‹ Back

Acts 24:1-9. Paul has been sent to the governor in Caesarea, Felix. The high priest, Ananias, along with some elders and a spokesman named Tertullus arrive five days later to make their case against Paul. Tertullus begins by praising Felix and thanking him for all he has done for the Jews. He goes on (quickly, in order not to detain Felix any longer than necessary), to say that the Jews find Paul to be "a pestilent fellow, an agitator among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarians." Tertullus says Paul even tried to defame the temple, and that was when he was seized by the Jews. He says Felix can learn all of this from Paul himself when he examines Paul. All of the Jews at the hearing confirm that this testimony is true.

 

It is interesting that the high priest brought a spokesman rather than testifying against Paul himself. This is further evidence of what I wrote about yesterday - when one's religion is being threatened, emotions run too high to be reasonable. Ananias is most likely in such a state of anger and defensiveness that he cannot trust himself to appear reasonable before the governor, so he brings a spokesman.

 

Tertullus is obsequious and pandering in his brief testimony, but what he accuses Paul of is what the Jews truly believe him to be guilty of. Tertullus even says that Paul himself will corroborate his testimony, and all the Jews agree, so they clearly believe it to be true. So let's examine his testimony: Tertullus says the Jews find Paul pestilent - this is true, they do; he says Paul is an agitator among the Jews - this is also true, although Paul does not intend to be an agitator, what he says does agitate the Jews; Tertullus says that Paul is a ringleader of this new Nazarene sect - this is also true, although "ringleader" is a loaded word, Paul is definitely one of the leaders of the early Christian community; and finally Tertullus says that Paul tried to defame the temple. Is this last one true? Not from Paul's point of view and not objectively, but to the Jews, I think it is.

 

This gets to the "feelings as truth" problem. The Jews see Paul as a threat to their faith, which he is, but only because he is preaching truth that they do not want to hear or admit to. Because they see him as a threat, everything he does is seen through that lens. They are angry, scared, and defensive, because they are dealing with a true threat. All of Paul's actions are seen as an offense against their religion by the Jews. If Paul is a pestilent agitator and a ringleader of heretics, then his very presence in the temple, performing a Jewish ritual, is defamatory. But notice that they say Paul was about to defame the temple - for this charge, they have to assume his intentions, because objectively he did nothing wrong.

 

Again, we can see this same breakdown of "truth" all over the place today - both in the Church and in the world at large. Secular things like politics have become religions, and thus engender very strong emotions in defending them. What's more, these emotions are seen as unquestionably righteous. When feelings define truth, we can become dishonest, judgmental, defensive, angry, and even murderous very quickly. Allowing our feelings to govern us makes us into people who are not what God wants us to be. 

 

Look at how Brett Kavanaugh was treated as an example of this happening today. Kavanaugh was seen as a threat to women's rights, especially to abortion, so everything he did was perceived as an attack on women or hatred of women. Because politics has become a religion (with feminism one of its sects), and abortion has become like a secular sacrament, the entire confirmation hearing was ruled by feelings and emotions. Any manner of testimony was permitted against him, whether it was true or not, and motive and intentions were assigned to him by his accusers. There was no reasonable hearing possible, because "feelings" would be too hurt if he was allowed to "defame" the Supreme Court with his presence. That is just one example of the exact same behaviour as we see in the Jews in today's reading, there are many, many more.

 

In this world of subjective truth and outright lies, we should always try to find the objective truth. Unfortunately, we find ourselves in a place and time where that is often impossible, so then we should at least ask ourselves if anything we are being told as true is not at all supported by any available evidence. Jesus Christ is Truth and the Holy Spirit inspires the Church to teach truth. If the question is one of Church teaching, we can find our answer there. In other matters, if we are not willing to look for or hear evidence that counteracts what we feel to be true, if we are assuming intent and motives of those we deem our "enemies," if we are acting like the Jews here, we can be sure we are in the grips of some sort of idolatry.

 

The truth has a name, it is Jesus Christ. If we don't know what is true, we should simply look to Him, and the way He taught us to live and treat others. Eventually we will learn whatever we need to know, and in the meantime we will keep ourselves from great sin in defending our idols.