In my town outside a sign maker's shop there is a sign with a picture of Jesus with sacred heart rays signifying His boundless mercies and the words, "Jesus I Trust in You!". I strongly affirm this statement, but doubt that the meaning I ascribe to those words are the same as that of the business owner. Taken that the owner has also posted anti-abortion religious sentiment signs, I would imagine that their understanding of this phrase would follow a more conservative Christian narrative. That understanding would have Jesus as a literal deity that takes personal interest in that person's life and directs and intervenes in their life events through supernatural means. In this narrative, Jesus has a plan for the "perfection" and growth of each Christian and life events have been carefully orchestrated by Him to that end. What seems like hardship or tragedy has a purpose in our development or the development of others as part of a plan that may be opaque to us but will lead to the best of all possible ends if only we will, "trust in Him".
I was also reminded of this philosophy by a humorous animation entitled "God sending you a toxic person for character development" In the clip, God tells his angels to "send him another toxic one" and argues that "I know what I'm doing..this is for character development..send the toxic bitch". Many who take this view literally see all the tragedy and misfortune in the world as "part of God's plan", and part of the best of all possible worlds that God created and maintains.
The phrase, "the best of all possible worlds" comes from the German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Leibniz argued that, since God is perfectly good and all powerful, then God must have chosen to create the best possible world and what appears to be evil or suffering must ultimately serve a greater good. This belief was popular among Enlightenment-era rationalists. However, the philosopher Voltaire found the position both morally offensive and intellectually dishonest. He felt that in light of real-world suffering such as war, disease, and natural disasters, such an excuse was cruel comfort. He wrote a scathing satire to parody this philosophy with his novel, "Candide".
On the surface "Candide" looks like a simple adventure story, but it is really a systematic parody of philosophical optimism, especially the idea that we live in “the best of all possible worlds.”. This philosophy is the often repeated instruction of Candide's tutor, Dr. Panglos with the humour being that he repeats this phrase, insisting that everything is the best, in the worst of circumstances; being hanged and later surviving with syphilis, witnessing wars, massacres, rapes, and executions, along with standing amid earthquakes and public burnings. He never changes his beliefs, no matter how much evidence contradicts them. By this Voltaire parodies how philosophy and theology, when they become abstract systems and certainties divorced from experience, can become cruel in the face of human suffering. The protagonist, Candide who is eager to believe in Pangloss's teachings is also exposed in the novel to a series of disasters; brutal military violence, religious hypocrisy and persecution, slavery, natural catastrophe, betrayal, loss, poverty and exploitation, with each episode comically presented in it's extremity, emphasizing the absurdity and indefensibleness of this ideology.
Voltaire concludes his novel with his counter to this doctrine, the phrase, "We must cultivate our garden". This is his rejection of the urge to explain away injustice as "necessary", of the comfort that things are fine and going according to a divine plan, rather than acting to make them better. It is a call for engaged and modest human responsibility grounded in reality rather than abstract doctrine.
I should also note that the "best of all possible worlds" reasoning goes hand in glove with the "divine right of kings". According to that doctrine, If all that happens is only what is directed or allowed by God, then whoever has political power must have been installed by God and therefore represents His authority. The actions by this king must have been foretold and desirable by God and should then be legitimate. By this thinking, to resist or rebel against the king is to rebel against God. Many American evangelicals extend this doctrine to Donald Trump, stating that he has been put into power by God and that his actions are God's will.
When I was younger, I was a follower of this philosophy, in the form that, if God was both good and in control of all things, then everything he allows to occur must serve a greater good. I had read a book about praising God in all circumstances which was based on this thinking. It was not long after reading this book that I saw an opportunity to put it into practice. As the president of my Highschool ISCF (Interschool Christian Fellowship) I had convinced our staff advisor and the Vice Principle that a reformed "born again" convict and former bank robber should come share his testimony to the students of the school and, to the reinforcement of my belief that this idea had been from God, they agreed and a date for a senior assembly for this man's presentation was arranged. However, on the day of the assembly, as the chair filled gymnasium also filled with students, the speaker had yet to arrive. Our ICSF staff advisor called our club members together and asked sarcastically if anyone could tap dance, stating that the Principal had told him that he would not hold the students in the gym waiting on the speaker much longer. I failed to recognize the stress this put our staff advisor, how he had struck out his neck for this, and how this might effect his career if the assembly had to be cancelled. Instead, taking a page out of my book on praising God in all circumstances, I led the group in a prayer where I praised God for what was going on and insisting that God had control of the situation and that we should thank him even if we didn't understand what He was doing. Instead of acknowledging the staff advisors very real concern and fears, I had shamed him for his "lack of faith". At the very last possible moment, the speaker did arrive before the assembly was excused and the testimony went ahead. This circumstance justified in my eyes my "faith" in this understanding of God and in my conviction to adhere to this theology in the future despite reality and any evidence to the contrary.
Today, I affirm the statement "Jesus I Trust in You" quite differently, but no less emphatically. First century Rabbis like Jesus were synonymous with their teachings. I similarly see Jesus the person as inseparable from his teachings and recognize that in the Gospels the story given of his life epitomizes his 'Way'. So, for me, saying that I trust in Jesus means that I trust in the Way, the teachings of Jesus. This is what I put my trust in; a perspective of the world where what is paramount or "divinely sanctioned" is love of one's enemies, radical inclusion, non-violence, and a compassion that leads to active service such as the feeding of the hungry, visiting those sick and in prison, and welcoming the stranger. This perspective, instead of passively accepting injustice and suffering as part of God's will, calls us to do what we can to correct injustice and alleviate suffering. Like Candide's conclusion, it calls us to, "cultivate our garden", to take responsibility and engage with the world in light of an alignment and allegiance to what Jesus demonstrated was important and had the highest legitimacy; love, compassion, inclusion, and truth, among other things. In a world that seems to be dominated and led by greed, self interest, and lack of compassion and concern for the other, raising this standard may seem like raising a flag in a hurricane. Yet, even if the rest of the world rejects it and I convince not a soul to it's merits, or end up benefiting none of those I hoped to help, I believe this faith to have merit on it's own and to be worth any and all cost.
No comments:
Post a Comment