In this essay, which he originally entitled "The Conspiracy of Blindness", Dr Kania is exploring the nature of "true friendship" from a moral and Christian perspective.

In one of his most enduring homilies, St. John Chrysostom taught on the notion of what constitutes 'real' friendship. Chrysostom concluded this homily by saying:

"The greatest test of a friendship is whether one person can reprove the other. All of us commit sins from time to time; and all of us try to blind ourselves to our sins, making excuses for ourselves, or pretending the sin did not even occur. At such times we need friends to open our eyes to the reality of our sins. Put yourself now in the position of the friend. Are you willing to open that person's eyes? Are you willing to expose the excuses as false? Are you prepared to risk that person's wrath, as wounded pride rises up in anger? Or do you prefer to blind yourself to your friend's faults, and so join a conspiracy of blindness? … In choosing our friends, we should embrace those who are willing to be honest with us, and those prepared if necessary to endure our anger. Without such honesty the friendship has no depth, and is useless. Yet when it is your duty to express criticism to a friend, beware of destroying that friend's self-respect. Always soften your reproof with words of affirmation, in which you acknowledge their virtue. And ensure that your own motives are good: that love, not jealousy or anger, is the true well-spring of your words". (Chrysostom, 1996, p.48 )

We see this test of friendship in the interplay between two friends in 16th Century England. From the scaffold the English humanist and martyr, Sir Thomas More (1477-1535), said as his final words: "I die the King's good servant, but God's first". More's words are important to consider, for although devoted to Henry VIII (1491-1547), More risked his life in order to speak the truth regarding Henry's actions in both divorcing his Queen, Catherine (1485-1536), and establishing himself as Supreme Head of the Catholic Church in England. Few others had the courage to do so, and whereas Richard Rich (1496-1567), Thomas Cromwell (1485-1540) and Thomas Cramner (1489-1556), outlived More and enjoyed for a time at least the King's good favour and friendship, none of these individuals loved Henry VIII as dearly as More in risking his own life to save the life of his monarch from error and perdition. The tragedy for Henry VIII was that in killing More he not only lost his greatest friend, but one of the greatest friends who ever lived in history — a man who could love so dearly that he gave up his own life for his friend. (cf: John 15: 13)

St John Chrysostom

Our truest friends are thus not those who are ready to tell us what we wish to hear, nor those who never seek to challenge our opinions, nor those who are willing to do wrong in some perverse way of sanctifying a bond. The true friend always has the best interest of the object of their affection in mind and heart, even if this diverges drastically at times from what their friend believes or wills. We may sit weekly around a friend's table and enjoy their hospitality and their feast, but this act of friendship should not serve as an anaesthetic dulling our senses to act morally and to see that justice is done. We owe God far more than we owe our friends. No Christian is required to join hands and walk merrily down the road to Hell — for friendship's sake. For friendship to exist, as Chrysostom teaches, we require not a harmony of opinion nor a uniformity of belief, but an open respect, a mutual love, and a commitment to honesty, without which we do not have a friendship, but an acquaintanceship.

All of us can become blind to our faults, as we steadily build over the years cocoons of comfort and affirmation, protective shells that can become impervious to criticism. It is at this point that self-righteousness destroys goodness, where we begin to be convinced that we cannot be wrong.

The Bible provides us with a wonderful example of a powerful man living such a 'self-righteous' existence. King David stands by his window and looking at the scene below his balcony begins to lust after Uriah's wife, Bathsheba. Uriah is a good man, a loyal general of David, who loves and honours his king. But for all this the 'good' David sets out to plan Uriah's death in battle. After hearing that Uriah has been killed, David proceeds to take Bathsheba as his wife, consoling her in her sorrow. Thus the couple could have lived ever after, David blinded in his sin, Bathsheba blinded in her ignorance — had it not been for the arrival of the Prophet Nathan at David's palace — a true friend, a friend sent by God.

As the Old Testament story is recounted: "Yahweh sent the prophet Nathan to David. He came to him and said: In the same town were two men, one rich, the other poor. The rich man had flocks and herds in great abundance; the poor man had nothing but a ewe lamb, only a single little one which he had bought. He fostered it and it grew up with him and his children, eating his bread, drinking from his cup, sleeping in his arms; it was like a daughter to him. When a traveller came to stay, the rich man would not take anything from his own flock or herd to provide for the wayfarer who had come to him. Instead, he stole the poor man's lamb and prepared that for his guest. David flew into a great rage with the man. 'As Yahweh lives,' he said to Nathan 'the man who did this deserves to die. For doing such a thing and for having shown no pity, he shall make fourfold restitution for the lamb.' Nathan then said to David, 'You are the man!'" (2 Samuel 12: 1 - 7, The New Jerusalem Bible)

So to test what type of friend you are, consider whether if your spouse was being unfaithful would you wish your friend to have the courage to inform you of this? This is the easy part of the equation! Now consider the case of the roles being reversed and your wife being informed by the same friend of your infidelity. Would you still call this person — friend? Or would you condemn and hate him for telling your wife the truth? Would you prefer a relationship where no hard questions were ever asked of you — a life somewhere in the land of shadows, where all laws, all responsibilities, all morals and all virtues are sucked into an empty vacuum, where people around you agree with you always, pandering your ego, knowing you do wrong — but caring nothing for your salvation? Such a life would not be a life among friends, but a life where no man stands for anything; a life devoid of individuals such as Chrysostom, St. Thomas More and the Prophet Nathan — a life lived within the confines of a conspiracy of blindness.

©2007 Dr Andrew Thomas Kania

[Andrew Kania's Archive]