Posted on 02/10/2007 4:24:02 PM PST by NYer
No single factor is invoked more often in people turning away from God, or in their failing to believe in Him, than the occurrence --- note that I do not say "existence" --- of evil, especially as it manifests itself in suffering. The occurrence of evil appears incompatible with God, or at least a coherent conception of God as both (and simultaneously) absolutely good and absolutely powerful. That God and evil should coexist appears logically contradictory and ontologically inconsistent. The one is the abrogation of the other. The existence of God, it is argued, precludes the existence of evil and the existence of evil precludes the existence of God. While we can readily adduce empirical evidence, that is to say, tangible instances of evil to discredit the existence of God, the availability of evidence to corroborate the existence of God, on the other hand, is so exiguous that even when such instances are invoked they are deemed extraordinary events in the affairs of men, indeed, events so far from commonplace that we deem them miraculous, which is to say, inexplicable interventions conditionally attributed to God in the absence of explanations that may yet be forthcoming. Whether or not this is a sufficient, if concise, summary, the general implication is clear. The evidence of evil is far more overwhelming than the evidence of God. If preponderance is the criterion to which we appeal, God loses.
Evil comes as a scandal to the believer who asks, "How can this be, given the existence of God?"
To the disbeliever no such scandal arises, only scorn for the believer who is left in perplexity, unable to deny the existence of God on the one hand while equally unable to deny the occurrence of evil on the other.
How did we come to such a state of affairs? We appear to be consigned to either nihilistic resignation in the one camp, or an unreasoned and therefore untenable affirmation in the other --- so both are damned to perplexity.
Neither has satisfactorily answered the question implicit within every occurrence of evil: "Why?"
The sources and causes of disbelief are, of course, many, ranging from competing religious traditions with conflicting and contradictory conceptions of God, to the violence that has historically erupted between them, subsequently scandalizing the impulse of religion itself together with the notion of God --- at Whose behest, it is held, or at least in Whose name, atrocities distinctly religious in character were committed.
A more recent phenomenon to which we can appeal --- and with which we have become intimately acquainted --- is the rise of what we might call Militant Secularism. Secularism, however, is not the cause of disbelief as much as a response to it. But in this case we must in all honesty probe more deeply and ask why it is that secularism, this manifestation of disbelief, is making such deep inroads upon religion, especially the practice of religion.
Secularism, we must understand, is not a repudiation of the existence of God, but a programmatic dismissal of God (if such exists, and secularism neither affirms nor denies this existence) as legitimately pertaining to the public and even the private affairs of men. Secularism does not dispute the existence of God; it merely maintains Him to be either no longer relevant, or more troubling still, the very cause itself of much of the evil in the world as we increasingly witness ever escalating sectarian discord and violence in the name of religion, most notably --- and most violently --- in Islam. This phenomenon has caused us to re-examine our own religious antecedents in the history of Christianity.
It is important to understand, however, that in this process of reexamination a good deal of revisionism unquestionably occurs --- not unlike the sort practiced within erstwhile Communist societies which not so much politically sanitized history as programmatically distorted it to better accord with socialist ideals --- despite the exploitation of authenticity in the narrative. Entire histories were re-written, revised, expunged, and politically edited until an "acceptable" version emerged. We still see evidence of this in Communist China, no less than in the present drafting of the Constitution of the modern European Economic Union, both of which, albeit in different ways, attempt to expunge God in general and Christianity in particular from its historical antecedents. The result, of course, is not so much history as a disinterested chronicle of events, as it is an explication of events through the instrument of policy ...
Secularists have embarked on a similar venture, leafing through the annals of the history of Christianity with a careful eye to egregious defections from it (as every sin, every injustice, is not a manifestation of, but rather a defection from the teaching of Christ and the Church) emphasizing the abuses that occurred within the Church and the evils done by individuals and even nations spuriously invoking the name of the Church --- the Church which explicitly repudiates and vehemently denounces the political and social crimes committed in its name to the material ends of nations or the unbridled avarice of individuals. That there were clerics and even popes complicit with these enormities, is an indictment of the individual clerics, however many, but in no way an indictment of the Church from whose teachings and dogma they defected.
While eager to emphasize these defections from the Church, secular revisionists have been no less assiduous in programmatically expunging the inestimable good that Christianity has brought to the world --- and wrought within it. Pope Alexander VI, one of the Borgia Popes of the 15th century, notoriously corrupt, dissolute, and wicked by any standard is more likely to be invoked by secularists as an example of Catholic religious influence than Saint Francis of Assisi, together with, say, Tomás de Torquemada of the Spanish Inquisition rather than Mother Teresa of Calcutta. It is, in short, a carefully selective and meticulously culled history held to be paradigmatic of Catholicism and its overwhelmingly deleterious influence on the world. One of the more popular --- and perhaps prototypical --- examples cited is the lamented destruction of the native Aztec religion and culture by the Catholic Spanish conquistadors. That it was a religion and culture centered on human sacrifice upon a grand scale1 is, apparently, of no consequence to enlightened secularists --- and the Church which abolished this evil practice was guilty of a greater evil still, that of cultural imperialism, the supplanting of a native religion and culture centered on human sacrifice with a culture and religion centered on loving God and man. In reality, however, the secularist denounces both --- but on distinctly unequal terms: one for ritually exterminating life in the name of religion, the other for abolishing, in the name of religion, the culture that ritually exterminates life. That one is a religion of death and one a religion of life is immaterial. If the same glass can hold poison or water, break the glass ... and drink neither.
There is only one solution for the secularist: abolish God and you abolish both.
Such an approach is not without precedent. Marxism and Communism invoked the same solution to the problem of economic inequality. Belief in God and the exercise of religion were "the opiate of the masses" inasmuch as they inured man to his suffering rather than galvanizing the proletariat to revolt in a class conflict against the bourgeoisie. Inasmuch as God and religion were complicit in the suffering of the proletarian masses by proffering spiritual rewards in place of material
incentives, both must be abolished as impediments to the realization of the Socialist ideal.
Criminalize God and you exonerate man. Lay the root of evil (in this case, the suffering of the proletariat) at the foot of God, proceed to abolish God, and you abolish the root of the evil.
Such a programme failed to work for Communist secularists ... and it will fail to work for other militant secularists as well, and It will fail to work for the same reason: God is not the cause of evil.
Our original question asked why secularism is making such deep inroads upon religion --- and succeeding. It is, at least in large part, because we have failed to coherently articulate the genesis of evil. We know the narrative, but we have failed to grasp the ineluctable implications. As Saint Paul tells us, "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child. But, when I became a man, I put away the things of a child."2 We have read, as from a primer, the account of the genesis of evil as though depicted in pastels that stir our imagination, the imagination of children --- and have failed to follow the sad but invincible logic inescapable within it. Let us, then, begin.
Tomorrow - Part II
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Job 40:1-4
The LORD said to Job: Will the one who contends with the Almighty correct him? Let him who accuses God answer him!
Then Job answered the LORD : I am unworthy—how can I reply to you? I put my hand over my mouth.
I submit the entire books of Job and Ecclesiastes for review.
I would assert almost the opposite. Good, independent of faith through Christ is parlayed into evil by the Adversary. An incredible temptation exists to make order out of chaos or build worldly systems, cosmic systems, which are very good for the short term, but whenever they are made without faith through Christ, they are ultimately good for nothingness.
IMHO, human good in worldly thinking tends to be invoked far more often, on a daily, hourly, if not continual basis by many believers and unbelievers alike.
The occurence of good, as in human or worldly good, void of divine good by faith in Christ, is IMHO a much greater temptation to man turning away from God than the occurrence of evil. Evil in many fashions tends to remind people of the law, whereas human good deceptively fools the carnal Christian into thinking they are performing good works for God when they are simply living by worldly standards.
It might also be noted that God loves order being made from chaos, i.e. the world, but only when performed through faith in Christ.
Buuuuuummmmmmmp.
St Paul had me pegged. I was very angry with God when my Dad died at 42 leaving 5 kids. I was even angrier when the youngest of the 5 was killed in a car accident. Then I became a man with a well developed set of beliefs and a never ending thanks for our God who gave us the greatest gift of all, freedom.
Absolutely!!! So often when I point to the 'feminist and/or homosexual' movements as being the source of problems in contemporary society, people have responded with "Get with it! This is the 21st century" - like this was a radically new concept. Ecclesiastes reminds us that "everything old is new again. There is nothing new under the sun". Job, on the other hand, helped me get through an 11 year stretch of difficult times. No matter how bad things were, Job had it far worse.
Thanks for the reminder!
A very positive approach to life. He also gave you a Dad for a portion of your life. So many children today, live with single moms. They have never known what it is like to have a father.
Good point. Anyone who tries to serve Jesus outside the Church He established generates chaos.
***********
Good article. Mention in passing either the Devil or evil and see what happens to conversation.
Despite the stupid assumption that G-d would not allow evil to exist, the fact is quite the opposite: the existence of G-d is absolutely essential to have evil.
Only G-d can define objective good and objective evil. Atheists find themselves in the predicament of defining for themselves "objective" evil in a world they hold is meaningless, when in a meaningless world objective evil could not exist.
Many people might cringe at the idea of G-d being responsible for evil, but G-d is responsible for everything. He did not have to create the universe but did so. By bringing into existence something other than himself G-d made evil possible. According to the midrash, already before Adam had even been created the earth rebelled against G-d when he commanded it to bring forth `eitz-peri `oseh peri ("trees of fruit bearing fruit") and it instead brought forth `eitz `oseh peri ("trees bearing fruit"). For this disobedience the ground was cursed at the expulsion of Adam. The same ground later tried to aid Cain by swallowing the blood of his slain brother Abel. There is also a midrash about the creation of the sun and moon in which the moon protested that "it is impossible for two monarchs to wear the same crown," for which it was reduced.
What all this means is that, since G-d cannot reproduce Himself, His creating something other than Himself is ultimately responsible for the existence of evil. Many chr*stians try to deal with this by positing that G-d created a perfect, sinless universe into which sin was introduced by Satan. This makes Satan a co-creator of the world, G-d forbid. But (contrary to chr*stianity), Satan is not a fallen angel but is merely doing his various jobs assigned to him by HaShem (as is illustrated in the Book of Job). Furthermore we know that G-d Himself created both the good and evil inclinations and placed them within Adam (this is the meaning of the two yods in Genesis 2:7 (Vayiytzer HaShem 'Eloqim 'et-Ha'Adam). Each of the two Yods is a reference to each of man's two yeitzers (inclinations)--good and evil. Add on top of this that the first human sins were committed by the perfect, unfallen Adam and Eve and it becomes obvious that G-d created the possibility of sin. Then on top of all that is the fact that everything that has ever happened or ever will happen is governed by G-d's Providence.
This we see that G-d is the sole creator of the world, not the "co-creator" with Satan, G-d forbid.
Atheists are stupid when they look at mass murder and other atrocities and then, to answer some perverted and self-defined sense of "justice," remove HaShem from the world. They are left with all the mass murders but they can no longer be said to be objectively evil.
Idiots.
**********
Christians don't believe that Satan is co-creator either.
They certainly believe that G-d created a perfect, sinless universe until Satan came along and ruined everything.
There's a small denomination called "Two Seed in the Spirit Predestinarian Baptists" who do indeed believe that only the good inclination comes from G-d, while the evil inclination comes from Satan.
*************
Well, Satan=Bad, no doubt about it. That's not the same as being a co-creator, though.
Satan does his job(s). Chr*stians think he's a "fallen" angel who "rebelled" against G-d and mucked everything up. They even call him "the 'gxd' of this world." He is not a fallen angel, he is not in rebellion, and he never was "gxd" of anything. G-d is in control of everything, including evil.
The dualistic chr*stian view of a "good gxd" and "evil gxd" at war with one another is a violation of actual Monotheism.
This is not a correct description of Christian belief, it is like a caricature of Christian belief.
G-d is in control of everything
Yes, God is in control of everything.
***********
I'm not sure how you came to this understanding, but it is not correct. We Catholics have never considered Satan to be "a" god or God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.