One of the advertisements at the top of this page reads “Schools in Kissimmee,” which leads me to imagine this dialogue:
Where are you from?
Kissimmee.
Well, that’s a lovely suggestion, but I hardly know you.
Whenever I see something I have written with quotation marks wrapped ‘round it like a color guard of tadpoles, I am taken aback. My inner voice – that is, the voice that reads to me within – suddenly begins to read the bit between the quotes in the voice of Ronald Coleman. I think, “My word, who’s the miserable little prick who wrote that?” You see, I don’t read what I’ve written once I’ve written it. I try not to feel what I felt after I’ve felt it either.
I’ve told this story before. A few years ago I was in a local launderette, and was there lost in whatever my thoughts may have been, minding my own business, when a woman’s voice began suddenly to fill the place with – me. She was reading to her husband from a book I had written, one of those tourist books that are left in trafficked places for tourists to find, one assumes out of desperation. Oh she would go on; I could hear my voice in hers. It was very odd: my words in another person’s throat.
No, I don’t suppose she could get pregnant that way. Settle down please, gentlemen.
I admit it takes some getting used to when I am quoted.
Making a simple bank transaction also takes some getting used to. The teller says, “Mr. Squabbler?” and my first reaction is to implement a strategy of plausible deniability. My fingertips tap nervously at the altar rail of such institutions as I wonder will I be found out this time, will I be denied the money, and will the authorities be called for?
My first-ever serious E-mail exchange occurred several years ago with an old friend who had recently reinitiated an acquaintance. His E-mailed responses to whatever I had written began with the words, “mr. squabbler @ yabbadabba.com wrote:” – blah blah – my words in tadpoles – ah – quotation marks. It was maddening. It was as though they were returning in a black chorus of disapproval, as vengeful ghosts, to accuse me of some terrible crime.
To write words is the same as speaking them – they are released. They are liberated. They are freed. Once the words have left my mouth, my pen, my fingertips here tap-tapping, they fly off like birds to – who knows where? They were never mine to keep. They were never really mine.
I’m not really a thinker; I don’t think deeply. I’m really just a medium who is relaying thoughts from another source. You might say this source is all that I read, and all that I have ever read of the great words of others. I say it is the Squabs whispering in my ear or the result of indigestion – it’s the same damn thing, really.
Well, I am thinking this morning about how to tell the difference between Right and Wrong. Oh what a quandary! No – not at all. You see, it’s written down rather plainly what is right and what is wrong, and what is written is applicable to every case, universally, unilaterally. (What a word!) This writing, which is called the Ten Commandments, is older than dirt – or very nearly. At least it is considerably older than I am, and in this age of instant communication and world wide access to the deep well of collected wisdom few can claim ignorance of its content.
So, we have this word – judgmental – which is usually applied with a negative connotation to folks who take that old document seriously. It is not good – so the training of our knee jerk reaction goes – to be judgmental, or to be considered judgmental in any case. One wonders why it should matter, but of course we are social creatures. (Well, most of us. I’m not really sure what the Squabbler is.) But in reality judgment isn’t usually necessary to determine what may be so easily grasped by simple observation.
To explain what I mean I will invoke the spirit of Sesame Street, the old government TV child educational program which most of us have seen. On that program there used to be featured a little song which went, “One of these things is not like the other/ One of these things is not the same.” Several objects, or perhaps geometrical shapes, were shown on the screen and the young viewing audience was encouraged to discern the difference between them. Here is a circle and here is a square – does it require judgment to tell the difference between a circle and a square? I say no, it doesn’t.
Let us say then that “Thou Shalt Not Steal” is a circle; stealing is a square. Is a person being judgmental when he observes that there is a difference between them? Of course not. And telling Right from Wrong is really just that simple.
Judgment is a little more complicated. It involves not merely discerning the difference between right and wrong, which as I’ve explained is as simple as telling the difference between a circle and a square, but passing a sentence or assigning a punishment, or Penance, upon the perpetrator of the wrong action. The purpose of judging is to amend a situation of wrongness so that it may become rightness. In the case of stealing, for instance, there are people whom society has elected or otherwise appointed in the role of judge. It is the judge who passes sentence, assigns punishment, thereby allowing the wrong to be amended.
When it comes to passing judgment on the state of a person’s soul, however, who amongst us can see what state another person’s soul is in? The answer to that question is Few, if any. I understand Padre Pio is said to have been given this great and rare gift of the Holy Spirit. That may be. Otherwise, being judgmental is really not a thing for which any of us are really qualified. Discerning? - Yes. Judgmental? – Out of my league somewhat, I admit.
Just as in the case of stealing there may be extenuating circumstances in any other cases of wrong doing which an actual judge – assuming he is a good judge – will be required by his office to take into account. These extenuating circumstances will ultimately affect the nature of the assigned punishment, Penance, or amends-making.
Why is this so? Well, because we all suffer from a predisposition to do the wrong thing at times. But we are not predisposed by fate, circumstance, genetics, or what-have-you to do the wrong thing at all times. In other words, not every wrong act is willful and premeditated, requiring therefore the strongest application of punishment. Judging involves making such a determination. It’s a tricky business. It requires some wisdom.
There is the outward appearance of Wrong – that would be the action, such as for instance stealing – that is one thing, and the commission of Wrong within the mind, whether it manifests outwardly or not – that is another thing. In cases where the Wrong is not outwardly manifest it is only God who judges. Moreover, it is ultimately God who judges every case – public or private – with a finality His human proxies cannot achieve. We are asked to take inventory of our thinking in order to discern the circles from the squares, thereby beginning the process by which we may amend the situation of wrongness within ourselves. And it all begins with a simple little song: “One of these things is not like the other/ One of these things is not the same.”
That’s not being judgmental. That’s just being observant.