Skip to main content

The ideal way of governing

Isaiah 32.1-8, 15-10
Our ideal way of governing is democracy. But that’s not Isaiah’s ideal. For him good governance is not about who governs but about how they do it. Mob rule can be just as tyrannical as despotic rule.
We forget too easily that democracy has limited value unless it goes hand in hand with the love of justice. A just society is a place of refuge in a cruel world whereas an unjust society is harsh and unforgiving even when it has democratic elections, and for how long will it be truly democratic anyway?
In a just society the citizens would make an effort to see things from other people’s point of view. They would open their eyes to see what is really going on. They would pay attention to what other people are saying.
In a just society people would take time to think before they said anything. They wouldn’t rush to judgement because rushed judgements often turn out to be profoundly unjust.
In a just society voters would recognise foolish plans for what they are. They would have a sixth sense for proposals that are self-serving and unfair, that make the poor even poorer and limit access to the knowledge that we all need if we are to become equal stakeholders in society. People would know when ideas are cruel - aimed at destroying those who need help most or denying justice to the weak, and they would instinctively realise when politicians are trustworthy and are trying to help build a better, fairer world.
This sort of society, embracing the right kind of values, would be one where it was truly worth living. It’s a vision that every government and every citizen should make their aim. But, of course, it is unachievable in the real world.
Or is it? Isaiah says not. And that’s where Pentecost Sunday comes into the picture, because he says that God’s Spirit can make the difference between an impossible dream and an amazing reality. If we allow God’s Spirit to guide us, ‘honesty and justice will prosper and… produce lasting peace and security.’ Even when things go wrong, everyone will rally round to put them right again.
For him it doesn’t matter who brings this about. An authoritarian society that was ruled in a free and fair way would be better for Isaiah than an unjust democracy. But as the Nineteenth Century historian Lord Acton once said, ‘Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’  We talk glibly about ‘the great and the good,’ but he said that ‘the great’ - by whom he meant the most powerful people in society - almost always turn out to be bad.
That’s why, in the end, democracy probably gives us the best chance of creating the sort of society that Isaiah envisioned. But only spirit-led democracy can do that. Democracies led by people who tell lies and do evil things is just as likely to turn out bad as any great man or woman.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I don't believe in an interventionist God

Matthew 28.1-10, 1 Corinthians 15.1-11 I like Nick Cave’s song because of its audacious first line: ‘I don’t believe in an interventionist God’. What an unlikely way to begin a love song! He once explained that he wrote the song while sitting at the back of an Anglican church where he had gone with his wife Susie, who presumably does believe in an interventionist God - at least that’s what the song says. Actually Cave has always been very interested in religion. Sometimes he calls himself a Christian, sometimes he doesn’t, depending on how the mood takes him. He once said, ‘I believe in God in spite of religion, not because of it.’ But his lyrics often include religious themes and he has also said that any true love song is a song for God. So maybe it’s no coincidence that he began this song in such an unlikely way, although he says the inspiration came to him during the sermon. The vicar was droning on about something when the first line of the song just popped into his

Giotto’s Nativity and Adoration of the Shepherds

John 1.10-18 In the week before Christmas the BBC broadcast a modern version of The Nativity which attempted to retell the story with as much psychological realism as possible. So, for instance, viewers saw how Mary, and Joseph especially, struggled with their feelings. But telling the story of Jesus with psychological realism is not a new idea. It has a long tradition going back seven hundred years to the time of the Italian artist Giotto di Bondone. This nativity scene was painted in a church in Padua in about 1305. Much imitated it is one of the first attempts at psychological realism in Christian art. And what a wonderful first attempt it is - a work of genius, in fact! Whereas previously Mary and the Baby Jesus had been depicted facing outwards, or looking at their visitors, with beatific expressions fixed on their faces, Giotto dares to show them staring intently into one another’s eyes, bonding like any mother and newborn baby. Joseph, in contrast, is not looking on with quiet a

Meeting Jesus on Zoom

‘Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe.’ (John 20.19-31 ( https://www.biblegateway.com NRSVA) This is my second reflection about today’s Gospel reading but I wanted to write something about meeting Jesus on Zoom. Zoom’s been very useful during the lockdown, but it’s also got a bad press. Various mischief makers have gatecrashed meetings on Zoom, either to eavesdrop or make inappropriate comments. That’s why worshippers needed permission to join our on-line service this week. If they managed to press all the right buttons, and entered all the right codes, they should've found themselves looking at a screen not unlike the cartoon picture below of the eleven apostles trying to meet on Zoom with the risen Jesus. Anyone who couldn't see the service on the screen would've been in good company. In the cartoon Jesus has done something wrong. Either he hasn’t enabled Zoom to t