The Unauthorized Homily

By Bill Dunn

A commentary on the Scripture readings from the Sunday Lectionary

(Scripture readings for Sunday, April 6th: Acts 2:14, 22-33; 1 Peter 1:17-21; Luke 24:13-35)

JESUS: THE MOST POLITICALLY INCORRECT PERSON IN HISTORY – PART 1

(During Lent I had the privilege of presenting one of the talks sponsored by my parish. This is Part 1 of my presentation.)

The theme of our parish Lenten lecture series this year is: “Who do you say that I am?”

This is the question Jesus asked his disciples, and we read about it in Matthew, chapter 16:

¹³Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” ¹⁴And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” ¹⁵He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” ¹⁶Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” ¹⁷And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven.”  

This is truly the most important question in the whole world: What is the identity of Jesus? Who exactly is He?

Each one of us—each person on earth—must decide the answer to that question. Each one of us must determine the true identity of Jesus. If you believe what the Bible says and what the Church teaches, then the answer to this question is the difference between eternal life and eternal death; between Heaven and Hell.

Two-thousand years ago there were a number of different answers to the question. Some said Jesus was John the Baptist come back to life; some said Elijah; some said Jeremiah; some said one of the other prophets.

Well, a similar situation exists today. Many different people nowadays have many different answers to this crucial question.

Some people say Jesus is just a mythological figure. It’s only a story, a folk legend, a fable, and no real Jesus of Nazareth person actually existed.

Others say he was a con man who could mesmerize a crowd and get people to do whatever he wanted. But his little scheme backfired when the authorities got mad and put him to death.

Others say he was a good and wise teacher, but he was not divine. He was just a man, and long after his death some of his more fanatical followers invented all those stories about miracles, the Resurrection, the Son of God, etc.

Still others say that Jesus was an enlightened philosopher, who preached a value system that was centuries ahead of its time: a value system that accepts everyone, judges no one, and gives everybody the freedom to believe and to say and to do whatever it is that feels right.

This particular definition of Jesus is the Politically Correct Jesus Christ. (Or, I suppose, “PCJC” for short.)

A few months ago I drove by a church in Fairfield County, and the sign out front said, “We are a loving and caring community. Just like Jesus, we accept everyone and we judge no one.”

Just like Jesus? Hmm, I think it’s safe to say that this particular church group believes the true identity of Jesus is the Politically Correct Jesus.

My talk tonight is titled: “Jesus Christ: The Most Politically Incorrect Person In History.” (Gee, do you think that title gives away my opinion on the subject?)

I’d like to examine some of the things Jesus said and did, so we can determine whether Jesus really was Mr. PC, or whether He was something different. We need to do this to better help us answer that crucial question: Who do you say that Jesus is?

The first thing we need to do is define political correctness. What does it mean to be PC?

Well, Political Correctness has a few major components. The first is that you can never say or do anything that might offend someone. Being non-offensive is high on the list of important PC traits.

For example, you may have heard the news story a couple of months ago about a brouhaha that took place in England. A new children’s book, based on the story of “The Three Little Pigs,” was about to win a literary award, but then a government agency stepped in and said the book could not win the award. And the reason was that the book might be offensive. Since the main characters were pigs, that could be offensive to Muslims, who are taught that pigs are unclean and are not allowed to eat pork.

In addition, the government agency pointed out, the book also could be offensive to building contractors, who might not like the fact that in the story houses keep getting huffed and puffed and blown down.

(I’m not kidding! This was a big news story. Look it up on the Internet.)

A Muslim spokesman in England immediately replied by saying that this is ridiculous, the Muslim community would not be offended by the children’s book. I don’t know if a building contractor spokesman had anything to say, but at my job I deal with construction contractors all the time. Take my word for it, these guys are pretty thick-skinned. They don’t get offended very easily.

I’ve been at jobsite meetings and seen building owners scream at a contractor, “You’re the worst contractor in the world! You don’t know what you’re doing!!” And after the meeting the contractor just walks away with a smile on his face. I’m telling you, those guys don’t get offended, and I don’t think a children’s book will crush their fragile self-esteem.

So this is a prime example of PC run amuck, where making sure that no one might possibly ever be offended is producing cultural paralysis. We see it especially during Christmas season—oops, I mean, Winter Holiday Season. Christmas decorations, including non-religious decorations like snowmen and trees and reindeer, get banned from schools and other public buildings, not because someone was offended, but because someone MIGHT get offended.

Another major component of Political Correctness is moral relativism. This is the idea that there are no firm, absolute values. All definitions of right and wrong, all values, are merely personal opinion. So no one has the right to impose his or her values on anyone else. That would be mean-spirited and intolerant and judgmental, which of course in the PC world are definite no-nos.

So in a nut shell, being Politically Correct means being non-offensive, non-judgmental, and tolerant of everyone and everything.

At first glance this might seem like a pretty good thing. It’s an open-minded attitude that helps people get along and avoid arguments and avoid hurt feelings. And just like that church sign I saw in Fairfield County, it’s very welcoming. Everyone is accepted. No one will be judged. How nice.

But the problem is that Political Correctness is intrinsically contradictory. One of the most important concepts in the PC world is that there is no such thing as absolute truth. Truth is subjective, nothing more than personal opinion. But think about it: this claim that there is no such thing as absolute truth is itself a declaration of absolute truth. What they’re saying is, “It is absolutely true that there is no such thing as absolute truth.” Huh? That’s illogical.

With PC thinking, the only idea that is always wrong is the idea that something can be always wrong. The only opinion that is strictly forbidden is the opinion that certain things are strictly forbidden. The only behavior that deserves judgment is to say that people will be judged. The only absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth.

Political Correctness contradicts itself at every turn. The PC movement in our culture has the goal of being non-offensive, non-judgmental, and very tolerant. But it ends up being extremely offensive, very judgmental, and quite intolerant. To the point that people now are scared to death to say anything in public out of fear of being labeled mean-spirited, or hateful, or racist, or sexist, or homophobic, or, the worst label of all, an intolerant religious fanatic.

I suspect that if I ever visited that church in Fairfield County, the one that accepts everyone and judges no one, and if I declared to them that I am a conservative Catholic who believes that the Bible is the Word of God and that certain things are always right and other things are always wrong—for example, abortion—I don’t think they would accept me with open arms. And I think they definitely would judge me—judge me as being an intolerant religious fanatic.

(Next week, in part 2, we’ll take a close look at the words of Jesus. If Jesus really was Mr. PC, then he never offended anyone, he never judged anyone, and he certainly never expressed the idea that there really is absolute truth.)

©2008