I sent the piece for several reasons: it was well-written and
with integrity - unusual for an advocacy piece where
"my-side-is-right-no-matter-what" is usually the default.
I also cringed at the Bartameus portion, but the portion about
being humble because wisdom comes from strange places is dead on.
Best, Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date sent: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 21:10:30 -0400
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Presidential Vision and
Self-Restraint
I'm not sure why this was posted or what Peter thought that our
response
might be, but I was rather disturbed by this portion of the
interpretation
of the biblical quote.
The scene is historically rich and theologically complex. Its
richness
comes in the realization that the first recorded instance in
which Jesus is
referred to publicly as being divine comes out of the mouth of a
blind man.
The complexity is the fulfillment of Jesus' own prophecy, as well
as the
resolution of His natural human impatience with His disciples'
haughtiness
as they recognize for the first time that the truth will not come
exclusively out of their mouths or even the mouths of the
well-tutored but
often will come out of the mouths of babes, so to speak.
So what this is saying is that the blind are akin to "babes" or
"the
untutored". I know that isn't the point of the piece and maybe
after 81
years, I should stop taking this sort of thing personally. But
I'm really
tired of receiving this message day after day and having to
continually
fortify myself against it.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of peter
altschul
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 7:31 PM
To: Blind Democracy <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Presidential Vision and Self-Restraint
Presidential Vision and Self-Restraint
Judge Andrew Napolitano Nov 01, 2018 12:01 AM Townhall.com
I was sitting at Mass last Sunday in a cavernous Catholic
church on
Manhattan's Upper West Side near Lincoln Center, praying and
thinking about
the horrible events in America last week.
A white supremacist who lived in a truck covered with images of
Donald
Trump and his political adversaries terrorized the neighborhood
in which I
live and much of the country by sending pipe bombs to former
presidents and
other prominent Democrats and to CNN through the Postal Service.
A virulent
hater of foreign-born people and Jewish people killed 11 innocent
Jewish
worshippers using a lawfully owned semiautomatic rifle in a
Pittsburgh
synagogue.
And the president of the United States lamented publicly that
these events
might serve to halt what he called momentum toward Republican
candidates in
the nationwide voting next week because the news media - of which
I am a
tiny part - might dwell on these human tragedies and thus not pay
sufficient
attention to him and his message between now and Election Day.
These events shook me deeply, as they did many Americans. Yet
as the Mass
on Sunday proceeded, the Gospel reading brought me some small
understanding.
A blind beggar named Bartimaeus learns that Jesus is about to
walk near
him, so he shouts over the noise of the crowd surrounding Him:
"Jesus, son
of David, have pity on me." When no one responds, he shouts it
again - and
then again and again, until eventually Jesus hears him and shouts
back,
"What do you want of me?"
Bartimaeus replies: "O Lord, that I might see." Jesus responds by
restoring
the blind man's sight.
The scene is historically rich and theologically complex. Its
richness
comes in the realization that the first recorded instance in
which Jesus is
referred to publicly as being divine comes out of the mouth of a
blind man.
The complexity is the fulfillment of Jesus' own prophecy, as well
as the
resolution of His natural human impatience with His disciples'
haughtiness
as they recognize for the first time that the truth will not come
exclusively out of their mouths or even the mouths of the
well-tutored but
often will come out of the mouths of babes, so to speak.
This biblical scene is a metaphor for our own age. Most of us
can see
with our eyes (we have the gift of biological sight), but we lack
full
understanding - the mental ability to "see" into the hearts and
minds of
evil ones around us.
The world is not so happily arranged that our understanding can
discern the
evil in people who choose darkness over light - hence the need
for
leadership that liberates and heals rather than stifle and wound.
President Trump - like all his modern predecessors - has a
buIly pulpit
available to him. He has the means through which to mold the
hearts and
minds of people to do good and to avoid evil, and he has the
means through
which, as well, to intimidate them into fear of challenging him.
And that bully pulpit must be exercised within the confines of
the
Constitution, because it - and it alone - is both the source of
and the
restraint on presidential power.
Should tragedies of terror and horror be exploited for
political purposes?
Should presidents lament unforeseeable fear and bloodshed because
they
divert our eyes and ears from the presidential political message
or because
real innocent human beings have suffered horrifically and
irreversibly and
those who have survived yearn for the balm that only a true
leader who has
genuine empathetic understanding can bring? Should the
president's bully
pulpit be used to divide and polarize or to unify and uplift?
If you are reading this column in the ordinary way, you already
have the
gift that Bartimaeus begged for and received. Yet each of us is
a
modern-day Bartimaeus - seeking that other sight, the one we call
understanding. We hope to see it and its cousins -
self-restraint and human
compassion - in the presidential heart.
I do not see them in this president.
They are not there when Democrats - of whom I have never been
one - are
branded as evildoers. They are not there when the often
articulate words of
public presidential critics - of which I am not usually one - are
characterized as fake or treasonous or even the enemy of the
people.
They are not there when this president appears to see every
tragedy and
embrace every event in terms of himself and his short-term
political needs
rather than defend the Constitution, which he has sworn to
uphold. They are
not there when he claims he can amend the Constitution on his own
and deny
birthright citizenship to babies born in America to undocumented
parents.
And they are not there when large and deep segments of the
American populace
are presidentially ridiculed and alienated rather than embraced
and invited
in.
What to do about this? The Donald Trump I have known personally
for 30
years is warm, gregarious and bighearted. The Donald Trump I
have seen this
election season is angry, reckless and lacking in understanding.
His words have given comfort to the worst among us.
To be a successful president, he needs externally what he lacks
internally
- restraint. Restraint produces introspection and understanding
and respect
for the opinions of those who disagree.
In our constitutional system, exterior restraint on the president
can come
only from Congress. That means that Democrats - with whom I
agree on next
to nothing - if they win the House of Representatives, may
actually save
Donald Trump from himself because he will be constitutionally
compelled to
respect and understand and work with them.
A politically divided federal government is often frustrating
and slow.
Neither side gets all it wants. But like the persistence of the
sightless
beggar Bartimaeus, a divided federal government just might
produce more
understanding for more people
- and perhaps some presidential self-restraint - and then the
binding of
many wounds.