Image
I have spent much of today thinking about the Parable of the Bramble. “What is the Parable of the Bramble?” you ask. Understandably. It is not one of Jesus’ parables found in the gospels, it is actually found in a lesser-known book of the Hebrew Scriptures called Judges (9:8-15 to be specific). And technically speaking, it is not a parable at all. It is a fable. I’ll explain the difference in a footnote, because I’m guessing you don’t really care.
But the story goes like this (I’m paraphrasing): Once upon a time the trees all got together to decide which tree they should make their leader. They went to the olive tree, but the olive tree turned down the role saying, “Must I give up my rich oil, whereby gods and human beings are honored, and go off to hold sway over the trees?” (Actually, that is an exact quote…Judges 9:9.) So the trees go to the fig tree… and get the same response. They go to the grape vine… and get the same response. Turned down three times. And in all three of the times, the verb that is used to describe the task of leadership—"sway over”—is the same. In Hebrew, it has connotations of wandering aimlessly or staggering around in a drunken stupor. Clearly this is a setting in which leadership is neither valued nor respected. For the olive tree, fig tree, and vine, stepping into the role of king is perceived as a ”step down” from what they are already doing.
So the trees go to the bramble—a prickly shrub, close to the ground—and they ask the bramble if it would like to be king. The bramble accepts enthusiastically and promises that if the trees are loyal, it’ll offer them shade. This is something bramble can’t actually do since bramble doesn’t get big enough to offer shade. The bramble also says that if the trees are not loyal, it’ll incinerate the whole forest. This is something bramble can do. It is great fire starter.
And there the parable… okay, fable… ends.
I’m going to guess that the bigger question you have in your mind is, “Ann, why were you thinking about this story all day?” Well, it actually is one of my all-time favorite bible passages. For a long time now I’ve observed how often people who are really gifted often resist taking on leadership roles: Administration can be draining. It requires lots of difficult conversations. People complain about you. Often such roles, especially in the non-profit world, don’t pay especially well. It’s all the stuff I write about in the “Redeeming” trilogy. But the problem with this situation is that we can then end up with persons in leadership roles who are often less competent, and—dare I suggest—less virtuous. People who are good at lighting things on fire, but not a whole lot else. I think about this kind of stuff all the time and worry about it a good deal.
I imagine that many of you have been sitting this past week with Pope Francis’ well-publicized comments about relying on one’s conscience to choose the “lesser of two evils” in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. I love Pope Francis. (I’m guessing you know that by now.) And, I love that he trusts my conscience so much. At the same time, I am wishing that perhaps the pope had offered a bit more nuanced guidance here about how a conscientious decision is made because it kind of sounds like an instance of false equivalency: Here are two people. Both are bad. You decide who is less bramble-ly. That seems a bit unfair.
There are a wide number of issues related to the flourishing of life that are part of Catholic teaching: abortion, immigration, poverty-alleviation, labor rights, climate change, the end of the death penalty, gun violence, etc… The pope named the first two of those as especially prevalent in his mind. I wish he’d been a bit more explicit about the others, but it’s okay. His comments were made, I think, on the airplane back from his exhausting visit to East Timor.
At this point, I think we can acknowledge that neither presidential candidate holds the pope’s desired view on abortion. Kamala Harris has been very clear on that matter. Donald Trump has taken multiple different stances related to abortion in the past couple months depending on who he is in front of. Moving on to the other life-related issues, the Democratic platform appears to give greater weight to how immigrants are treated, climate change, and gun regulation. It has a long history of trying to support workers' rights and addressing the concerns of those in poverty.
But moreover, when we are electing someone into a leadership role, our concern about their policy stances is secondary to a more fundamental concern about their character. We aren’t actually voting on policies in the presidential election, we are voting for persons. In this regard, the important questions include:
- Who do I think has a mind that is more aligned with reality? (Aquinas’ definition of truth)
- Who do I think is more likely to be faithful to what they’ve said they stand for? Who is more honest?
- Who do I think would work more effectively with others who might not share their stance but are still part of the constituency they are supposed to serve?
- Who do I think would better exercise the patience and wisdom to know how and when to push their policies forward in a world that changes day by day?
- Who do I think possesses the age-old cardinal virtues the Greeks named centuries ago as non-negotiable for meaningful civic life: prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude?
These are questions useful for discerning character and I would argue that they are important questions because you can have all the best public policy stances in the world but if you aren’t telling the truth about what you actually plan to do, or you don’t have the relational skill to move your policies forward…. Well, it is all for naught. Bramble.
During election season, we are careful from the pulpit to focus on policies and not tell people which person they should vote for. I think that is good. We can help people to inform their conscience, but then as Pope Francis indicated, people need to make their own decisions . In addition to educating around policies that the Church believes will lead to a greater flourishing of life, however, it seems important that we also lift up what the Church believes are important markers of character as a further aide to the formation of conscience. Judges 9 reminds us we need people of good character who are not only willing but capable of taking up the hard work of true leadership.
We don't want to make it sound like we've got two equally good or equally bad choices in that regard.
*The distinction between a parable and a fable among scripture scholars is perhaps not a terribly important one, but maybe it is. One of the things to know about Jesus’ parables is that they are always pointing to reality. He calls people to a deeper observation of the real world around them as a sign for something more. But everything behaves as itself. Animals don’t talk. Beans don’t turn into giant stalks. In fables, characters often are involved in activities that are not true to nature: Turtles and rabbits race. Foxes talk. You get the picture.