In William Styron's heartrending novel Sophie's Choice a woman is forced to choose in a matter of life and death between her two children. Does the story have any relevance today?
Over the past few weeks I have read columnists whom I respect and enjoy opining about the war in Afghanistan from various positions and perspectives. One of my favourites defended the war on the grounds that it brought about the emancipation of women. I was saddened. Like many other apologists for both sides, she never saw the wider questions with equal emotion and sympathy. That an Afghan woman has the right to be educated and wear what she likes is important, of course - but is the education of a conscripted cannon-fodder youth not also an issue? In a world that is losing touch with independent criteria for moral comment, the demise is matched by a growth in emotions as the guide to what is right and wrong.
There are myriad examples beyond the war we can draw on to see short-sightedness. It often seems that Western civilisation has lost its unifying focal point for debate. Individual interests, personal success and economic growth have replaced any concept of the common good as justification for our opinions and actions.
This feast of Christ the King should challenge us to consider the rise of this phenomenon. While the title of the feast looks triumphant and arrogant, the nature of the feast is far more modest. It celebrates the end of the church's calendar. It is a positive look at the good things we have achieved as followers of Christ building his Kingdom.
There are many scripture scholars who believe that the Kingdom Jesus spoke of was not in the next world; the Kingdom was the society that we would build here on earth, a place where peace, justice and charity reigned supreme.
The scriptures have left us clear directions for the discussion of most areas of dissent. Over the centuries the guiding principles of Christianity have facilitated discussion in councils and synods as much as in coffee shops and sitting-rooms. Jesus's teachings have provided a stable focal point for so much healthy discussion and compromise that he should be regarded as a ruler. Losing that focal point would be a disaster!
This tradition of discussion makes it important that Christians everywhere should challenge simplistic solutions to personal, community and world problems. We have enough common ground to be able to see the concerns and implications of whatever choices we make. Like Sophie, we have to survive our choices and live life to the full in their aftermath. This should challenge all Christians to be mature enough to face the arguments of another and to be prepared to learn from them. But this does not always happen!
In a world where the scribbling of a child must be exhibited on the classroom wall lest the child discover that his/her effort is not on a par with Rembrandt, how can we learn our own limits? In a world which regards the ignominious departure of a quiz show participant as amusing, who can risk being wrong? In a world where a criticism is reported as a slam or a snub who will dare to speak?
In a world that censors debate Sophie has a new choice: a lie for a lie or a truth for a truth?
F. MacE.