After
they had gathered, Pilate said to them, ‘Whom do you want me to release for
you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ Mt. 27:17
False Dichotomy
Matthew
27:15-31
Preached at
the Ecumenical Good Friday Service
March 25, 2005
Who
was the Roman governor Pilate? The Gospels of Matthew and Luke present
different perceptions of Pilate. What
were his motivations? Was he trying to
save Jesus from crucifixion? Was he trying
to save himself and prevent a riot?
What
about Jesus Barabbas? Was he an
insurrectionist, a robber, a murderer? Again, the Gospels are not uniform. What
does notorious mean in reference to his character? What happened to him after his release?
We
will never really know the definitive answer to any of these questions. Maybe the wisdom of the Gospels correctly
turns our attention, not to the personalities of Pilate and Barabbas, but to
the event of Jesus’ crucifixion precipitated by questions Pilate asks the crowd
and the crowd’s response. “Whom do you
want me to release for you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” “Barabbas,” the crowd shouted. “Then what
shall I do with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” “Let him be crucified!” When asked what evil he had done, the crowd
only yelled the more, “Let him be crucified.”
On
that Friday, before the first Easter, before the resurrection, the cross was
not the symbol of the Christian faith that hangs around our necks and is
displayed in our sanctuaries. The cross
was the cruel means of execution by the Roman government upon which condemned,
non-Roman citizens hung. Roman citizens
were not crucified.
Pilate,
in a shrewd public relations ploy aimed at playing off the unruly crowd, sets
up an “either or” situation which I refer to as a false dichotomy: whom do you want released Barabbas or
Jesus? Condensing the options to the
unambiguous choices of either/or and turning justice over to the public
opinion, Pilate attempts to wash his hands of responsibility, while securing
his position as governor by maintaining order among the crowd. In asking the
question, Pilate keeps the favor of the chief priest he appointed, Caiaphas,
and stays in favor with the Emperor by preventing a riot.
Yet, few things in politics and religion are more destructive and dangerous than the false dichotomy-an "either/or" situation which limits solutions to a given problem to only two options. A dichotomy is a set of two mutually exclusive alternatives. Dichotomies are typically expressed with the words "either" and "or", like this: "Either the test is wrong or the program is wrong." A false dichotomy is typically used in an argument to force your opponent into an extreme position -- by making the assumption that there are only two positions or possibilities.
False dichotomies appeal to crowds because they seem to offer a simple choice. False dichotomies intensify the emotionalism of a crowd when their decision is restricted to seemingly exclusive and opposing positions. False dichotomies succeed in dividing people into proponents or opponents, for or against, them or us, with long term polarizing effects.
For
example, Hitler used the false dichotomy to great effect, telling Germans that
the solutions to the problems facing
From
the halls of public power to the walls of schools and offices to the living
rooms of our homes, false dichotomies are set up to force a choice and secure a
position.
You
are either my friend or hers!
You
either believe that God created the earth or you believe in evolution.
And,
sadly in the public debate over the life and death of Terri Shiavo, false
dichotomies are arising to polarize opinion for political gain on every side.
From
the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, Peggy Noonan writes an article
entitled In Love with Death, the bizarre
passion of the pull-the-tube people.
Her opening statements are these:
“God
made the world or he didn't.
God
made you or he didn't.
If he
did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is
true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is
true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.”
She
goes on then to justify the emotionalism of those who want to continue feeding
while saying she can not understand the emotionalism of those who “want to
pull-the-tube.” The premise is simple,
if you believe God made the world and God made you, then there is only one way,
one option for seeing each human life as precious, of infinite value, and
worthy of great respect.
I
wish Peggy Noonan had sat with me as I sat with families of elderly loved ones.
I wish she had sat with the parents of newborns, and the mothers and fathers of
teenage boys killed in car accidents, and with spouses of all ages as we prayed
through difficult medical decisions that were theirs to make, not mine.
I
wish Peggy Noonan had held Hannah as I did, born with most of her brain missing
except that part that kept her heart beating and her lungs breathing. Hannah, whose very name meant grace, was held
by many of us in her five days of life.
It was not the media or public opinion that decided whether Hannah would
be fed or not, but her parents within a community of family, doctors, hospital
chaplain, and two churches, Immaculate Conception and First Congregational,
where they lived in deep relationships with neighbors and in faith trusting
God.
I am
not sure that our decisions about life and death are as unambiguous as Peggy
Noonan assumes. I confess that I am not certain
what is God’s will. Is it God’s will to
make the first medical intervention to sustain life when it would have
died? Is it God’s will to wait upon a
miracle? Is it God’s will to trust that
truly the last enemy death has been defeated by the Christ who has died, the
Christ who is risen, and the Christ who will come again. I do not know for certain.
This
I do know and confess. Peggy Noonan is
the very same editorial writer who incensed me with her In Love with Death piece and also inspired me with her Flannery O’Connor Country piece about
Ashley Smith and Brian Nichols. Ashley
Smith is the woman who was held hostage by Brian Nichols after he had killed a
judge and court deputy. Brian let Ashley
go to her daughter, she turned him into police, and in their seven hours
together both of them were changed.
This
I do know and confess. Every time I say
that I would not want to live as Terri Schiavo, I stand before the cross. It is not my decision about my life, nor
would it ever be my decision alone, as if I lived in isolation on an island. Nor
is it the decision of a public who are not committed to her care, nor bear the
personal joy and personal burden of supporting her life. It is the decision of a family within a
community who are embroiled in a battle, and we do not know their motives any
more than we knew the motives of Pilate in asking his question: whom do you
want me to release for you Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called the
Messiah. The task of the public is not
to exacerbate an already tragic situation by further polarizing the parties,
but to support both Terri Schiavo’s parents and husband.
This
I do know and confess that when the crowd was given that choice in the false
dichotomy, they chose Barabbas. Public
opinion chose Barabbas!
This
I do know and confess. We are not saved by our choices. I can only be here
today, on a Friday that is called Good because of Easter, because Jesus died
not telling the crowd they were wrong or right.
Jesus died forgiving them because they didn’t know what they were doing.
I am
here before the cross on Good Friday, just like you and everybody else, because
we share a common, vulnerable, and limited humanity that God has redeemed not
because we have the right answers, but because we belong to the God of grace who
created us and in Christ has defeated even that last enemy – death!