Category: Clear thinking, words, and communication

Frames of Reference

Frame of reference:  a structure of concepts, values, customs, views, etc., by means of which an individual or group perceives or evaluates data, communicates ideas, and regulates behavior.

   We all have and utilize frames of reference, and much of the time we barely realize it or advert to them.
   Here’s a simple example. When I was a child and started school in New York City, the first question I was asked by the other kids was, “What are you?”
   In those days and in that place, the question meant, “What is your national background or family origins?”
   (Since the United States was generally an immigrant country, what differentiated people was the country they or their parents or other relatives came from.)
   I never had a simple answer like Italian, French, or English. I had to explain that my father was of German descent (German Jewish, since “Stern” was immediately identified as a Jewish name) and my mother, of Irish descent (presumably Catholic of course).
   My parents had agreed before marriage to raise their children as Catholics, and so I was, but the confusion lingered. Even as a young priest, sometimes I was asked how old I was when I converted (i.e., became a baptized Catholic)?
   Sometimes I enjoyed answering, “A couple of hours!” My birth was difficult for my mother, and I was presumably dying at birth and hastily baptized.
   The expected kind of answer to, “What are you?” would have been very different in another place or time. The answer might well have been your caste, trade, tribe, or social class.
   Some other frames of reference in our lives are more subtle and less obvious.

   For example, religious teachings, practices, and beliefs. First, they vary among different religions, but they also vary within the same religion. They may be fixed and unchanging or developing and evolving.
   In Christian tradition we still have a lot of words and practices which originated in and reflect a different physical, scientific, social, or other frame of reference. For example:
   – a flat world: the good go up (heaven) and the bad go down (hell).
   – a ranking of persons: “clergy” (upper or ruling class) and “laity’ (lower or subject class).
   – degrees or kinds of divinity or godliness: the blessed Trinity, angels and their ranks and functions, saints and their distinctiveness and roles.
   Often religious misunderstandings and conflicts are rooted in frames of reference that are not recognized as such.
   If you’re familiar with the great works of St. Thomas Aquinas, you can’t help but be dazzled by their depth and breadth. But, his frames of reference, besides Christian faith and the customs of his day included the philosophy of the pagan Aristotle.
   Many disagreements within Christianity are rooted in different cultures, practices, historical traditions, and linguistic systems.
   A holy writer esteemed by some may be considered as unintelligible by others.
   “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin” may once have been a legitimate topic for debate among scholars long ago, but now is usually dismissed as a ridiculous and even meaningless question.
   The point is, we all have frames of reference. Try to be aware of them. and try to keep yours up to date!


30 January 2022

Bucket List

To “kick the bucket” is a sort of slang expression in English for dying. Whatever its origin, it was popularized by the 2007 film, “The Bucket List”, meaning a list of things you want to do before you die.
   One way or another, we all may have one, whether we identify it as such or not. That is to say, we all tend to have unfulfilled desires, wishes, hope, and plans that we end up deferring for consideration “tomorrow”.
   (Like Scarlet O’Hara in last scene of the famous movie, “Gone With the Wind”.)
   We also have a very good word to describe this kind of behavior—“procrastination”. And, sometimes, recognizing that we’re doing it, we resolve to change—and then often we procrastinate again!
   The moral seems to be, do not put off until “tomorrow” what you can do today, even if what you can do today is no more than a first step in long or continuing process.
   (Remember the Chinese proverb, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”)
   Logically, since we fundamentally have absolutely no certitude whatsoever about the length of our lives, we should not put off until “tomorrow” whatever we consider vitally important today.
   That’s why having a bucket list is a pretty good idea. Forget about fantasies, dreams, and wishful thinking, but figure out the undone things that you really want to do and should be doing.
   If they are possible and important, put them on your bucket list—which should be arranged in priority order—and then resolve to begin to implement it.
   Never mind how formidable, how challenging, how demanding your undone thing may be. With the help of God all things are possible.
   (As the Beatles used to sing; “Oh, I get by with a little help from my friends”)

   Obviously, and maybe likely, your list may prove to be longer than your life. No matter. That’s why it’s in priority order.
   All you can do is to do as much you possibly can. You’re not omnipotent, you can’t fix everything, you can’t erase the past—and you can’t control the future, either.
   Trust in and be grateful for the help of God and the little help of your friends. Also, since you’re not superman/superwoman, be at peace with your limited successes and failures. Do your best, and God will do the rest.
   Your bucket list may, so to speak, range from the sublime to the ridiculous. That’s okay, after all it’s your bucket list—and no one else is exactly like you, nor will there ever be another person exactly like you!
   But, getting your bucket list in priority order is very important. After all, in the scheme of things, e.g., is climbing Mt. Everest more important than being reconciled with your estranged relative? Never mind that, for you, climbing Mt. Everest may be easier!
   Maybe you won’t live long enough to accomplish it, but the moment you add it to your list truly as a top priority you have taken your first step towards accomplishing it.
   Don’t leave any of the weighty, really important things off your list or give them a low priority on it.
   If you’re not sure, think of it this way: If today was the last day of your life, what undone thing would you like to accomplish, no matter how difficult, no matter how unlikely it may be that you could achieve it.
   Making the decision is what counts!


28 November 2021

Outdated Language

The language we speak is changing all the time. That’s why we need dictionaries. They tell us where each word comes from, what it originally meant, how it used to be used, what it means now.
   Geoffrey Chaucer, born around 1340 in London, is called the father of English literature. His famous work is The Canterbury Tales. You think you know English? Try reading it exactly as he wrote it.
   You may more or less understand it, but you’ll find yourself often stumped by unfamiliar words or words spelt differently and/or that have a different meaning now than they did when Chaucer wrote them.
   You think you know English? Try visiting different English speaking countries and different neighborhoods within them. I once was in a train to Liverpool near a group of teenagers returning home. I couldn’t understand their conversation at all!
   You think you know English? Spoken Indian English is rapid and can be hard to understand for an American. Once in India, I asked a friend if he had a similar difficulty with my (New York style, American) English. Yes, he said, you speak with such a drawl!
   You know where and when we still use a lot of old, outdated English words? In our religious language and traditional prayers.
   For example, the Our Father. We still use some outdated words, but, hopefully, not with their outdated meanings.
   We refer to God as in the sky (heaven). We pray that his name be hallowed (made, be regarded as holy), but the main way we use that word now-a-days is for Halloween.
   We ask that his kingdom be established, but how familiar are we really with ancient Middle East kings and kingdoms?
   Do we really want to be led away from all temptation? If we avoid every place and situation of temptation, we’d be rather shut in. But, we do want the strength to resist the daily temptations in our lives.

   When we ask for forgiveness of trespasses, we don’t mean unlawfully entering upon someone else’s private property.
   Another obvious example, the Hail Mary. We know about hailstorms, we may hail a cab, and we know about ship to ship encounters, but now to attract someone’s attention we’re more likely to “hey”.
   We say she is full of grace, but we don’t mean elegance or beauty, rather that she was favored by God or in a state of holiness.
   When we say she is blessed, we don’t mean that she’s lucky or a winner; we mean she bespeaks God, that the love and mercy of God shows forth through her life.
   “Mother of God” doesn’t mean that she has begotten the creator of the universe nor that God’s genetic makeup is from her. It refers to the divinity of Jesus, her son.
   I’m not knocking anything, just reminding that in religious talk we comfortably use many words whose meaning has shifted.
   A few more examples:
   Church—do we mean a consecrated building or an assembly of believers?
   Altar—do we mean a place where offerings are burnt or a dining table?
   Mass—do we mean a holy sacrifice or a remembrance of Jesus’ life and death and a communal act of thanksgiving (eucharist)?
   Priest—do we mean an ordained official or an elder (presbyter) in a community of believers?
   Confess—do we mean to plead guilty to a sin or crime or to proclaim one’s belief or allegiance?
   Communion—do we mean the consecrated host or a shared fellowship?
   It’s okay to use outdated language, but it’s important to be clear about what we mean!


14 November 2021

Calumny vs. Detraction

Your armory of good words, probably has two excellent but almost forgotten and rarely used ones, subtle, clear, and strong:

Calumny: 1. a false and malicious statement designed to injure the reputation of someone or something. 2. the act of uttering calumnies; slander; defamation.

Detraction: 1. the act of disparaging or belittling the reputation or worth of a person, work, etc. 2. the taking away of a part, as from quality, value, or reputation.

   Both have to do with damaging a person’s reputation. The difference is that calumny achieves it by a falsehood, and detraction achieves it by a truth.
   Calumny seems clearly to be wrong, since it involves spreading a falsehood with the intent of damaging someone’s reputation.
   Detraction is also wrong, although less obviously. There are those who might claim that it can never be wrong to tell a truth, but this is not always the case.
   For example, if you once said or did something which was very personal and private, whether good or bad, it is not necessarily correct for another person to publicize it, making it a matter of common knowledge-especially if the intent is to destroy your good name and reputation.
   We are all less than perfect. Everyone is not entitled to know everything about each of us without sufficient cause or reason.
   If someone has repeatedly done something seriously wrong or dangerous to another person or the public good, there may well be adequate reason to reveal it. But, if not, the very revealing of the wrong or danger may be itself a wrong!
   Everyone is entitled to a reasonable degree of privacy and to his or her good name, and to violate it requires an adequate cause.

   This isn’t about an examination of conscience or a private confession. A wrong remains a wrong, whether known or not. But, everyone need not know everything about another, whether right or wrong.
   Today, where huge quantities of true and false information are easily available to us through the various media, there seems to be a great emphasis on a “gotcha” mentality—a kind of almost indecent haste to unearth anything that could be used to discredit another, whether justifiable or not!
   Of course, some grievous matters may need to be revealed for the common good, but not everything, always.
   In examining our individual or collective conscience, we need to a remember that there is such a serious fault (wrong; sin) as calumny. and there also is a subtler fault (wrong; sin), also serious, detraction. 
  We can’t excuse ourselves because of ignorance, that we didn’t fully realize the implications of what we were doing.
   We’re supposed to know the laws of the land in which we live and obey them. Ignorance does not excuse us from breaking them and paying the penalty.
   We’re presumed to be familiar with the customs and tolerances of the society in which we live and respect them. Ignorance does not excuse us from ignoring them and being treated accordingly.
   We’re supposed to seek and discern God’s will for us and follow it. Ignorance does not absolve us from our responsibility.
   We’re also supposed to clearly speak the language of the society in which we live. So, be sure your vocabulary includes these two clear and powerful words and that you wield them well!


22 August 2021

Prizing and Praising and Blessing

Prizing (to prize) means to estimate the worth or value of something, to value or esteem it highly.

Praising (to praise) means to express approval or admiration of something, to commend, to extoll.

   There’s no praising without prizing. We can’t sincerely express admiration and extoll something or someone if we don’t actually value and esteem that thing or person.
   Praising without prizing is a dishonest, false, and fraudulent thing to do.
   If you’re singing along in church, “Praise God from whom all blessings flow”, it presumes you really mean it, that you have a genuine appreciation of some of the wonderful works of God and value and appreciate his mercy and love.
   Good praising needs good prizing, and good prizing means first seeing and then appreciating, valuing, and esteeming.
   Good prizing needs sound values, needs open eyes and ears and mind and heart—but it doesn’t necessarily need an open mouth! That’s the praising part—that comes later.
   In the hustle and bustle of modern life and the myriads of obligations and requirements of our jobs, our families, and, in general, modern living, it’s easy to become blind and deaf to the works and actions of God in the whole world, in that small part of it where we live our lives, and in our very life itself.
   Taking time to see, to hear, to think, to reflect, to appraise, to prize, and to praise is at least as important as taking time to eat, to drink, to rest, to exercise, to care for health, to work, and to earn money.
   Prizing and praising are key ingredients of praying—in fact it’s pretty much what praying is all about. Praying isn’t just providing God with a shopping list of our concerns, hopes, fears, woes, and wants.

Blessing (to bless) usually means to consecrate, sanctify, make holy or to request God to bestow a good upon a person, place, or thing.
   In church Latin usage, to bless is “benedicere”. “Bene” means good or well; “dicere” means to speak.

   When we say grace before eating, we say, “Bless us, O Lord, and these thy gifts…” However we also pray (e.g. in Daniel 3), “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord…”
   “Bless the Lord” can’t mean to ask God to bestow some good thing upon himself—but it can mean to speak well, in some way
   Actions speak louder than words. Any creature and all creation can “speak well” about God by manifesting him through the beauty and the wonder of his work in them.
   In this sense, to bless God means to display and show forth the work of God in us, to “bespeak”.
   Paradoxically, “bespeaking” doesn’t involve words at all. It’s means allowing the wonder of the work of God and his goodness to be seen through our lives.
   This brings us back to prizing and praising. Praising, like bespeaking, is not so much a matter of words at all.
   If the quality of our lives, our behavior, and our dealings with others are aligned with the designs of our maker, we are showing forth, bespeaking, blessing, and praising God.
   Contrariwise, if the way we live and act and treat others is not in accord with the will of God and his designs in our creation, we’re not bespeaking, blessing, or praising God at all.
   Be good—you don’t have to say a word!


30 May 2021

At Home on the Range

No, this is not about the song
   It’s about how comfortable we are about where we seem to find ourselves—or others choose to situate us—on the various ranges or scales that we use to describe and measure our appearance, behavior, popularity, feelings, skills, etc.
   Here’s a notorious example: skin color—classifying people on a range from Black to White (which actually is a range from dark to light).
   Nobody is at either extreme. Nobody’s skin is 100% black or dark, and nobody’s skin is 100% light or white.
   We all may know many so-called “black” people who are paler than some so-called “white” people, and many so-called “white” people who are darker than some so-called “black” people.
   When we use a range or scale like that to describe one another, we’re really thinking about all kinds of factors besides skin color—physiognomy, dress, behavior, ethnic origins, family, social status, education, wealth, etc.
   Just think about what we’re trying to get at—and how confusing it gets— when we classify people on the “conservative-liberal” range, or the “young-old” range, or the “smart-dumb” range, or the “weak-strong” range, or the “good-bad” range, or the “rich-poor” range.
   Whatever range we’re using to describe ourselves or another, there’s one common factor to them all: nobody is at the extreme of any range; no one is 100% anything!
   In other words, we all have and may display to some extent a bit of both: I may be fairly liberal about somethings and conservative about others, know a lot about somethings and little about others.
   And, of course, as we change and develop, our position on any of these ranges shifts, more towards one extreme or the other—sort of like the way the mercury moves one way or the other in a thermometer.

   Here’s another contemporary example: sexuality—classifying people on a range from heterosexual to homosexual.
   Nobody is 100% at either extreme—or exactly in the middle (e.g.. “bisexual”). Nobody is only and exclusively attracted to others of the opposite sex and never, ever attracted to the other—and vice-versa.
   When we use a range or scale like that to describe one another, we’re really thinking about all kinds of factors besides sexual attraction and/or behavior—physiognomy, dress, mores, cultural standards, affects, etc.
   With this range, there are key factors which strongly influence our reactions and judgements—our standards of morality and, or based on, our religious formation.
   A strong influence in the shaping of standards of morality and religious formation until fairly recent times, especially in Western societies, is sometimes identified as Jansenism (based on the writings of a 17th century theologian, Cornelius Jansen).
   This movement, rooted in Augustinian theology, emphasized original sin, the fundamental sinfulness of the human condition, and the need for divine grace. It inspired a very rigorous moral theology, especially in sexual matters.
   For example, I can remember being taught as a child in catechism class that the sixth commandment (about adultery) forbade, under penalty of mortal sin, “impure” thoughts, feelings, desires, and actions.
   I was terrified by what, in retrospect, I later realized were bad religious teachings.
   A moral to all this: be aware of the range of views regarding most matters and beware of believing your judgement about the right point on any range is the only legitimate, unbiased one. (Alas, we’re not infallible!)


23 May 2021

Dated Dogmas

Dogma: 1. An official system of principles or tenets concerning faith, morals, behavior, etc.
   2. A specific tenet or doctrine authoritatively laid down.
   3. Prescribed doctrine proclaimed as unquestionably true by a particular group.
   4. A settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.

   “Dogma” comes from the Greek verb “dokein”, which can mean to expect, think, seem, seem good, or pretend.
   The way we use the word now has more the flavor of something fixed, permanent, definitive, binding, unchangeable.
   But nothing human can be that. If each of us is less than perfect—and we are—than the best we can do is to declare what seems to us to be good or correct, according to our lights, at a particular moment
   No dogma can fit every possible situation and no dogma can preclude the possibility of being dated, divisive, or even destructive at another time or in another place.
   Even the very understanding of dogmas develops and changes.
   Since dogmas often are concerned with religious beliefs and practices, let’s look at how they play out.
   First, things—events—happen, But even participants and eyewitnesses differ in their telling about them, and their solemn testimony about them, and their writing about them. Again, human limitations at play.
   Second, with the passage of time, the stories, histories, and traditions passed on themselves change and sometimes are revised and altered.
   Consider the Bible. There are many places where you can find more than one version of events, conversations, and conflicts—sometimes in the very same book!

   One inspired author writes from one point of view, and another, from another. It’s not about who is right and who is wrong—it’s about a complex reality bigger than any one person’s understanding or communication.
   Besides this diversity, with the passage of time further insights occur, more facts are uncovered about the earlier period, and perhaps a greater appreciation of the achievements of the earlier persons and their points of view develops.
   As the diversities increase, so does a discomfort with them. There is a desire for some clear definitions of meaning and some clear standards of practice. In effect, it often means that persons in authority respond to this desire with dogma.
   And, then gradually, diversity in the understanding and application of the dogma develops as well. There’s no stopping it!
   Since we human persons are necessarily limited, no human work or construction is ever perfect, and change and development always lead to new understandings, articulations, and norms.
   Dogmatic diversity in some sense is almost a contradiction in terms, and dogmatic development can be frightening and challenging to its partisans. But, life is about change and development, and that means that education, technology, governance, behavioral standards, faith, religion, science, philosophy, theology—all things that involve human beings—involve change and development!
   We sometimes say, “Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.” Maybe we should also say, “Better to embrace change and development than to bewail the loss of our comfortable, earlier certainties.”


18 April 2021      

Loaded Language

Recently Frank Bruni wrote a thoughtful opinion article for The New York Times called “Stop It With ‘Gun Control’. Enough Already”. Its subtitle was “Language matters. This language doesn’t help.”
   He considered “Gun Control” as “an example of the loaded language that often shapes our discourse on important matters.”
   His point was that “how we write and talk about any issue that engenders passionate disagreement” is “inevitably consequential”. Although his main example was the difference between speaking of Gun Control vs. Gun Safety, he gave a few other examples of what he considered loaded language:
   – Illegal Aliens vs. Undocumented Aliens.
   – Pro Life vs. Pro Choice.
   – Gay Marriage vs. Marriage Equality.
   Sometimes, although we may not realize it, we may be using religious, theological, and canonical language that is loaded also.
   Maybe once upon a time, the language may have been perfectly respectable and clear, but as times change, customs change, and words change, the same language can become “loaded” in the sense of engendering passionate disagreement.
   At present, there is disagreement about translations of the Bible, especially whether they are discriminatory.
   For example, translating St. Paul’s opening words on the Areopagus: Traditional translations usually use “Men of Athens” whether it was an all-male audience or not. But some modern translations, presuming it was a mixed audience, use “Athenians”.
   In any case, for us, nowadays, “Men” usually means just adult males.
   With the changing usage of words, sometimes we find that the word we need doesn’t exist. For example, we shouldn’t apply exclusively masculine or feminine words to describe the Creator. But, we don’t have any good alternatives for using “he”, “him”, or “his” when referring to God.

   Sometime there are solutions. We can use “brothers and sisters” instead of just “brothers” if a message is directed to everyone, not just to men.
   Translations are not the only challenges regarding using words that have evolved and changed in meaning or usage.
   People were once identified as black, brown, red, white, or yellow—a very racist mentality. Now a popular usage is “people of color” for everyone who is not “white”. It’s really no less racist an expression, although it’s meant to be not racist at all!
   Race is a word that implies a different species—and there is only one human species.
   We refer to LGBTQ people meaning everyone who is not . . . heterosexual? normal? not-different? We don’t have an good opposite word in this and many cases.
   The obvious opposite of “Pro Life” is “Pro Death”. The opposite of “Pro Choice” is something like “Pro No-Choice”.
   If one’s definition of marriage involves two people intending procreating children, then it’s difficult to consider a same-sex relationship as a marriage. But, anybody can be a partner with anybody else in a civil union, which doesn’t imply procreation.
   The Order of the Holy Sepulchre includes men and women. What to call the women members? In English usage (England that is) a title of distinction for a woman is “Dame”. But, in some places (U.S. for example), “Dame” sounds like slang and “Lady” sounds better. However, any woman can be called a lady; it’s not an honorific title at all.
   “Words, words, words.” Be very careful how you use them, especially the loaded ones!


11 April 2021

True or False

Polydactylism is an anomaly in human beings and animals—i.e., extra fingers and/or toes.
   Suppose you were playing True or False, and the question was “Humans have five fingers, true or false?” The common sense, customary response would be “True”—but sometimes, rarely, they don’t. So the right answer must be “False”.
   Now, if the question was more nuanced, say, “Humans usually (or mostly) have five fingers, true or false?” the right answer would be “True”.
   But if the players of this game all lived on an isolated little island (never mind that “isolated” and “island” are both derived from the same root word) where everybody has six fingers . . . well, you get the idea.
   On a day to day basis, it’s hard to find real life “absolute” truths and/or “absolute” falsehoods.
   A similar challenge involves characterizing something as either “right” or “wrong”, or as “good” or “bad”.
   The problem is whether there is such a thing as an “absolute”—because an absolute means something 100%, without exception.
   An absolute is a projection, based on experience. In practice, one end of a range is an absolute—e.g., from 100% True to 100% False. You can be at any point on the range, but you’re never at either end point.
   None of us are ever 100% True or 100% False; 100% Right or 100% Wrong; 100% Good or 100% Bad—no creature, that is. (100% is either a theoretical abstract or we’re talking about God.)
   But just because no view, opinion, or decision is absolutely (100%) true or absolutely (100%) false, it doesn’t mean that all views, opinions, and decisions are of equal value or worth.
   We judge things—and even argue about things—on the basis of how close or how far away they are from the ideal (the absolute).

   A popular classification or rating criterion now-a-days has to do with liking. Someone tweets something, and then we learn about how many “Likes” it got in response. (We don’t get into whether it refers to liking a lot or only liking a little.)
   This is a measure of popularity at any given moment in time (presuming, of course, that everyone more or less understands the tweet, view, opinion or decision being classified in the same way.)
   An idea may be very popular, but this has little to do with it being true or false—or right or wrong, or good or bad.
   When you get down to it, there’s a high degree of relativity to every aspect of our lives. We may not be perfectly (100%) good, but we may be striving to be good. Our ideals are the carrot on the stick!
   We often “like” the unearthing of negative facts about people. And, since none of us are perfectly (100%) good or bad, smart or dumb, prudent or imprudent, selfless or selfish, there’s always something to accuse, criticize, unearth, or discredit about each of us—about every human person, no matter who!
   What’s really important is what are our absolutes, our ideals, what are our carrots on the stick in front of us.
   If we try to be true, right, or good and manage to be more often than not we may be on the way to becoming “saints”—e.g. exemplary people, outstanding in many ways, models to be imitated.
   On the other hand, if more often than not we’re false, wrong, bad, we also may be exemplary people, outstanding in many ways, but an entirely different kind of model!


14 March 2021

Cursing the Darkness

Better to light one candle
than to curse the darkness.

It seems, considering how we invest our time, energy, and attention, that we have become inordinately absorbed in cursing the darkness!
First, let’s be clear what we’re talking about. “Darkness” refers to the absence or lack of light; by extension and metaphorically it alludes to wicked or evil beings that inhabit or are associated with it.
Second, let’s be clear about the attention we give to darkness.
– Although we want light, we’re not being inundated by candle-lighters or overwhelmed by the light they’re shedding. But we do try to educate potential candle-lighters about the depth and extent and danger of the darkness.
– That’s what prompts us to condemn the darkness. We want to persuade people that, even in spite of certain advantages and satisfactions of the darkness, it’s not good. So, we try to heighten their awareness of the undesirable consequences of the darkness.
– But, to motivate cursing the darkness, we really have to reveal the darkness in its depth. We have to call attention to its vastness, its origin, and its seemingly rapid expansion. We have to dramatically illustrate its deceptive worth and value. We have to announce the dark dangers daily.
What happens! Often we end up becoming absorbed by the darkness and its effects, by the absence of light.
Look at the entertainment sector: audiences are thrilled by films that exceed one another in shockingly vivid depictions of death, destruction, and violence.
Look at the religious sector: church goers sometimes are titillated by exhortations to righteousness and virtue that dramatically describe the consequences of their absence—sins and their enormity.

Look at the political sector: citizens are ceaselessly informed about the scope and significance and failings of the “other”, so as to muster support for the “right” side.
If we’re often hearing and speaking of the darkness, its extent, and the achievements of darkness dwellers, we may not be doing a great job of spreading the light.
There are always spots of light amid the darkness, like stars in the night sky. Do we see them as spoilers of the darkness, or as harbingers of the beauty of the light?
In over-educating people about the achievements, pleasures and dangers of the darkness, we may be blinding them to the power and glory of the light.
To be a force for light, we need to be aware of the darkness, but not to curse and denounce it in such exquisite detail that in effect we become its promoters.
To be a force for light, don’t forget that the most important thing is to light and keep burning the candle of our lives—even one spot in the night can encourage others to shine their little light as well.
To be a force for light, we should learn from the current pandemic. One tiny virus so multiplies that it is interfering with human life on earth, causing more death than many a war, radically affecting and altering the behavior of almost everyone.
Your priority is to light your candle, which instantly dispels nearby darkness and can become a very contagious behavior—each candle-lighter encouraging another.
Remember Paul’s plea to the Ephesians: “…you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light, for light produces every kind of goodness and righteousness and truth…”


7 March 2021