{"id":36842,"date":"2024-03-18T22:23:14","date_gmt":"2024-03-19T05:23:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/?p=36842"},"modified":"2024-03-18T22:23:14","modified_gmt":"2024-03-19T05:23:14","slug":"what-is-truth-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/what-is-truth-3\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Truth?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cThe truth is the truth is the truth is the truth throughout the ages \u2013 that\u2019s what it means to worship the one true God. And our job is to follow the truth, to fight for it, and to make way for it, wherever it may lead.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

So Matthew R. Petrusek ends Part I of his book Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture<\/em>. In this book, he seeks to make a case for the merging of evangelization and politics. In the first part of the book, he, \u201cdevelops a methodology for employing Catholic social thought to debate secular ideologies.\u201d[2]<\/a> The second part of the book turns to secular ideologies and seeks to consider them through a Catholic lens as a means of evangelizing. He writes,<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the end, evangelizing always requires going to where the people are, and where many people are today is stuck in a morass of increasingly aggressive political ideologies, each one seducing its adherents down varied paths to the same dead end: moral, spiritual, and yes, political futility. There is a better option.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

Truth is Illusive<\/strong><\/p>\n

It is an interesting argument and yet I find myself stuck on his conclusion to Part I. \u201cThe truth is the truth is the truth is the truth throughout the ages.\u201d [4]<\/a><\/p>\n

Truth. Yes, I believe there is absolute truth. But what is truth? I think I am following truth, but am I? I am an imperfect human; I can guarantee you that something I firmly believe as \u201ctruth\u201d is in fact not truth. There are things I believed in my younger years that I now look at and realize how inaccurate I was.<\/p>\n

I think Petrusek makes his own case for the illusiveness of truth when he writes, \u201cThere is plentiful comedy in our hyper-politicized culture, an environment in which news can be difficult to distinguish from satire. Yet fear and suffering lie just beneath the surface.\u201d[5]<\/a> I have one friend on Facebook who frequently will post articles from the Babylon Bee or other such satire sites appalled at the story. She does not even recognize that what she is reading is satire. How much false data or fake news have we seen over the years? Truth is not easy to discern. Fake news just gets worse during an election year.<\/p>\n

Am I Loving My Neighbor?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Personally, I am not a fan of politics, though I seem to often be drawn into political discussions. I vote because I believe it is my privilege and responsibility. Women over a century ago fought for my right to vote, to ignore this privilege is to spite them. However, I do not enjoy digging through the Voter Information Guide to determine which candidates align best with my beliefs or which propositions make sense. Even still, I sit down with my husband before each election and work through the ballot. We discuss which candidates and which propositions best agree with our ideals and make our decisions. For me, it is tedious but important work.<\/p>\n

I admit, when Petrusek argues that we should engage in the political arena, it just makes me feel weary. Then, to add his argument of fighting for the truth, I am not sure how far I agree with him. In his introduction to The Gospel in Black & White: Theological Resources for Radical Reconciliation<\/em>, a series of essays on reconciliation, Dennis L. Okholm writes, \u201cWe cannot make requirements for church membership that God does not make for salvation.\u201d[6]<\/sup><\/a> He also writes, \u201cThe extension of our love to those who are different, even to enemies, is the test of the genuineness of our love.\u201d [7]<\/a><\/sup> Is legislating morality loving our neighbors?<\/p>\n

In the context of the Catholic view of marriage (as one man and one woman), Petrusek writes, \u201cThere are some questions on which disagreement is not only morally legitimate but also desirable because it leads to better laws and public policies.\u201d[8]<\/a> I live in a community with a large LGBTQ+ population. How would I be loving my neighbor to support legislation denying them the right to marry? To be honest, I struggle with the question of gender identity. My denomination holds the same view as the Catholic church on the question of marriage, citing verses such as 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. There are other Christians who make arguments that God is not against homosexuality. Who is right and who is wrong? There is a similar schism when it comes to egalitarianism verses complementarianism.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

Petrusek concludes his book saying, \u201cEvangelizing the political culture is thus ultimately not about the ideology and even less about politics. It is about opening the widest and straightest path possible for making the pilgrimage to the Lord.\u201d [9]<\/a><\/p>\n

If Petrusek\u2019s purpose is to draw people to Jesus, I am not sure his method is one that will draw people to Jesus.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Matthew R. Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture<\/em>. (Park Ridge, IL: Word on Fire Institute, 2023), 136.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Ibid., 14.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Ibid., 18.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Ibid., 136.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Ibid., 2.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Dennis L. Okholm, ed., The Gospel in Black & White: Theological Resources for Racial Reconciliation (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 9.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> Ibid., 61.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Petrusek, 17.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> Ibid., 463.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cThe truth is the truth is the truth is the truth throughout the ages \u2013 that\u2019s what it means to worship the one true God. And our job is to follow the truth, to fight for it, and to make way for it, wherever it may lead.\u201d[1] So Matthew R. Petrusek ends Part I of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":155,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2997],"class_list":["post-36842","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-petrusek","cohort-dlgp01"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36842","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/155"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36842"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36842\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36843,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36842\/revisions\/36843"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36842"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36842"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36842"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}