Reflections on Honesty
I’ve been thinking a lot about honesty after reading Patrick
Regan’s book Honesty Over Silence. Patrick,
the founder of Kintsugi Hope, tells his heartfelt story of suffering and
provides advice about achieving mental well-being. The book is a wonderful encouragement
to be honest about our struggles. Shame and stigma prevent us from having
healthy conversations about mental well-being and I have nothing but praise for
Patrick’s book. It has led me to reflect on the subject of honesty in pastoral
care in more depth and to think about the challenges of speaking truthfully
more generally.
We tend to think of honesty as a virtue that is at the heart of individual moral character and corporate culture. We admire those in professional sport who are honest about committing a foul and hold their hands up. We celebrate when companies come clean about their tax avoidance, admit their failure and pay compensation. Many would elevate honesty to an absolute that must never be contravened no matter what the circumstances (i.e. a deontological approach to ethics). The ninth of the Jewish Ten Commandments prohibits perjury: ‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour’.[i] More generally, Proverbs lists six things that the Lord hates, one being ‘a lying tongue’ (Pr. 6:17). Others would argue that it is the negative consequences of dishonesty that commend honesty in all circumstances (i.e. a teleological or consequential approach to ethics). Exploring the chain reactions set off by lies perhaps explains our fascination with crime fiction, because we are fascinated by moral causes and effects.
The case for honesty in all circumstances seems well made
and is often repeated. However, when we consider Lance Armstrong’s ‘honesty’
after being caught out for doping, we begin to realise that honesty can take
many forms and not all of them are good. Alternatively, we can imagine
situations in which lying to protect the vulnerable is commendable. Wisdom
demands that we learn to ask why a person lies or why a person is honest, giving
consideration to their motives and the context around their speech. Exploring
the context of speech enables us to ponder anew, for example, those characters
who lied for the glory of God in the Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament.[ii]
Contrary to our expectations, in some circumstances it appears that honesty is
not commended in the Jewish and Christian traditions.
A more nuanced
understanding of honesty
Dietrich Bonhoeffer set out a more nuanced understanding of
honesty in his Ethics, which contains
a short chapter entitled ‘What is Meant by “Telling the Truth”?[iii]
He notes that in the parent-child relationship the child should reveal
everything to her parents, but parents must conceal much from the child in the
best interests of the child. From this illustration Bonhoeffer concludes:
The question must be asked
whether and in what way a man is entitled to demand truthful speech of others.
Speech between parents and children is, in the nature of the case, different
from speech between man and wife, between friends, between teacher and pupil,
government and subject, friend and foe, and in each case the truth which this
speech conveys is also different.[iv]
With respect to truth, the child’s claim on the parents is
different to the parents’ claim on the child. And so in other relationships we
must also consider what is mandated for that specific relationship.
Bonhoeffer is a Christian theologian and so he argues that
we owe truthful speech to God, perhaps as an infant owes truthful speech to a
parent. However, our speaking to God cannot be separated from our speaking to
others within God’s creation. This is why Christian worship is constituted by
our ethical relations in the world. The character of this ethical relation is
what Bonhoeffer calls obedience to the ‘real’, by which he means obedience to
the will of God. So we must act to will that the reality of God should ‘show
itself everywhere to be the ultimate reality’.[v]
To speak well means finding the right word at the right time, which takes
considerable effort.
Directly quoting Bonhoeffer’s Ethics, the Christian ethicist Stanley
Hauerwas has this to say (with my illustrations inserted [ ]…):
It is also true that Bonhoeffer argues that in
formal terms the description of the lie as the discrepancy between thought and
speech is inadequate. […] There is a way of speaking that can be correct but
still a lie. That is when a notorious liar for once tells the truth in order to
mislead [e.g. Lance Armstrong], or when a correct statement contains deliberate
ambiguity or omits something essential that is necessary to know the truth
[e.g. key witnesses at the Grenfell or Hillsborough inquiries]. Bonhoeffer’s
account of the lie is determined by his understanding of reality. We are
obliged to speak truthfully about reality, but we must remember that reality
names not only what is “out there” but our relation to what is “out there”. [...] According to
Bonhoeffer, every word we speak should be true, to be sure the veracity of what
we say matters; but the relation between ourselves and others that is expressed
in what we say is also a matter of truth or untruth “The truthful word is not
in itself constant; it is as much alive as life itself. If it is detached from
life and from its reference to the concrete other man, if ‘the truth is told’
without taking into account to whom it is addressed, then this truth has only
the appearance of truth, but it lacks its essential character.”[vi]
Cynics are often believed to arrive at the truth earlier than more credulous people. The cynic distrusts. In my household we have a saying that only 10% of what people say is true, which I believe is a healthy cynicism in the age of social media. However, cynicism is no basis for healthy relationships. A good illustration
is found in Richard Yates’ portrayal of a failing marriage in Revolutionary Road. Staring as the lead
in a promising new community theatre, April Wheeler gives an uninspiring
performance further undermined by the incompetency of the cast and stagehands.
Described as a man who ‘would have exactly the right words of comfort for his
wife backstage’, Frank Wheeler is unable to find words of consolation and can
only find words of criticism for the cast. This ‘honest’ appraisal has the
effect of extinguishing the dying embers of self-esteem, love and trust in the
marriage.[vii]
Following Bonhoeffer, the husband who desires the reality of God to ‘show
itself everywhere to be the ultimate reality’, must love his wife. For Frank
Wheeler this would involve rejecting the tenets of professional artistic criticism,
based on comparison and competition, which would free him to find words of
praise and encouragement.
So my conclusion is that honesty is a skill that must be
learned. Honesty is not about the simple alignment between thought and speech, if
only it were that simple. Honesty is speech that is conditioned by our obedience
to the real, that is, to God. The honest person is responsible for their own
words and has learned to take account of the person to whom they address.
Speaking honestly does not mean saying everything that can be said.
[i]
All citations from the Bible in this article are from the English Standard
Version translation.
[ii] Bonhoeffer,
D. (1953) Letters and Papers from Prison. London: SCM Press (see p.157 for discussion)
[iii]
Bonhoeffer, D. (1995) [1955] Ethics,
London: Touchstone.
[iv]
Ibid. p.358-359.
[v]
Ibid. p.186.
[vi] Hauerwas,
S. (2015). Performing the Faith: Bonhoeffer and the Practice of Nonviolence.
London: Wipf and Stock Publishers. p.62-63; also see Hauerwas, S. (2008)
Dietrich Bonhoeffer on Truth and Politics, Burke Lectureship on Religion and
Society URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPPJCkfxdTs
[accessed 09/06/2020]
[vii] Yates,
R. (1961) Revolutionary Road.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
