In the Gospel, Jesus healed a man blind from birth. The backdrop reveals a strong connexion between sin and physical infirmities. The notion prevailing then was that sin would result in physical imperfection. Hence the intense interrogation of the blind man healed as to whose sin had caused his blindness in the first place. Added to that, the healing took place on a Sabbath. That presented a dilemma for the observant Pharisees. The Gospel offers the man born blind as a model of conversion and at the same time reveals the irony of the sighted who were spiritually blind. Instead, he who was visually impaired could see who Christ was and came to faith in Him.
What sort of eyes do we need to see and believe better? As Jesus challenged the Pharisees to see beyond the narrow limits of their own world-view, He challenges us to go beyond what we are comfortable with. If we think that the Pharisees were terrible, perhaps we should survey the blinkers we unwittingly wear. Correcting our assessment of the how Pharisees operate for it might actually help us see better.
Firstly, the Pharisees have been painted in less than glamorous light giving the impression that they were hopelessly incorrigible. The word “Pharisee” itself is ladened with negative connotations. In not so many words, as we read the many exchanges between Jesus and them, they have been depicted as wilfully blind. Even Jesus was exasperated by their hardness of heart. However, our perception of the Pharisees’ wilful blindness may be a reflexion of the anti-religiosity of our present age. Organised religions because they focus on the setting of boundaries are increasingly considered irrelevant amongst modern religious sceptics who value individual autonomy and freedom. We chafe when we are obligated by religious edicts.
This bias against the Pharisees in particular and religions in general, is symptom of our own blindness. We suffer from an addiction to attention. For example, ADHD (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder) is possibly an extreme form of our age of media attention. Unwittingly, we vie for recognition because we crave to be liked. In desiring attention, we are concerned about what others think of us. The word “optics” comes to mind.
Multinationals and big companies have PR teams to handle how their corporate actions should be perceived and understood. Currently, the canon for correct corporate conduct is “DEI”—diversity, equity and inclusion. Increasingly our politics are placed under the microscopic glare of these criteria. In fact, much of our political optics is derived from posturing, theatre, drama and grandstanding.
In a climate where metaphysics or God does not exist, what we see is determined by ideas or notions shaped using the tools of branding and marketing. People do not just see what they want to see. They are also guided and manipulated to perceive what the powers that be want them to perceive. Getting the optics right is the premise of branding, marketing and public relations.
Whether we know it or not, our carefully staged social and political theatres operate within a phenomenon recently described as the echo chamber. Clearly, the Pharisees were caught in a kind of herd-think in which they merely magnify each other’s shared belief to the point that they could not see beyond the barriers of their tiny bubble. If we condemn them as narrow-minded, what about our cyber search engines that magnify this “echo” effect many times over? Try searching for an airfare on a particular airlines and soon enough the advertisements from that specific airlines will pop up on your screen. Whenever we conduct an inquiry, the algorithms that drive the search engines pre-emptively push the items which they think we want. If a person has progressive leanings, then Twitter, Instagram and the likes will channel more materials that reflect one’s liberal viewpoints. How not to be trapped in echo chambers? If the Pharisees are regarded as wilfully blind, then, we are wittingly blinded by our groupthink.
To be able to see better and beyond this blindness, we need to step out. Faith is taking that step beyond our comfort zone. Like the man born blind who risked further ostracisation by responding to the Pharisees. In a way, it requires the courage of humility. Our search algorithms are less omniscient than we perceive them to be. Even though Google is good, still it is not free from bias and prejudice. Wikipedia is good, still it is not wisdom.
The challenge of Jesus to the Pharisee was to be less dogmatic and more compassionate. The example of Albert Einstein is illuminating. He was asked about how he felt of his many achievements. His answer showed a morality which might help us walk towards a more divinely inspired enlightenment. He said, “In formulating so many of these theories, I am not interested that I am proven right. I just want to know if I had been right”.
In many of our discussions or arguments, how often have we entered into them with an arrogance that we possess the truth and as such are ready to hammer those whom we disagree with? Such readiness to force one’s position down the throat of another is glaringly evident when society is infected by ideological divide. Every medium of communication has been co-opted to take sides championed by warring factions that it is impossible to have decent conversations without the arrogance of “being right”.
The Pharisees were certain that they were on the side of right. Whereas if we were to follow Albert Einstein, we become a bit more hesitant in our moral assessment and a little less categorical in our judgement. In defending a position, we would want to know that we have fought for our position with honour, humility and hospitality even if the opposing party does not follow the same rules.
St Ignatius in the Spiritual Exercises says we ought to give the other person a better interpretation, no matter how we feel. Perhaps one can understand why Pope Francis said, “Who am I to judge”? It was not a capitulation of the faculty of judging but in the matter of grace, God can work better if we were less Pharisaical or dogmatic and a bit more charitable. It certainly makes the world feel less certain and more dangerous but we can trust that the Lord’s light cannot be extinguished even by evil men.
In conclusion, the man born blind is a symbol of the struggle between light and darkness. Like the Pharisees who are blinded by their bubble of self-righteousness, we who inhabit a deeply divided, fractured and fragmented world need the light of faith to know who Christ truly is. To be spiritually blind is to dwell in darkness which is why to have both a clearer sight and a deeper insight are constant themes during the season of Lent. In begging for the grace to use the things of the world wisely and to hold on to things that endure eternally, may we come to behold and to follow Christ the only Light who leads us to eternal life.
