The false witness

After Exodus 20:16 

The false witness,

the liar, wreaks

reverberating havoc.

It does not matter

if the false witness

is on the campaign trail,

or the courtroom,

in the police report,

in the academic paper,

in the classroom,

in the marketplace, 

in the Ph.D. thesis,

in the pulpit or pew,

in the scientific study,

in the home.

False witness is

the acid eating

the bonds of love,

the bonds of community,

the bonds of trust.

It is the wind and water

eroding the foundation

of life, of our life.

Whether by omission

or commission, false

witness destroys until

itself is undone.

 

Photograph by Taras Chernus via Unsplash. Used by permission.

Some Friday Readings

 

The Leak – poem by Seth Lewis.

 

When the Blind See and the Seeing are Blind – Mitch Chase at Biblical Theology.

 

What is the Unpardonable Sin? (Matthew 12) – Dan Doriani at Crossway.

 

Great Gamble: The Failed Launch of Moby Dick – Jason Clark at This is the Day.

 

“Timor Mortis Conturbat Me,” poem by Anonymous – Sally Thomas at Poems Ancient and Modern.

"Out of the Ashes" by Anthony Esolen

Whatever else it did, the election of 2016 reignited the culture wars in the United States. That likely means they had never really gone away in the first place, and were simmering below the surface, ready to erupt when a catalyst came along.

Where you find your own place in these wars will likely determine your response to Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture by Anthony Esolen. A professor of English at Providence College in Rhode Island, Esolen takes a rather dark view of contemporary American culture. And he defines culture broadly – politics, the arts, relationships, education, faith and religion, and even our definitions of beauty and truth.

It’s difficult to argue with him.

The book was written before the election, but it’s as if Esolen anticipated “fake news” and “alternative facts,” otherwise known as lying (or “misspeaking,” the clumsy word invented to cover making false statements). That’s his first critique of American culture – we lie about everything, and we believe what fits our own pre-existing or preconceived beliefs.

Esolen goes on. We’ve lost any concept of the idea of beauty. Public education, and higher education, are disasters. Our ideas of manhood and womanhood have been turned on their heads, if not obliterated. Our understanding of both work and play are seriously lacking, and those lacks have consequences. And out ideas of community participation and involvement are talking to our friends (people of like mind) on Facebook.

“So we need to clear out the garbage, admit our errors, and rebuild,” he writes. “When your only choices are repentance or oblivion, you repent.” Of course, we have entire industries that depend upon those errors continuing, regardless of the cliff they may be taking us toward.

This is an easy book to read and a difficult book to digest and accept. He speaks hard words, words that will produce outrage, especially among those who might classify themselves as progressive left.

On schools: “…the schools we have built are monstrosities that reflect the government we have built, a government that has taken in an all-eating life of its own.”

On the current crop of students disrupting universities: “It is also something of a mistake to point at the students and laugh at them for being weaklings. The students hold the hammer and they know it. …In our world of inversions, power is granted to people who claim that they have no power and who resent the greatness of their own forebears. They do not seek ‘safety.’ They seek to destroy. The strong man is bound and gagged, and the pistol is pointed at his head – the seat of reason itself.”

In fact, Esolen argues that high education no longer occurs at most of our colleges and universities. It’s difficult to defend higher education when you take a look at what’s being taught in English and the so-called social sciences.

His solutions are radical. Some aspects of the culture will simply need to be allowed to collapse, while alternatives are developed and nurtured. Some of what he proposes may be politically difficult if not impossible.

Anthony Esolen

Esolen is the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization (2008) and numerous other books, including Ironies of Faith: The Laughter at the Heart of Christian Literature (2007); The Beauty of the Word (2012); Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child (2013); Reclaiming Catholic Social Teaching (2014); Defending Marriage: Twelve Arguments for Sanity (2014); and Real Music: A Guide to the Timeless Hymns of the Church (2016). He has also translated Dante’s The Divine Comedy and On the Nature of Things by Lucretius.

In 2016, Esolen spoke out against what he called Providence College’s “totalitarian diversity cult” in Crisis Magazine and sparked protests and demands for his punishment. The president of the college, a Catholic priest, affirmed his right to academic freedom but publicly criticized his stand on the college’s diversity efforts.

In Out of the Ashes, Esolen looks at culture holistically. It’s not simply a case of one aspect or one area being sick, but all of them. And each affects the others.

The book deserves serious consideration. It is a serious book making its case for fundamental, radical, disruptive change.

Photograph by Brigitte Tohm via Upsplash. Used with permission.

“Have You Ever Lied for Your Company?”

I’ve spent 40 years in organizational communications, mostly in the corporate world. I’ve been on the firing line more times than I want to remember – product crises, environmental crises, public controversies involving the company, and more. I worked for slightly less than year for an urban school district forced into massive change during a full-blown financial crisis and became the most familiar face on local television during that time.

Once, perhaps more than once, I was asked a question by an acquaintance that caught me up short, because I had never been asked it before.

“Have you ever lied for your company?”

I thought a moment, looked at the person asking the question, and answered.

“No. Not once.”

He was surprised. That’s what public relations people are supposed to do, right – lie on a regular basis? Or “mis-speak,” to use the more common word today.

I understand the question. I have seen PR people lie. I’ve also seen just about every other kind of professional and worker lie as well.

But with PR, it’s expected. PR carries a bias for the organization, or bias for the client.

And I will say this: the questioner actually asked the wrong question. The question he should have asked was: “Have you ever been asked, or told, to lie for your company?”

He would have gotten a very different answer. Actually, he would have received four different answers.

First, being directly and knowingly asked to tell a lie is exceedingly rare. It might have been more common in the days before tape recorders, listening devices, and email, but no one says “I need you to lie to the newspaper about this one.” It can happen, but it’s not at all common.

But things quickly get more interesting, more “gray.”

It is possible to speak the truth and lie at the same time – but omitting a key fact or number or situation or perspective. Most of what passes for “spin” – positive or negative – falls into this category, emphasizing one perspective while hoping no one asks about the other. This isn’t limited to business and the private sector, by the way; many others commonly do this. The list  includes politicians, social and environmental activists, lobbyists, attorneys arguing court cases, and teachers trying to explain why they don’t teach penmanship any more but that sensitivity training module for 8-year-olds was wonderful. Newspaper editorial writers are often especially prone to this.

Spin is not something done only by PR people.

The third form of lying is how you say something. You use enough high-sounding words to make a statement seem substantive but really say very little. You emphasize a particular word or phrase, directing attention away, such as “We would never consider doing something that dastardly” (meaning, “No, but we might have done something slightly less dastardly”). What may the most common form of lying in America today – the non-apology: “If I offended anyone with my statement, I’m sorry.” That little word “if” changes the entire meaning.

And finally there’s the old standby, “No comment.” In some cases, organizations truly can’t comment for valid legal reasons – like when an executive gets fired after losing an internal political battle, or a merger or acquisition is pending and what you say will be scrutinized to death by the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Publicly traded companies have to be particularly careful.

But much of the time, “no comment” means you don’t want to talk about it because it’s embarrassing and the accusation is actually correct, or a response might get you sued, or answering the question will only drag you into a deeper quagmire.

So, have I successfully avoided lying in all of these contexts? The answer is yes.

In most cases, candid discussion will set things right. People often don’t realize that omitting something or a particular phrasing can be misleading or untruthful, and they will work to make it right.

But it’s made for some difficult work situations. If you regularly raise objections to a planned statement or course of action for valid reasons, you will not be seen as a team player. There can be and often is a cost to your career, your salary, your bonus and your position.

But if you take your faith seriously, and if your faith accompanies you into the office, cubicle or shop floor, that’s what you do.

This week, The High Calling has been having a community linkup on the theme of “Clear Conscience.” To see what others are saying, please visit The High Calling and check the links.