Faith, hope, and love abide
Now we see in a mirror, dimly
I’ve been agitated by the way the Amsterdam story has been getting reported in my go-to news source, the New York Times. I believe it has the sniff of antisemitism in it. But as I began to explore it I ran up against how subtle such antisemitism is. I realized that what I saw so clearly was not seen by most non Jewish Americans, especially those I have historically felt aligned with in liberal and progressive circles. So, that pushed me back to the issue of how we all see things. How we have differing lenses we use in trying to see and understand the world around us.
For example, there’s this Christian lens many of us have as we respond to the election results. Pretty much all of us would acknowledge that Christians voting for Mr Trump see things through a different lens from those who voted for Ms. Harris. We are focused on divergent and contracting ways of seeing things. But how about the different lens and emphasises from within the same group?
Yesterday my rector offered a fairly standard approach to how we are called to respond to the election results, especially if our side was defeated. I think he assumes that most (all) of our parishioners voted for Harris. He said, “Nothing has changed. Our call, our mission, remains the same.” In part he was affirming the elements of baptismal covenant which we then used in the liturgy. You know, we are to “seek and serve Christ in all persons” and to “strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.” He also spoke to the purposes of the parish church as another thing that has not changed: our worship of God in Christ as expressed in the Eucharist, forming the people of God for the sake of the world, and being a sanctifying presence in the broader community. He was taking the same line as almost all our bishops have taken since the election (with a few exceptions who seem to have lifted a section of the progressive party platform to substitute for the baptismal covenant and the gifts and virtues of the faith.)
Or how can you say to your neighbour, “Let me take the speck out of your eye”, while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbour’s eye. (Matthew 7:4-5)
As coffee hour was winding down and I was making my way to the door I got caught up in a small group discussion. No one was objecting to what the rector said. It wasn’t the conversation. The mental models of the group were the more the conventional political ones: some catastrophizing about the climate and democracy, also a bit of reality testing about how the checks and balances of the system are actually rather strong. But nothing about how we as Christians can approach all that; even if all the catastrophizing became true or if the checks and balances all held up well. Now that didn’t mean that they didn’t accept what the rector had said. But it did suggest the ways of seeing that were primary for us.
When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love. (Corinthians 13: 11 -13)
The conventional lens we look through seems to us to be reality, the truth. Or at least it is the “truth” in the forefront of our mind that is currently shaping our behavior.
In Shaping the Parish (STP) we've heard from participants that they now see more facets, more aspects, of what is going on in their parish then they did before. That's because we have offered them additional ways to see things. For example, the Shape of the Parish model offers them a way out of the “we are all the same” vs. “the cult” way of thinking. ( A video on the model)
Lens, mental models; all the work of the past decade about how cognitive therapy was the most effective form of therapy — it all comes into play here. Cognitive therapy helps patients identify thought patterns (lens, mental models) that are not helping the person and change those thought patterns and related behaviors. People can think more clearly. APA says, "Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a form of psychological treatment that has been demonstrated to be effective for a range of problems including depression, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug use problems, marital problems, eating disorders, and severe mental illness."The emergence of organizational psychology and organization development are in part about lenses that assist us in seeing organizational dynamics we often miss. We are helped to see things “hidden” and under the surface.
We then test our lenses by disciplined reflection on our experience. If the lens is false or simply overstayed -- in time many of us will see it because of the experiences we are going through as a result of our existing lens. As some conservatives, and now more liberals, have said about our political mental models, "we get mugged by reality."
so that, with the eyes of your heart enlightened, you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance among the saints (Ephesians 1: 18)
It's difficult to shift from one set of lenses to another. Take for example what just happened in California. It was a radical shift in what lenses most citizens found useful in seeing reality and truth. The Free Press offered this "Californians Finally Get Serious on Crime"
In the past couple of decades California decriminalize drugs and reduced its enforcement of some laws. The writer said that what was happening was this, “We all needed more empathy for those committing crimes, more empathy for drug dealers, the activists said, and soon the politicians did, too.” That worldview is a lens we can look through; that most voters in the state did look through. But then on November 5 California did this -
.Seventy percent of voters in the state—and every single county—backed Proposition 36, a measure undoing soft-on-crime measures brought in under 2014’s Prop 47. Among its changes: If you are caught stealing items worth under $950 three times, you will be charged with a felony, rather than a misdemeanor.
In Los Angeles, voters elected a Republican district attorney.
In Oakland, voters recalled their DA and mayor.
In San Francisco, Mayor London Breed lost her reelection bid to moderate Dan Lurie.
The national and California results mean the equilibrium is shifting. (Also see “A new equilibrium”) Does such a shift mean we have now arrived at what will be a lasting stability? In politics does it mean that the concerns of the left are wrong headed? No to both. The danger of a shift in the equilibrium is that it goes too far in the other direction. In the Free Press article he notes how “Such lawlessness has unfortunately hardened the hearts of many, which only compounds the tragedy.” He also ends by pointing to ways in which adjustments can bring both more compassion as well as public order and safety.
In any case it’s obvious the equilibrium has changed, that most votes are looking through a new pair of glasses. They had reflected on their experience and now saw things somewhat differently.
Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is. (1 John 3:2)
In the coming days I’ll return to the matter of how the Amsterdam story is being covered. That exploration will be helped by clarity about how our lenses, our mental models, always determine what we see and how we act.
This abides,
Brother Robert, OA
Feast of Martin, Bishop of Tours, 397 and Veterans Day.
When I think of “lenses,” I also include “constraints” or “defaults,” or “preferences.” Philosophers have fancy names for some of these like “intuition pumps” or “consciousness.” Then there’s “Weissenschaft,” for example - a world view.
I wonder if it would be helpful illustrating how the default positions we pray - the Resurrection, the Eucharist, the psalms - each lift up and expose the limits of our other default positions. They have the power to keep us moving. I wouldn’t even say moving forward or backward (both special lenses that may be mistaken and are bounded in a sense by time or direction), but perhaps in a trinitarian fashion with God, who is always responding to Godself in action. Perhaps this means asking “where are we moving, and how do we move given the spiritual / emotional practices the church has inherited through the faith of Jesus Christ?”
It might be a good practice for people to identify, reflect, and consider the strengths and limits of their own lenses.
The day after the election, the first thing I did on waking was to say Morning Prayer. I ran through a gamut of feelings as I read psalm 72 and contemplated the view of justice as delivered by the secular king. It seemed so obvious that both supporters of Mr. Trump and supporters of Ms. Harris could see their "king" in the psalmist's vision - it's easy to do, depending on your lens. And yet the psalm ends pointing to the Lord God, who alone does wondrous deeds.
Being aware of our lenses is critical in sound decision-making, and in shaping moral judgment. It's also not enough on its own. It's important to know what we value and how we organize the world through our biases, frameworks, and hoped-for outcomes. It's also critically important to address facts. Much as I might want "my" candidate to be such a Godly king, it's pretty far from the truth whichever candidate I favor. There are nonetheless meaningful differences between them that can be elucidated through appeal to objective truths and the application of our civic priorities. "Both-sidesism" tends to forget the importance of facts and values while relying on the lens of equality of word count. We all tend to forget that it is the Lord God who alone does wondrous deeds.