TRUST

“Trust is a fundamental basis of morality. ”

A virtue is readily identified as the good actor while an opposing vice is the bad one. Virtue is always a virtue; vice is always a vice. Right?

Trust and Trustworthiness are virtues and Distrust and Untrustworthiness are opposing vices; however, there are certain situations and circumstances that seem to warrant distrust and untrustworthiness, in my opinion. For example, some adults [young and old] are all too easily duped or deceived by people you or I would naturally suspect. Yet, these adults are often described as being very trusting individuals. What about the person who refuses to report an acquaintance’s criminal activity? Perhaps the criminal would feel that the silent friend is very trustworthy whereas you or I would call it something else. However, being on-guard against con artists and revealing criminal activities would always be good choices rather than bad ones. The problem seems to be a matter of semantics rather than concluding that sometimes virtues morph into vice or that vice can become a virtue. Being easily duped is best described as gullibility, immaturity, or callowness rather than trust. Similarly, false loyalty or faulty loyalty — rather than trustworthy — best describes the friend who keeps secret the crimes of his criminal friends. We should be able to state that a virtue is always a virtue and a vice is always a vice. Let’s move on and discuss the virtue called trust.

Trust is “not merely a feeling; but, it is a feeling that necessarily flows into doing something good for one another.” [adapted from Rabbi David Wolpe’s definition of love. Wolpe was named among the 50 most influential Jews in the world by the Jerusalem Post. Feb. 16, 2016. http://time.com/4225777/meaning-of-love/]. 

Like love, trust naturally brings goods and good things to other people. Let’s discuss them. The goods and good things just mentioned are intrinsic and extrinsic goods. They arrive in the same measure that we trust one another. Trust makes it possible to want to help other people. Trust is the virtue that makes cooperation possible while also making cooperation easier and simpler. Ultimately, trust deepens our respect, compassion and empathy for others. It facilitates healthy, mutual dependencies among those we trust. Trust promotes friendships. It develops healthy work environments. Trust promotes social health and wellbeing. Trust encourages neighbors to help each other; thereby making the neighborhood an enjoyable place to live. Trust is the cement that bonds people together. Trust enables us to grow in our understanding about other people and the world they live in. Trust helps us feel secure about ourselves. Trust helps the people we trust to feel good about themselves. Trust creates natural, healthy autonomies and dependencies within societies and families. Trust fosters moral maturity and responsibility toward others. Trust is a necessary ingredient for moral decision making and corresponding action. Trust helps us feel appreciated, understood, and loved by others. Trust opens us up to each other while rendering us open and vulnerable; yet, we don’t worry about vulnerability when interacting with those we trust.  Trust is the necessary virtue for all healthy interpersonal relationships; but especially between spouses; parents and their children; and God and his children. These positive effects reveal why trust is indeed more than a feeling — it is a feeling that necessarily flows into doing something good for one another. Trust is inextricably linked to our feelings and emotions. Trust develops other companion virtues including hope and optimism. Trust facilitates the giving and receiving of the gift of “assured reliance on someone’s character, ability, and strengths”. [Merriam Webster’s definition] In other words, trust is basically an implicit promise to honor, to be loyal to, and to be respectful of another person. It is fundamental to the marriage vows even if the promise to trust and to be trustworthy is not expressly stated. [Many of the previous various ideas are adopted from the following source:  https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trust/]

As already stated, virtuous behavior naturally spawns other virtuous acts. Trust supports and is supportive of many different, yet similar, companion, human virtues including loyalty, respect, hope, optimism, trustworthiness, love, justice, cooperation, and compassion for others. Eons ago, Sirach taught: “If you choose, you can keep the commandments; loyalty is doing the will of God. Set before you are fire and water; to whatever you choose, stretch out your hand. Before everyone are life and death, whichever they choose will be given them.” [Sirach 15: 15-17] Consider how this applies to all virtue and specifically trust. 

When trust is absent, opposing vices easily fill its void including: betrayal, unhealthy doubt, pessimism, skepticism, disloyalty, disrespect, hatred, injustice; and deceit. Recent public protests and demonstrations showcase many of these vices which tear down trust necessary for healthy, social co-existence. The protests show that our culture suffers from an underlying distrust of persons, ideas, and even agencies including the Church and other institutions. Societies will struggle and even fall when citizens grow excessively wary of each other’s words, actions and motives. Friendships fall apart when distrust replaces trust. Marriages fail when deceitfulness overtakes trustworthiness. One’s overall wellbeing is sometimes a measure of our personal treasure trove of virtues vs vice; the same can be said of entire cultures. 

So, how do we put on trust? Trust is both learned and earned! As we mature, we learn to trust others through verification. We begin with those closest to us. Consider babies. At birth, babies are naturally trusting because they have yet to experience disappointment or betrayal. Around seven months of age, babies begin to express stranger fear/anxiety because they finally realize that everyone is not necessarily mother, father or siblings; although they may have developed a preference for certain individuals within their immediate family. This new awareness protects babies as they are not yet able to verify the trustworthiness of strangers. Their fear of strangers gradually diminishes as baby observes his parents interact with friendly ‘strangers’. Even toddlers and pre-schoolers remain wary of strangers longer than we realize and for good reason. Gradually, children give and receive conditional trust because of emerging verification skills. 

How do we verify the trustworthiness of others? The verification processes involve studying a person of interest, observing him while interacting with others; listening to his ideas and thoughts; discussing topics with him; questioning his ideas; receiving input from others about him; getting to know him personally; and trying to understand his motives, beliefs and worldview. It is next to impossible to verify someone’s motives — even though motives really tell us who the real person is. All of us ought to reveal our motives so others don’t have to guess them — assuming we understand them ourselves. When a person’s motives remain a mystery, we are forced to draw conclusions about his/her trustworthiness based on the other verification systems listed above; our final conclusion about their trustworthiness may be off the mark when jumping to conclusions about their motives.  Trust eventually loses most of its conditionality when determining that someone is trustworthy; we then form the belief that the person of interest is truthful, sincere, and trustworthy — or not. 

Trust is shattered through the act of betrayal of someone’s trust. We automatically link betrayal to cheating on a spouse but it is has a broader context. Feeling betrayed may happen for the following reasons and situations; including the discovery of a hidden addiction of a loved one, friend or coworker. Persons who feel used by someone for any reason — financial, social, or others — will often feel betrayed by the person they trusted. Getting ripped off  financially by a trusted person is betrayal. Constant lying to someone betrays trust. Talking or gossiping about others can make the person being talked about feel betrayed. Abandonment - whatever the age or relationship can feel like betrayal. Revealing someone’s deepest secret without permission is a form of betrayal. Giving up on a friendship or marriage for little or no reason feels like betrayal. Discovery that a loved one has committed a serious crime feels like betrayal. Turning friends or family members against each other during arguments, court cases, or work disputes, can feel like betrayal. The pain felt by betrayal depends on the degree of trust placed on the betrayer. It also depends on the seriousness of the offense to the person who has been betrayed. Betrayal is one of the deepest hurts ever felt because it lays bare a person’s vulnerability and exposes it to the world as if it were their fault for trusting someone. Betrayal takes advantage of a person’s good will and optimistic hopes. It forces us to erase our belief system about someone. [https://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2014/04/12/dealing-with-betrayal/ and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/worse-than-cheating_n_6036228.html]

Unconditional trust has no reason to monitor, track, question, or constrict the actions of someone we trust. However, after betrayal, that is exactly what we are tempted to do to prevent future episodes of betrayal and to diminish the hurt that we feel. These self-preservation efforts trend us toward becoming invulnerable rather than open to new-found trust. Broken trust doesn’t just lie dormant; it remains lost. Consequently, a betrayed person is also in danger of succumbing to vice that pretends to heal brokenness including acting out with anger, disrespect, hatred, injustice, vengeance, retaliating against the perpetrator; and other vice. Perhaps William Congreve himself betrayed a woman and therefore knew full well her fury when writing:“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.” Unfortunately, the betrayer often ends up in a better spot — emotionally,  psychologically, and socially —  than the person he/she betrayed.

Attempting to control someone's will, actions or life does not heal anyone; neither does it remove distrust. Betrayal undermines one’s sense of confidence and reality about self.  How does healing take place? It never helps to be told: just get over it or its time to move on.The emotions and feelings involved after a betrayal are very real and they run too deep to ignore, stuff inside or bat away without suffering serious consequences to social, psychological, physical, spiritual, or mental wellbeing.

The hurt caused by the betrayal becomes the opportunity to become even more merciful, forgiving, strong, and Christ-like through prayer, appropriate personal action, and decision making. It helps to seek expert advice so that the path forward is highly influenced by helpful directions, guidance, and oversight. This helps to ensure that he/she remains appropriately open and vulnerable, a just forgiver, and has new opportunities for personal growth.

How does disappointment in someone compare with betrayal? The difference between the two are hugely different. Disappointment does not feel as crushing as the feelings caused by betrayal. If you wondered about the difference, you probably haven’t been betrayed; perhaps you have merely felt  disappointed in someone. Feeling disappointed in someone proves two things: the trust we had in that person was very conditional — and probably for very just cause; and the act that disappointed us was probably not that serious. Let me give a few examples. Most parents realize their children are not perfect; therefore, they expect to be disappointed occasionally by their child’s choices, decisions and lack of maturity. Of course, committed parents are disappointed to learn that their child was unruly in the classroom, disrespected a teacher; was mean to another child; lied about something; was disobedient; cheated on an exam; or other misbehavior. Yet, we expect some of these things to happen as our children experience new people, places and things. Children have yet to mature so they do stupid things, make immature decisions, and say inappropriate words. They will never be perfect; neither will we. The feelings of disappointment range from low to high depending on the expectations of the parents, whether the act was new or repeat, and the degree of the wrongdoing. Like betrayal, disappointment provides us with the opportunity to teach, train, and supervise our children so they learn from their mistakes and our disappointments. Disappointment provides parents the opportunity to help their child become a better version of himself. [Matthew Kelly] So, parents set consequences, set higher expectations about future results, and monitor their children’s compliance. During a Fortifying Families of Faith workshop for parents, a psychologist stated that its important to remind our children that we trust them but we don’t trust their judgement  — yet. This statement seems to miss the truth about Trust. Unconditional trust involves trusting someone’s character, judgement, choices, decisions, etc.  Parents lack trust in their child because their whole personhood is immature! The way teens see others, ask questions, calculate situations, interpret, judge, and verify people, places and things is immature. We don’t just call into question their ability to judge; parents ought to call their whole verification processes into question. Parents’ trust of their children should remain highly conditional until they demonstrate mature behavior consistently. Until then, parents will be occasionally disappointed by our teens and adolescents and even college age children. 

Who do we trust fully and unconditionally? Your answer should focus on Three Persons - God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Everyone else was born under the [except Mary] yoke of original sin and susceptible to the influence of concupiscence. None of us are completely and unconditionally trustworthy in all situations and circumstances. But we can work on reversing the effects of that condition can’t we? Not one of us will ever have to verify the trust of the three Divine Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They will not disappoint or betray us — ever. Even though we betray God through personal sin, He does not turn on us. God’s response to our betrayals — past, present and future —  was His willingness to sacrifice His only son - Jesus. And Jesus’ yes was his response to His Father. Similar to human betrayals, Jesus’ sacrifice becomes our opportunity to receive God’s perfect love and grace. 

How do we learn to trust God? Trust begins naturally and gradually opens us up to pondering supernatural trust. We begin to better understand God’s Supernatural Trust by understanding the great blessings provided to us by natural trust. We begin to understand supernatural trust by meditation on the Crucifixion and Death of Jesus. He teaches us what betrayal feels like and how to respond. 

Only God is perfectly Trustworthy; only He is full of Truth, Integrity, Purity of Motive, Optimism, and authentic Love. God will never betray us; we can depend on that. That is what drives our Faith, Hope and Charity. God’s trust is the standard to use when learning and earning fellow human’s trust. God’s Trust created the world; it continues to support creation despite the original betrayal by Adam and Eve; the next betrayal by God’s beloved Jewish people, and our ongoing betrayal of God because of sin. He continues to love and forgive and show mercy — unconditionally — if we seek it. Let this be our example to live by. 

Questions to ponder: 

1. Pray for Trust. 
2. Have you ever been betrayed? What was your response? Have you forgiven them? Have you been able to re-learn how to trust that person? Why or why not? 
3. Have you ever betrayed someone? What were the consequences and effects on you and the person you betrayed? Have you sought forgiveness and mercy from them? 
4. What does trust mean to you? 
5. Did you disagree with anything in this article? What was it? 
6. Did you ever consider other types of betrayals before — other than within marriage? 
7. Have you been disappointed in your children or spouse or siblings? Explain how that differs from feelings of betrayal. 
8. List the opportunities provided by the betrayals and disappointments. Thank God for these opportunities. 
9. How does Sirach 15:15-17 pertain to any discussion about trust? 

Compassion or compassion?

by Linda Kracht 

Recently I attended a debate arguing for and against surrogate motherhood — the act of contractually renting out one’s womb for to-be-parents. It takes about a split second of thought to realize that this newest way to technologically intervene/assist in the making of babies and parents is highly exploitable by one or all parties involved including the lawyers writing new statutes; the surrogate mother and/or the contracting parent(s). While compassion is used to argue for and against the procedure, clearly one side uses the term too loosely. So, let’s explore the topic from the perspective of Compassion vs compassion. 

Let’s begin with the actual definition or meaning of compassion; it is the feeling that wells up within someone when confronted by another person’s suffering. But it’s more than just feeling sorry for someone’s plight. Compassion makes us want to help relieve the unfortunate sufferer’s condition. The virtue of compassion is too often interchanged with altruism or empathy but the three are stand alone virtues; altruism is the “kind, selfless behavior often prompted by feelings of compassion, though one can feel compassion without acting on it, and altruism isn’t always motivated by compassion.” And empathy is our ability to ‘feel’ someone’s pain because we identify with or understand another person’s situation or feelings. In reality all three can stray far from virtuosity if/when actions taken [including motives, thoughts, feelings or what we identify with] are impure, immoral or self-centered. Most of us felt compassion for the young, captured Jordanian pilot who was burned alive by ISIS but few of us could do anything about it. For some, the feelings boiled over into feelings of outrage prompting acts of revenge /retaliation towards others. All of these different reactions blurs compassion and altruism and the virtuous-ness of our feelings. 

So what does Compassion vs compassion look like? Jesus has given us many examples and instances of what Compassion actually looks like. Jesus wept before springing Lazarus from his rocky grave; he cured the little girl after consulting with the parents; and he blessed the prostitute (sinners) before exhorting her (them) to sin no more. In each instance, Jesus actions combined Compassion with altruism and empathy to show us how to love those who suffered beside him. He is our model for Compassion - with the capital C. 

Compassion - lower case — is the human rendition of Compassion; it often veers off-course as we let our human thoughts, feelings, judgements, and desires interfere and distract. Other times, it gets pretty close. Thinking right now of Saint Maximillian Klobe, who traded his life for another in Auschwitz; then there is Miep Gies who hid Anne Frank and her sister during the Nazi occupation of Amsterdam. Mother Teresa is also a great example of just Compassion for the poor and impoverished of the world.  

Did you know that feeling Compassion is good for us and good for those who suffer? For instance, social scientists tell us “when we feel compassion, our heart rate slows down, we secrete the bonding hormone oxytocin, and regions of the brain linked to empathy, caregiving, and feelings of pleasure light up, which facilitates the desire to approach and care for other people.” But it does even more than that. By being mindful of other people’s suffering, we actually “feel safer around them, facilitating even more compassion within us.” Compassion also makes it more likely that we will learn how to cooperate with the suffering people rather than work against them. Compassion makes us feel good. Compassionate acts activate pleasure circuits in our brain… Having compassion for others allows us to feel happier in both the long and short term. But we have to keep in mind that feelings of compassion are not designed for self-centeredness but ought to garner more self-less and other-centered behavior and thoughts. If we are not gaining other-centeredness, perhaps we are merely feigning compassion. The whole point of feeling Compassion is to help relieve suffering among those we love or don’t even know. Ironically, studies which study the effect of compassion on the compassionate person seem a bit mis-guided don’t you agree? Nevertheless, the results help explain how natural law works… the more humanely we act, the better we become — morally, spiritually, mentally, and physically. But that should not be the reason to be compassionate, is it? 

Why is the lack of compassion introduced as one of the primary arguments for codifying/allowing/regulating the surrogacy experience? The proponents for surrogacy are quick to argue that the rest of us lack compassion — for the surrogate, the contracting parties, the legal teams trying to make surrogacy fair and ethical, etc. The case made for the need to have compassion the evening of the debate went something like this: “I am as Catholic as anyone in this room … but I believe that it is unjust to allow adoption (which effectively removes a baby from its biological parent and forces the baby into a home absent of the biological parents) while the Church argues against the Surrogacy Experience which unites biological babies [born to surrogate mothers] with their biological parents. This is wholly unfair. Besides that, the technology is here to stay so let’s make it as legally binding and protective of both the surrogate and the biological parents as we can. That is my role in this whole thing. And yes, there are many potential problems with surrogacy so we have to make just laws which protect all the parties involved. And yes, let’s help prevent the exporting of the Surrogacy Experience to third world countries where results can get complicated very quickly. And yes, when someone introduces morality, I lose the argument. And yes, renting out one’s womb is akin to babysitting for someone’s kids for a short while, so why not get paid for the service?”

Here, here said the 17 surrogate mothers in the audience. Hold on there said the other attendees who may not have been able to cogently explain why the Surrogacy Experience is wrong but they just knew it to be wrong in their hearts.

Both sides had plenty of time to present their case and of course the lawyer arguing against surrogacy made the most logical and ethical sense in my opinion. But she lacked compassion according to the other side. Did she really? She introduced facts such as: all in-vitro fertilization procedures create hundreds if not thousands of fertilized embryos that are left in a sort of limbo. In this state, they are not given a chance at life — at least not yet.  Nor are they given an immediate death sentence — at least not until they have served out their utilitarian purpose which is to be ready and waiting if / when the parents decide they want more implantations with a surrogate mother at some future point in time — or not. The embryos in waiting lives are suspended within artificial, sterile and cold (cryogenic ) tubes awaiting a life or death sentence based on feelings.

Isn’t this alone an assault on the dignity of that new little person’s personhood? Where is the Compassion for their existence?  How can one call for compassion for the infertile couple or the surrogate mother willing to rent out her womb for hire while ignoring the plight of the embryo in limbo? What’s more, does anyone display Compassion, if they pick and choose what/who/when to be compassionate about the frozen persons lying in-state? If the contracting parents set up conditions for who they will/will not give life to, why should the rest of us feel any compassion for their condition of infertility? Why should we care about their inability to have any children when they assert their right to deliberately ignore or select the best of the frozen ones? The facts are that every case of surrogate placement creates tens if not hundreds of fertilized embryos that are misplaced, destroyed, or forgotten about. Did you know that most surrogates — the womb for hire nannies — are expected to sign a clause agreeing to having an elective abortion for a less than perfect pregnancy? For example, if at some point in time the fetus is determined to have Spina Bifida or some other anomaly, the surrogate mother agrees to have an abortion. Where is the Compassion in that decision and agreement? It is abundantly clear to me at least that the contracting parents expect to have a near perfect if not blue ribbon baby after paying $35,000 — $65,000 or they don’t want it and neither do they want anyone else to raise this little imperfect him or her. That is conditional love at best and why should we be forced to feel compassion about such a contradiction?

Shouldn’t the contracting parents be concerned about the health and wellbeing of the surrogate mother? Of course they are and that’s why they add clauses about not using drugs, alcohol, etc., during the pregnancy! In reality how does that clause prove concern for - the surrogate or the pregnancy outcome? What about the health of the contracting mother who has to endure super-doses of hormone treatments for purposes of harvesting an abundance of healthy eggs? The proponent for the Surrogacy Experience flippantly said that women naturally have more eggs than they can ever need or use — so pre-gathering eggs is never a problem. This man clearly fails to understand the female reproductive system. Women enter menopause in large part because she has run out of viable eggs — and sometimes that occurs prematurely creating all sorts of problems. When a baby girl is conceived, she will have several hundred million eggs but even at her birth, she will only have one or two million eggs left in her ovaries. By puberty, the number has dropped precipitously to just a few hundred thousand; and by her mid 40’s she will have few left. The egg follicles degenerate over time due to a process call atresia. Factors speeding up the rate of atresia include illness, disease, genetic factors, environmental, and more. So to presume that women have plenty [have more than they need] is asinine at best. Furthermore, the unnatural order of harvesting eggs is sure to put a wrench on the natural-pace of atresia.

And then there are the spiritual and psychological effects to be considered for both the mother and father to be who treat the collection of their sexual reproductive cells, the in-vitro fertilization technique, and the making of their baby as just one more utilitarian activity that will get them what they want! Both collection processes (masturbation for the male and egg harvesting from the mother) render the making of a baby into a commodity that can be bought and sold for a price. And then there is the surrogate mother’s spiritual and psychological makeup to consider. Her sense of compassion for the infertile couple is completely blurred by the exchange of money for her womb for hire services which was previously stated as ranging from $35,000 to $65,000 / baby.

My compassion runs short when called forth by those who profit from things such as the Surrogacy Experience. It makes perfect sense for advocates of surrogacy to use the compassion trump card now. The ordinary facts are too easily refuted. So, it makes sense to employee a battle plan that has worked for other social movements [ gay marriage, abortion, divorce]. This plan tries to engender compassion for the infertile couple/individual while also diminishing all objections to any technological methods used to assert a person’s right to parenthood. But when was that right [to parenthood] established and by whom - other than God? Lots of loaded words from the ‘other perspective’ show put us on alert that something else is going on other than lack of compassion. 

Furthermore, my compassion tank runs out of gas even faster when I hear a surrogate mother suggest:“I have no emotional ties what-so-ever with the baby. It is a business transaction”. Yet Saint John Paul ll reminds us that motherhood itself “implies from the beginning a special openness to the new person: and this is precisely the woman's 'part.' In this openness, in conceiving and giving birth to a child, the woman 'discovers herself through a sincere gift of self. '(MD §18) 

My compassion tank runs empty when hearing a mother whine about having to make a decision about the 5 embryos left in cryogenics after claiming she has enough live birth children. And that was my personal experience with the In-Vitro Experience. One day I had taken our daughter to speech therapy and in walks a mother with three precious young boys — a set of twins (about 4 years old) and a two year old. Yes, they were rambunctious little cowboys! As we talked, the mother revealed that they were the result of in-vitro fertilization. The twins were born after implanting 5/12 embryos — natural selection left her with twins rather than quintuplets. She added that the first pregnancy took a toll on her [that kind of fell on deaf ears since I was there with our seventh child; sorry that seems to be my lack of compassion talking again]. Anyway, the mother horrified me by complaining about the having to undergo a second pregnancy just to use up a few more embryos — although she did admit that she felt a bit guilty about having 7 in Limbo. Not wanting another set of twins, she specified that no more than 3 embryos be implanted knowing that if more than one survived the transplant, she would have elected to have a reduction pregnancy abortion. Lucky for her, only one embryo made it to term and his name was Jimmy. The mother went on to state that she did not want to have another pregnancy but was conflicted about the embryos still awaiting her decision. So she asked me what to do. Seeing my horrified expression and hearing no response, she said “Well - what do you expect me to do?” If she had asked my opinion 10 years ago, I could have given her many answers. That day, I was too dumbfounded to come up with anything remotely compassionate or sensible or ethical. 

We have arrived at a time in history whereby we create contradictions that have no ethical solutions.  We completely fail in Compassion at the right times. I thought of this song written in 1969; it is entitled In the Year 2525 which seems to describe much of modern day thinking. 

“In the year 2525, if man is still alive

If woman can survive, they may find

In the year 3535

Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie

Everything you think, do and say

Is in the pill you took today

In the year 4545

You ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes

You won't find a thing to chew

Nobody's gonna look at you

In the year 5555

Your arms hangin' limp at your sides

Your legs got nothin' to do

Some machine's doin' that for you

In the year 6565

Ain't gonna need no husband, won't need no wife

You'll pick your son, pick your daughter too

From the bottom of a long glass tube

In the year 7510

If God's a-coming, He oughta make it by then

Maybe He'll look around Himself and say

"Guess it's time for the Judgement Day"

In the year 8510

God is gonna shake His mighty head

He'll either say, "I'm pleased where man has been"

Or tear it down, and start again

In the year 9595

I'm kinda wonderin' if man is gonna be alive

He's taken everything this old earth can give

And he ain't put back nothing

Now it's been ten thousand years, man has cried a billion tears

For what, he never knew, now man's reign is through

But through eternal night, the twinkling of starlight

So very far away, maybe it's only yesterday