Now, how about if I throw another piece into the puzzle? There is another factor that must be considered. What if I told you that Archie "struck" his wife when he tripped on a child's toy while coming down the stairs and his wife was coming up the same stairs toward him? Would that change your perspective? The "hit" was not intentional, and no, there was no animosity between the two at all. The police investigation happened as a matter of course, even though Archie's wife said clearly that it was an accident. Both Archie and his wife recovered just fine, and they even were able to have a laugh about it afterward.
Yet, what if all you heard was what I said in the first paragraph? That would definitely skew your view of Archie and make you have an opinion of him that was based on a radically misrepresented view of the "truth". Just because someone tells the truth, does not mean that it is the "whole truth" and "nothing but the truth". It is often the case that getting only a few details is more confusing than no details at all. The question, of course, is: "which" details are being given? We all know that it is possible to represent a story in such a way as to make it appear to be something completely different from reality. Since the intent is to deceive, the "truth" that is spoken is essentially a lie, and it causes others to have an opinion based on a lie (because it is a twisting of the actual story).
This is what is most often the basis of rumors. Someone hears a rumor about something, fails to investigate fully, and thus ends up with a final opinion about the situation that is not actually based on the full truth. If all you tell someone about Jesus is that He died on the cross and do not mention the Resurrection, then you have not given them the full truth. To compromise the truth by hiding certain aspects of it is not genuine honesty. To participate in such dishonesty is tantamount to being the instigator of the "lie" in the first place. Yet, many participate in the dishonesty, not out of a desire to deceive, but just because they have been drawn in to the cycle of sadness.
What do you do with rumors? How do you respond when someone gives a detail or two about something that could easily have multiple explanations? Are you one who tends to jump to conclusions about others, always presuming the worst? Or maybe you are like those who will not actually "believe" the lie, but will still entertain feelings of doubt and suspicion towards others? I have said it many times (and will continue to point it out) because it is so important for us to get this point. The technological advancements of the modern age that enable us to communicate quickly are both a blessing and a curse. They can be used to help us (like with the ability to call 911 from almost anywhere) or they can be used to hurt us (like with reports released before they have the whole story).
How many times have you seen someone recant a piece of gossip that he or she spread around (has it ever happened?)? How frequent are acknowledgements of error in the news media? The old term for someone who went around telling stories to others for the sake of getting attention was "talebearer"; someone who carried a story from place to place without genuine concern for the well being of others. This term was used long before modern news outlets, and it helps us to see the importance of truth; the whole truth. If you do not know the whole truth to some situation (and you rarely do) then you should be terribly careful in what you spread abroad. Whether it is about our president in these United States, some celebrity, or the guy down the street, talking about others behind their back is not spiritually healthy. It makes us become people who doubt others constantly, and then find it hard to maintain trust in the Lord Himself.
Guard your heart. Guard it against doubt and dissension. Yes, it is true that there is much to be concerned about in the Church these days; errors seem to abound and little seems to be done to stop it. Yet, how we react to these errors (and they are many) will make a difference. Do you presume the best about others, and give them the benefit of the doubt? It is pride that will make us become quick to believe the worst of other people, not humility. In the book of Philippians, St. Paul is speaking to a Church community that was struggling with internal strife. A division had occurred in the people's hearts to the point of where the parish had lost its true joy in Christ. As the Apostle was seeking to help them move past their quarrels he gives them this piece of advice:
So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any incentive of love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfishness or conceit, but in humility count others better than yourselves. [emphasis mine]Notice the last phrase? "Count others better than yourselves". That is the very thing that does not happen when we believe "stories" and make quick judgments on others. If those who enjoy gossip thought of others as better than themselves, then they would reject the gossip outright. If those who want to sow dissent and sadness among others thought of others as better than themselves then they would seek to find the most positive representation of something that they hear rather than the most negative. In a day and age when people seem to want to be offended, I encourage you not to let the "bad news" get you down. Do not spiral into the depressing mode of seeing everything in the worst light possible. It can tear you up inside, and--if left unchecked--it can destroy your soul.
