To see or not to see

Introduction

Can't you see?

In the gospel of Mark there is a whole section devoted to Jesus, the light of the world, who overcomes the darkness of blindness. It begins in the eighth chapter with the cure of the blind man from Bethsaida (22‑25) and ends in the tenth chapter with the cure of a blind man from Jericho (46‑52). Sandwiched  in between is a whole section on spiritual blindness. //Peter  refuses to believe that the Messiah must suffer, and Jesus scolds him, saying, "Peter, can't you see? The one who wants to follow me must forget self and take up the cross" (Mk 8:31‑33). //Then the Twelve  are arguing about who is the greatest? Jesus puts them straight, saying, "My friends, can't you see? Whoever wants to be my disciple must be the servant of all" (Mk 9:33‑37). //Then he says to the sons  of Zebedee who are seeking positions of honor in his kingdom:  "James and John, can't you see? Whoever aspires to greatness must be the servant of all” (Mk 10: 43).

 

 

The section on spiritual blindness  ends with the cure of a physically blind man from Jericho, named Bartimaeus. Like Peter and the Twelve and the sons of  Zebedee,  he too can't see. But with this difference: he sees that he doesn't see: "Rabboni, Teacher, I want to see!"  When we see that we don't see, we aren't really blind at all; that’s 20/20 vision. To Bartimaeus Jesus replies: "Blessed are you, for you see that you don't see." Then upon this man with spiritual insight  into his own personal blindness,  Jesus bestows physical sight. And in gratitude the man follows him down the road (Mk 10:46‑58).

 

Spiritual Blindness in politics:

It is always difficult to talk about spiritual realities, and spiritual blindness is one of them, but we try anyway. We might say that spiritual blindness is choosing to not see. (Not seeing in itself is not spiritual blindness; it’s choosing to not see is.) And when the matter at hand is rather obvious, and we still choose to not see, then that indeed is a good case of spiritual blindness.

 

Take the present political atmosphere of electing a president. Healthcare is one of the raging issues.  If we choose to not see that there are 40-45 million hard-working American citizens out there who are uninsured or underinsured; //if we choose not to see that hospital beds are empty not because there aren't enough sick people around but because there aren't enough insured people around; //if we choose not to see that the exorbitant price of prescription drugs forces some people to choose between food and heat on the one hand and medicine on the other; //if we choose not to see that a catastrophic health-expense can wipe out everything a person has worked for in his or her life; //if we choose to not see that the whole atmosphere of the healing profession from doctors' offices to hospitals is so often more about paper (insurance paper) than about people,

 

--in a word, if we choose not to see all that, then we’ve  got a good case of spiritual blindness on our hands. It is such  blindness which wrote that  obscene sign frequently seen in a former national healthcare debate:  “Don’t mess with the best.”  “Whose best? “Your best but not mine.” The sign says, or rather  betrays the fact that we live by one minute sound-bytes or two-line slogans. It reveals that we are  shallow and simplistic in matter profound and complicated. It exposes our way of dealing with issues  by not dealing with them at all  but  by dismissing them with a catchy line or two.

 

 

Spiritual blindness in religion

Spiritual blindness is choosing to not see. And when the matter at hand is rather obvious, and we still choose to not see, then that indeed is a good case of spiritual blindness. Even our Mother, the Church (like the rest of us human beings out of whom she is made) even she sometimes chooses not to see the obvious. It's obvious, for example, that the shortage of priests is yearly becoming more acute. It's obvious too that burn-out is overcoming the few priests that are left. It's also obvious that the shortage is really man-made (like our periodic fuel shortages). And it is obvious too that  there is really a rich field of candidates out there waiting to be harvested for the priesthood. And just as it is obviously a waste not to reap the  harvest, so is it obviously a waste not to  reap the harvesters. 

 

The "problem with the problem" that we have of ordaining married people or even women to ministry is that it really isn't much of a problem at all, or at least it shouldn’t be. Many theologians believe that there is nothing on  earth nor in heaven that stands in the way. But for the present moment the Church, for one reason or the other, which perhaps only psychiatrists can explain to us,  chooses not to see.

 

 It is this choosing not to see in religious matters that wrote for us the bumper-sticker which socks it  to us: “God said it; I believe it; that settles it!The sticker  says, “I’ve got  God and all religious matters down pat, so don’t both me  with the facts. “That settles It!” This isn’t a bid for or against the  ordination of married people or of women.  This is about something much more important: this is a bid for choosing to see in the place of choosing to not see, whether that be in  politics or in the Church or in the sanctuary of our own homes.

 

Spiritual blindness in the home

 Yes, especially in the sanctuary of our own homes where the greatest and the most important part of our lives are lived, and where we meet the really real issues of life that need to be dealt with.

 

You see, what’s so bad about our  “Don’t mess with the best” sign (which we parade in the political arena) is  that we bring the sign, with its spiritual blindness, home with us, and there parade it too. There too we deal with each other in  quite basically the same way: we warn even family members not to “mess with our best.” 

 

“God said it, I believe it; that settles it.” What’s so bad about that bumper-sticker of ours, which “socks it to ‘em” on religious turf, is that  we bring it home with us, drive it into the garage,  carry it into the house, and there “socks it to ‘em” on family turf as well.  That sticker, which has God down pat, has family members down pat too. The sticker which  is dead sure of religious matters is also dead sure of family matters.  “That settles it!” is the rule of law for religious life; it  becomes now the rule of law for  family life as well. (You see, our  lives are seamless garments. There is a consistency  in us – whether  for good or for bad. What we are or how we are in politics and religion is basically quite the same as who we are and what we are at home. When you hear your spouse or your children cry out to  you, “For God’s sake, can’t you see?,” that might just well be a very profound cry and an ardent plea for  you  to tear up your sign and rip off your bumper-sticker, and choose at last to see.

 

Gospel input?

It’s election time.  No doubt about it, as we watch the media, what we see is what we choose to see, and what we don’t see is what we  choose not to see. It depends a lot upon the stand we take on various issues: our stand on guns, our stand on abortion,  our stand morality (zipper morality or justice morality), our stand on taxes, our stand on school vouchers, our stand on healthcare.

 

The critical question for us, the baptized, at this important moment of presidential election, is this: What does our  stand  on the Gospel put into the whole election equation? What does our Catholic Christian faith put into the equation? Does it put in nothing because we have no Gospel stand? Does it put in nothing because our Catholic Christian faith is basically  harmless and irrelevant?

 

 Or do we have a Gospel stand, and does it put something into the election equation? Does it perhaps call all Christian Republicans and Democrats  to overcome their spiritual blindness (this business of choosing to not see) at this    critical political moment?  And does it perhaps call all Christian Republicans and Democrats to bring spiritual insight with themselves into the voting booth?

Conclusion

Tradition reserves the classical story about blindness for the fourth Sunday of Lent, Cycle A  (Jn 9:1‑41). It's the story of the man born blind.  The neighbors haul him to the religious authorities (Pharisees) and their religion gets in the way: “This man  Jesus  cured on the Sabbath, so he can’t be from God.” The authorities drag him off to his parents whom they question. The parents tell them to go ask their son: “He’s old enough to speak for himself.”  The Pharisees  pull the son off  to the side and ask: "Now tell us once more what exactly happened? How come you can see?"  Exhausted he exclaims, "My gosh, how come you can not  see?”

 

It’s a  rambling story of  forty‑one verses that builds up to an impatience  that has us crying out, "For God's sake, you Pharisees, how come you can't you see?” It ends with this strange line from the mouth of Jesus: "I have come into this world so that the blind should see, and those who see should become blind" (Jn 9:39).  Translation:

 

"I have come to show all those,

who choose to not see

but are dead-sure of everything,

that they are blind.

And I have come to give sight

to those who see that that they don't see

but want to see."

(Jn 9:39).