I keep coming back in my mind to perspective and the ground versus the aerial viewpoint. You see, the difference between a bonifide judge and you and I, is that a judge assesses the information by means of factual evidence; having a viewpoint and perspective outside of themselves; and then ascertains based on certainty, because they have the facts, and then their judgment is made.

This is the difference. We can only assess. We skip a step, because we cannot ascertain with confidence due to not having all the facts, but just basic information that we can assess with our eyes only. This means we only have the limited ground view, which involves more or less, immediate peripheral vision and therefore, can only determine a minimal amount about the person, or situation. The only other information most of us have is gossip, which is not free from obscurity in the face of actual facts.

We are simply assessors, yet somehow we think this is enough to give us temporary status as judges of others. What is it that has “conditioned” us into believing that we have this right; or that, in the grand scheme of things, any of what we assess is truly that important? I mean, if we were to assess from the air what we assess and judge from the ground, it would put a whole new spin on things.

First of all, we’d realize just how small we all are, and certainly how petty. I think, however, that the rest of the definition of the word “condition,” will help explain why we assessors tend to overstep our bounds into the seat of judgment.

A condition is also that on which something else is contingent, to condition oneself, or to determine, limit, or restrict. Lastly, a condition can be viewed in legal terms, such as existing circumstances or a law, as in a stipulation in an agreement or a requirement imposed. This word can also mean to subject to particular conditions or circumstances, or to test (a commodity) to ascertain its condition.

Well, first let’s recognize that as assessors, we are not in a position to “test” for the purposes of ascertaining any certainties. Most judgments are more immediate, and based off of a reaction, versus a response, because a response is more of a well thought out determination or action, and involves a bit more time.

The difference between “condition” and “circumstance” is that a circumstance is a condition, detail, part, or attribute, with respect to time, place, manner, agent, etc., that accompanies, determines, or modifies a fact or event. It is a modifying or influencing factor; the existing conditions or state of affairs surrounding and affecting an agent.

One’s circumstance can contain their condition, but at the same time, one’s condition can be dictated by their circumstance, because their condition can be regulated by their perception and how they react or cope with their circumstance. One’s circumstance does not define them because we have no control of factors that can influence us. The only thing we can control about that is how we react or respond to those influencing factors.

So whether Mary said “circumstance” or “condition,” either one applies. We are not defined by the sum of our condition or circumstance, because both are based on multiple variables and we have no control of any of them; including the fact that they are subjective, ever-changing, and held captive by the limitations of time.

We are defined by the fulfillment of our individual God-given purpose on this earth, and how well we showed real love to God’s creation: to each other.

Next part.