Living in the Great Fallacy
We live in the “Great Fallacy” era—an era that is known by dualism of sacredness vs. profanness. But why does this pesist? Great Fallacy persist because it is actually the Great Truth; life really is dualistic, and no attemp to argue otherwise can finally win the day. “Truth crushed to earth,” as we learned in grammar school, “will rise again.” It has become so embedded in the tradition that it never occurs to people to challenge it. Traditions die hard; anything that has lasted so long must be right.
But there is another explanation. Mush of the support for it comes because it is in the interest of those with power—whether political, economic, ecclesiastical, or all the three—to retain the power, free from challenge. To such persons, a religion that centers attention on “the realm of the spirit,” removed from the nitty-gritty of life, is a boon, while a religion that insists on dealing with the world of hunger, exploitation, and dehumanization is a bane. To believe, in the words of Juan Luis Segundo, that “the world should not be the way it is” is to issue a call for change, and those who benefit from “the world as it is” are going to feel threatened whenever they hear declarations of discontent.
Third world dictators want “the masses” insulated from notions of political or economic liberation, since such notions might challenge their power. They reward those within the church who preach a message to the poor that goes: Accept your lot, find “spiritual” liberation in the midst of physical hardship, don’t rock the boat, and God will reward you in the afterlife. When Chilean bishops challenge General Pinochet for violations of human rights, he responds that they should be in church praying.
It is not the only third world dictators who feel this way. Many conservative first world Christians likewise want religion to concentrate on “spiritual” things and stay away from challenges to political or economic injustice. To opt for “spirituality” means to them that things as they are need not be challenged, whereas to suggest that the love commandment means reexamining social structures that allow people to starve is, among other things, “unwarranted interference,” a distortion of the gospel, a reduction to mere politics, a replacement of Jesus Christ by Karl Marx, a humanistic rather than a theocentric faith. Many businessmen, for example, are upset by the Catholic bishops’ letter on the economy, because it suggest the need for changes in the capitalistic system of free enterprise.
“Opting for the status quo” might not be a bad thing if the status quo were only a little more just. Those who opt for it are going to be those who most directly benefit from it. But if we look realistically at the world, we find that the beneficiaries are few in number compared to the victims, who have every reason to seek change and even more reason to be suspicious of those who refuse to do so. Those who feel the urgency of change, who believe that “the world should not be the way it is” can never rest content with the Great Fallacy, they look for ways to overcome it.
We live in the “Great Fallacy” era—an era that is known by dualism of sacredness vs. profanness. But why does this pesist? Great Fallacy persist because it is actually the Great Truth; life really is dualistic, and no attemp to argue otherwise can finally win the day. “Truth crushed to earth,” as we learned in grammar school, “will rise again.” It has become so embedded in the tradition that it never occurs to people to challenge it. Traditions die hard; anything that has lasted so long must be right.
But there is another explanation. Mush of the support for it comes because it is in the interest of those with power—whether political, economic, ecclesiastical, or all the three—to retain the power, free from challenge. To such persons, a religion that centers attention on “the realm of the spirit,” removed from the nitty-gritty of life, is a boon, while a religion that insists on dealing with the world of hunger, exploitation, and dehumanization is a bane. To believe, in the words of Juan Luis Segundo, that “the world should not be the way it is” is to issue a call for change, and those who benefit from “the world as it is” are going to feel threatened whenever they hear declarations of discontent.
Third world dictators want “the masses” insulated from notions of political or economic liberation, since such notions might challenge their power. They reward those within the church who preach a message to the poor that goes: Accept your lot, find “spiritual” liberation in the midst of physical hardship, don’t rock the boat, and God will reward you in the afterlife. When Chilean bishops challenge General Pinochet for violations of human rights, he responds that they should be in church praying.
It is not the only third world dictators who feel this way. Many conservative first world Christians likewise want religion to concentrate on “spiritual” things and stay away from challenges to political or economic injustice. To opt for “spirituality” means to them that things as they are need not be challenged, whereas to suggest that the love commandment means reexamining social structures that allow people to starve is, among other things, “unwarranted interference,” a distortion of the gospel, a reduction to mere politics, a replacement of Jesus Christ by Karl Marx, a humanistic rather than a theocentric faith. Many businessmen, for example, are upset by the Catholic bishops’ letter on the economy, because it suggest the need for changes in the capitalistic system of free enterprise.
“Opting for the status quo” might not be a bad thing if the status quo were only a little more just. Those who opt for it are going to be those who most directly benefit from it. But if we look realistically at the world, we find that the beneficiaries are few in number compared to the victims, who have every reason to seek change and even more reason to be suspicious of those who refuse to do so. Those who feel the urgency of change, who believe that “the world should not be the way it is” can never rest content with the Great Fallacy, they look for ways to overcome it.
No comments:
Post a Comment