I want to discuss “worthiness” today. Do we need to be “worthy” to enter into the Kingdom of God? What would make us worthy in God’s eyes?
I had originally scheduled this entry for posting yesterday, but, for the first time since I’ve been posting here at Beliefnet, my entry did not post. I’m sure it was due to an error of my own…so I’m running it as an encore today…
I see an epidemic of unworthiness stretching across the land. People everywhere are feeling that somehow they don’t measure up, can’t measure up, to the expectations of other people. Notably, this is becoming present in our political discussions. Is Hillary Clinton “worthy” to become president? Is Barack Obama? Is John McCain?
Today I was browsing through Conversations with God-Book 3 and I came across an extraordinary passage dealing with what God thinks of all of us. I hadn’t read this text in quite a while (it’s over 10 years old), and so I approached this excerpt with new eyes…and what I read made me wonder what this political campaign season might look and feel like if we overlaid these words in a political context, in connection, specifically, with the present presidential election.
When I was writing this book I was mulling over this question of human worthiness and asking God about all of that. In response, this is what I was inspired to write…

You are worthy. As is everyone else. Unworthiness is the worst indictment ever visited upon the human race. You have based your sense of worthiness on the past, while I base your sense of worthiness on the future.
The future, the future, always the future! That is where your life is, not in the past. The future. That is where your truth is, not in the past.
What you have done is unimportant compared to what you are about to do. How you have erred is insignificant compared to how you are about to create.
I forgive your mistakes. All of them. I forgive your misplaced passions. All of them. I forgive your erroneous notions, your misguided understandings, your hurtful actions, your selfish decisions. All of them.
Others may not forgive you, but I do. Others may not release you from your guilt, but I do. Others may not let you forget, allow you to go on, become something new, but I do. For I know that you are not what you were, but are, and always will be, what you are now.
A sinner can become a saint in one minute. In one second. In one breath.
In truth, there is no such thing as a “sinner,” for no one can be sinned against—least of all Me. That is why I say that I “forgive” you. I use the phrase because it is one you seem to understand.
In truth, I do not forgive you, and will not forgive you ever, for anything. I do not have to. There is nothing to forgive. But I can release you. And I hereby do. Now. Once again. As I have done so often in the past, through the teachings of so many other teachers.

I asked God, “Why have we not heard them? Why have we not believed this, Your greatest promise?” Here is the reply I received…

Because you cannot believe in the goodness of God. Forget, then, about believing in My goodness. Believe, instead, in simple logic.
The reason I have no need to forgive you is that you cannot offend Me, nor can I be damaged or destroyed. Yet you imagine yourself capable of offending, even damaging, Me. What an illusion! What a magnificent obsession!
You cannot hurt Me, nor can I be harmed in any way. For I am the Unharmable. And that which cannot be harmed cannot, and would not, harm another.
You understand now the logic behind the truth that I do not condemn, nor shall I punish, nor have I a need to seek retribution. I have no such need, for I have not been, and cannot be, offended or damaged or hurt in any way.
The same is true of you. And of all others—though all of you imagine that you can be, and have been, hurt and damaged and destroyed.
Because you imagine damage, you require revenge. Because you experience pain, you need another to experience pain as retribution for your own. Yet what possible justification can that be for inflicting pain upon another? Because (you imagine) someone has inflicted injury upon you, you feel it right and proper to inflict injury in return? That which you say is not okay for human beings to do to each other, is okay for you to do, so long as you are justified?
This is insanity. And what you do not see in this insanity is that all people who inflict pain on others assume themselves to be justified. Every action a person takes is understood by that person to be the right action, given what it is they seek and desire.
By your definition, what they seek and desire is wrong. But by their definition, it is not. You may not agree with their model of the world, with their moral and ethical constructions, with their theological understandings, nor with their decisions, choices, and actions . . . but they agree with them, based on their values.
You call their values ”wrong.” But who is to say your values are “right”? Only you. Your values are “right” because you say they are. Even this might make some sense if you kept your word about it, but you, yourself, change your mind constantly about what you consider “right” and “wrong.” You do this as individuals, and you do this as societies.
What your society considered “right” just a few decades ago, you consider “wrong” today. What you considered “wrong” in the not-too-distant past, you now call “right.” Who can tell what is what? How do you know the players without a scorecard?

I said this: “And yet we dare to sit in judgment of one another. We dare to condemn, because some other person has failed to keep up with our own changing ideas about what is permitted and what is not. Whew. We’re really something. We can’t even keep our own minds made up about what’s “okay” and what’s not.”
To which I received this reply…

That isn’t the problem. Changing your ideas of what’s “right” and “wrong” isn’t the problem. You have to change those ideas, or you would never grow. Changing is a product of evolution.
No, the problem is not that you have changed, or that your values have changed. The problem is that so many of you insist on thinking that the values you now have are the right and perfect ones, and that everyone else should adhere to them. Some of you have become self-justified and self-righteous.
Stick to your beliefs, if that serves you. Hold tight. Do not waiver. For your ideas about “right” and “wrong” are your definitions of Who You Are. Yet do not require that others define themselves according to your terms. And do not stay so “stuck” in your present beliefs and customs that you halt the process of evolution itself.
Actually, you could not do that if you wanted to, for life goes on, with you or without you. Nothing stays the same, nor can anything remain unchanged.

This was a very important passage for me to read today, and I was moved to share it with you. Do you think these words might have any application in regular day-to-day living? I wonder if we could get away with inserting them in our political arena right now. So much judgment is being passed. Some are passing judgment on Sen. Clinton. Some are passing judgment on Sen. McCain. Some are passing judgment on Sen. Obama. I read the political blogs and the comments from their readers and it makes me shudder sometimes to see the words that people use to comment upon these three worthy candidates for president of the United States.
Why do we do that, do you suppose? Can we not simply agree that we disagree with the political viewpoints held by one or the other? Do we have to make our attacks so personal? And surely — please tell me that surely — we are not going to make our decision about the next president based on race or gender. Surely not. Tell me not.
I think that all three candidates are worthy. I mean that sincerely, not as a political lollipop. I truly believe that Senators Clinton, McCain, and Obama are each worthy and moral individuals of high character and extraordinary intelligence, highly qualified, each of them, to be the next U.S. president.
Now, can we just get down to talking about the issues? The places where their approach would be different? So that we can weigh their various arguments and make a decision based on their ideas rather than someone else’s thought about whether they are “worthy” or not?
Just a thought here…
Just a thought.