seems to me that some clues are in today’s gospel. Even though Jesus apparently introduces new teaching, his listeners recognize that he speaks with ‘authority’. This is a phrase that is repeated at the beginning and the end of section making the exorcism secondary to the teaching.  Jesus is believable because he is authentic. He is not self-serving. He has nothing to gain and nothing to lose. He speaks the truth from God even when it brings him into conflict with the forces of evil and with the religious and secular powers. Jesus has no thought for his own security, let alone advancement. His ego was ceded to God during his time in the wilderness and now he is truly free of any temptation to seek power, riches or fame. Jesus is God and speaks for God because he has rid himself of anything that might separate himself from God.

Jesus has nothing to gain and nothing to lose. He does not need to persuade or to coerce people to follow him. He can extend an invitation and give people the freedom to accept or reject him. His teaching, healing and compassion are directed outwards. He has no ulterior motive. His desire is not for himself but for others and he refused to do those things that might have saved him from an ugly death. His authority comes from his integrity, his authenticity.

So how can we discern the truth? How can we recognise God in others?

In answer to the first we should seek to liberate ourselves from any self interest that might blind us to the truth.  And in response the second we can start by asking ourselves whether the speaker is self serving or selfless, whether they are following their own agenda or whether they have the interest of the whole community[1] (the whole world) at heart.

Discerning the truth, recognizing God in the world is our purpose and goal. It might be harder than we think, but that is no reason not to try.

[1] There is not time to look at the reading from Corinthians, but you will see that putting others before oneself is a value that Paul promotes.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Mark's gospel | Comments Off on Truth/untruth. God/not god

Uncomfortable people – terrorists or saviours, threat or promise?

December 7, 2013

Advent 2 – 2013

Matthew 3:1-12

Marian Free

 In the name of God who is not always comfortable and benign and whose prophets are sometimes harsh and uncompromising. Amen. 

Over the past two days our airways and our print media have eulogised Nelson Mandela and rightly so. His was an extraordinary life and he belongs with the great men and women of history. That said, not everyone shares that view. When we were in Cape Town a few years ago our tour guide expressed disgust that “that terrorist” was regarded as a hero. In Fact, for most of Mandela’s early political life he was considered a revolutionary and a troublemaker. He was a leader of a banned organisation that incited people to revolt against the government. People in South Africa and abroad were divided in their opinions of him and of his means of achieving his goal. For many, he was a respected figure, working for a just cause, but for those who supported apartheid he was considered a dangerous activist who was determined to bring down a legitimate government.

In his autobiography: A Long Walk to Freedom, Mandela takes full responsibility for the decision of the African National Congress to use violence in the struggle against apartheid and when the Government invited the ANC to the negotiating table Mandela refused to lay down arms as a pre-condition for the talks.  He was anything but a comfortable man.

I raise these issues to remind you that it is not always easy to make wise judgements about uncomfortable people – especially when they challenge our complacency, confront our values or threaten the stability of our way of life.  Sometimes it is only with the benefit of hindsight that we understand how easily we are deceived. Hitler – an upholder of law and order – turned out to be a monster. Mandela – a law-breaker – turned out to be a nation’s “greatest son, father of the people.” (Jacob Zuma)

John the Baptist was an uncomfortable and uncompromising person. Despite that people flocked to him from miles around. No doubt he unsettled both the religious and political leaders of his day. Those in authority are suspicious of people who can draw a crowd and nervous about the level of their influence they can exert.

Perhaps this is why the Pharisees and Sadducees ventured into the wilderness to see John and ostensibly to be baptised by him. These unlikely partners in crime would be curious to see what John was doing and teaching. Perhaps they thought they could learn something from him, in particular how they could gain the support of the people. Alternately, they might have been seeking information that they could use in order to discredit him and to regain the deference of the people. Whatever their reasons, it is clear that John saw right through them. He did not believe that they had come to repent or to learn from him. He accused them of shallowness and of duplicity. “You offspring of vipers,” he says. “Bear fruit worthy of repentance.”

For John, it is not enough that they came out into the desert. Nor is it enough that they sought baptism. He was aware that if the Pharisees and Sadducees were not prepared to radically change their lives their baptism would have achieved nothing. Their feigned respect for John the Baptist was meaningless if they had not responded to his message and allowed their lives to be transformed as a result. John was confident that they could no rely on their heritage or their position, only a change of heart would ensure that they retained the privilege of being children of Abraham.

It is easy to be like the Pharisees and Sadducees and to live our lives on the surface, relying on our respectability and our superficial goodness. We can stand at a distance and admire and respect the John the Baptists of the past and the Nelson Mandelas of our time. However to dive into the depths of our being and to root out all that is ugly is a much more challenging and unwelcome task. Not many of us have the nerve to abandon our comfort zones and to allow ourselves to be radically changed. It takes courage to look deep into our souls and it takes a great deal of moral fibre to go against the flow, to associate with uncomfortable and challenging people and, with them, to stand up and be counted.

We do not honour Nelson Mandela by filling our Facebook pages with quotations and photos or by speaking in hushed and reverent voices about his achievements and his legacy. The best accolade that we can give him is to endeavour from this day on to recognise and to confront injustice; to rid our hearts of all bitterness and resentment; and to pray for the wisdom to discern when a person who makes us uncomfortable is a threat or a promise.

John the Baptist issued both threat and promise. He challenged the establishment and promised the coming of one even greater. He announced the judgement of God and provided a means to escape it. He saw through the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and Sadducees and honoured the openness of the people and their willingness to change.

If we do not wish to be censured, if we are sure that we are not the offspring of vipers, it is important that we hear John’s accusations, that we examine our motives for what we do and do not do, that we do not seek to protect what we have but to do what is right. Only an openness of heart, a self-critical attitude and a true understanding of the righteousness of God will help us to know right from wrong, good from bad, hero from terrorist. May God give us discernment, clarity of purpose and an openness of heart and mind, so that we might recognise the prophets among us, respond to their challenge and with them prepare for the coming of our God.

[1] Jacob Zuma commenting on Mandela’s death.

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Uncomfortable people – terrorists or saviours, threat or promise?