A typically thoughtful and honest post from "trad" Roman Catholic blogger "Bonald" at The Orthosphere has had me mulling over his arguments and implications.
As purpose and meaning are being, decade by decade, leached from public discourse and major institutions and the world (especially The West) descends into ever more explicit and aggressively imposed value-inversions -- is it really conceivable that such a situation is what we need for our spiritual well-being?
Maybe this is not so far-fetched, if I consider the specific instance of myself.
I grew-up into early adulthood in a much better world - more honest for sure, with a better appreciation of beauty; and a definite sense that the various social systems (law, academia, science, education) ought to be trying to perform these functions for the long-term benefit of everyone.
Yet the fact was that living in this better world, even when living by the highest standards of this better world; was grossly insufficient in terms of ultimate realities. To take my own field of science in the context of academia: in actual practice - in my own life - the fact that science and scientists in the UK sought truth and spoke truth; and that academia broadly supported this activity (or, at least, did not actively dis-courage it); had the effect of my life and work being a partial satisfaction of profound drives.
Because these profound impulses were partially satisfied in actual life, the fact that my life and world were ineradicably insufficient was for long concealed from me. There seemed to be (but actually was not) a valid hope that the inadequacies would be cured by some future change, some reform or improvement in the conduct of science and universities.
My life was Not satisfying, despite its many satisfactions; there was Not a genuine purpose to my life in context of humanity, nor adequate meaning to my work in context of reality - because I believed (in line with my culture, the Western Civilization I inhabited) no purpose or meaning to reality-itself. The universe was a mixture of blind-determinism and randomness, and was utterly indifferent to humanity in general, and me-personally in particular.
To summarize; the better world of my youth was At Its Best an only-partially-effective mere-palliative for a fundamentally inadequate world-view and a fundamentally meaningless public world. Yet the palliative was, for many years, good enough to prevent me seeking for anything fundamentally better.
Therefore, I did not acknowledge the reality of a God, a Creator, until my late 40s, and did not become a Christian until I was nearly 50.
And why did this truth eventually dawn upon me, after so long in this world? Probably the main proximate stimulus was the corruption of science and academia, such that their inadequacy was At Last forced upon me.
In other words, it was the world getting worse that made me realize the nature of the world, and led eventually to a grateful acceptance of Jesus Christ's offer of everlasting resurrected Heavenly Life.
My point is that it is at least conceivable that in some broad and general sense, the same may apply to many other people; and it may be that many people are led away from mainstream materialistic atheism and to conversion only by the worsening of the world, and the removal of partial-palliatives.
It may be that - in some average sense - a worse and worsening world may be the best hope for many or most people.
Not that God wants a worse world for us! Of course not. God desires the best world for us, and our highest happiness in this (inevitably flawed and corrupt) mortal life - followed by the choice of immortal resurrection into Heaven. God desires us to be born-into and develop and be nurtured, in a context of loving relationships and Godly ideals.
But Western humanity won't do that, does not even want that, and (increasingly) chooses the opposite; and therefore God (as creator) is able-to and does make the best of the evil choices of sinful Men.
For me, the decline of The West made me recognize that - even at its best - our secular civilization was not merely inadequate, but actively harmful. My own strong distress that the top-down imposition of corruption and lies on the once relatively 'pure' worlds of academia and science, actually functioned as a trigger to deeper reflection and a fundamental reorientation in what I desired for myself and others.
It seems that I actually, in practice, in real-life - actually Needed a worse this-world to be induced to desire a better next-world; and maybe there are (in very different ways, mostly) many other people in a similar situation? People who will not be cured of this-worldly materialism, except by the withdrawal of this-worldly gratifications?
It is not, of itself, an improvement in the world that real science has been (all-but) eradicated from professional "science"; and that the activity is now reduced to careerist bureaucrats striving to impress their official superiors rather than seek the truth; seeking funding rather than answers to real problems; publishing deliberately misleading deniable-dishonesties rather than the truth as they see it...
None of this is Good; and it comes from the short-termist expediency of modern Godless Men. yet from it; God can lead some Men (me, for instance) to recognize that even science at its best and noblest, is a radically-incomplete and dangerously-distorted human endeavor when made primary; an activity that cannot satisfy the needs of our soul; and a discourse which does not deserve to be the basis of a Man's mortal life.
Therefore, perhaps this "sorrowful" world that Bonald well-describes, may be God's way of making the best of modern Man's innate and accumulated evil - and maybe, therefore, this actual world does what is most necessary in ways that are actually more effective than the actually-available alternatives?
8 comments:
As a non- scientist I always thought that the ideal scientist was one who, inspired by Truth itself, labored away confident that worldly glory, if it came, would result from other, equally dedicated scientists who would sooner or later check his math and confirm that he had been right all along. You seem to suggest that this was the reality or that some trace of this spirit was still evident into our own time. Of course this ideal presupposes an already existing commitment to Truth logically prior to the work of the scientist. It seems that this spirit among scientists (I trust it was once a real presence) is now almost completely absent, certainly at the institutional level and, since the individuals are formed by the institutions, more and more among individual scientists. And since science is for most people the absolute standard of trustworthiness (“Follow the Science!”) this discovery dumps us, like some cheap carnival ride, right back out onto the midway again.
“Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.”
Well this is the truth of the matter. And the truth, regardless of how cold it may seem, is better than a fool’s paradise.
@AG - Yes, that "ideal scientist" (and scientific community) was substantially the reality in the UK even as late as the early and middle 1980s - and it was through the 1990s that things began to collapse with extraordinary rapidity.
By my understanding, this spirit was an excellent achievement and the foundation of Western civilization.
But it was never enough; and this major achievement encouraged a lot of people (not only scientists themselves) to lose sight of the ultimate and fundamental realities of the human condition and beyond. It was, indeed, the cause of its own downfall.
"to recognize that even science at its best and noblest, is a radically-incomplete and dangerously-distorted human endeavor when made primary; an activity that cannot satisfy the needs of our soul; and a discourse which does not deserve to be the basis of a Man's mortal life."
The Greek monk and now Saint Paisios the Athonite had a real way with words and could convey with immediacy and humor very deep truths in an almost Zen-like and jolting sort of way. This discussion of the inadequacy of science and need for God put me in mind of the following (to me) memorable quip of St. Paisios on this topic. It appears as an epigraph at the beginning of the book Precious Vessels about modern Greek Orthodox elders:
"If one studies a great deal in order to acquire knowledge and to teach others, without living the things he teaches, he does no more than fill his head with hot air. At most he will manage to ascend to the moon using machines. The goal of the Christian is to rise to God without machines."
I think there is some validity to this idea, that for some of us this sort of disillusionment is ultimately good for us. It's occurred to me in the past that I have certain contrarian instincts (which deep down probably have less to do with being a bold independent thinker than with wishing to think myself special and not confront my own mediocrity) that would have led me into error had I lived in an orthodox society. As it is, I had not realized until a couple of years ago how much I depended on the assurance of being part of a religious community that would outlast me (a visible one on Earth, that is, not just faith in the saints in heaven), until that assurance was taken away.
However, when meditating on God's loving providence in prayer, and the idea comes to me that what's happening is ultimately for the best (at least for some of us), I have an intuition to reject it, a sense that I have overstepped what God is telling me and am supplementing with my own speculation. I have a strong sense that I should stop with "God knows and God has ordained; therefore, this is how it's supposed to be." I ask for the grace to make the best spiritual use of it, and I have a sense that this was the right thing to ask.
All that is vague and without supporting argument, but when I'm praying I'm trying to be open to God's messages rather than closing up in my own reasoning. I do have reasons to be suspicious of spiritual counterfactuals, but I'll leave that for another time.
@Bonald " the idea comes to me that what's happening is ultimately for the best (at least for some of us), I have an intuition to reject it,"
I think I agree. Whatever happens due to sin - especially such extreme sin on such a massive scale - can't really be for "the best".
But I also think that - so long as we are sustained alive - "whatever is happening" will always be "good enough" - which should be sufficient.
Dear Mr. Charlton,
I've been reading your work for some time. It started with your articles in Medical Hypotheses and continued with your blog.
You write:
"For me, the decline of The West made me recognize that - even at its best - our secular civilization was not merely inadequate, but actively harmful. My own strong distress that the top-down imposition of corruption and lies on the once relatively 'pure' worlds of academia and science, actually functioned as a trigger to deeper reflection and a fundamental reorientation in what I desired for myself and others.
It seems that I actually, in practice, in real-life - actually Needed a worse this-world to be induced to desire a better next-world; and maybe there are (in very different ways, mostly) many other people in a similar situation? People who will not be cured of this-worldly materialism, except by the withdrawal of this-worldly gratifications?"
I'm one of these people. I'm in academia, but have recently been drawn to the religious and spiritual sphere, much due to the current state of society.
I cry thinking of and looking at what society has become. Like you once did, I've gradually come to the realisation that secularism is wreaking havoc on our worlds.
What advice would you offer a young man? I've been trying to affect things in a positive direction through the academic/scientific path, but it feels futile against the enormous tides of destruction.
Thank you for all your informative, original, and thought-generating writings! You are one of a kind.
@Eirik - Thanks.
The only advice I could offer to a young man would be of a kind he would not want to hear; and that is the kind of spiritual/ romantic Christian stuff I write about in several blog posts per week.
It is easy to tell young people what Not to do; but that is not a basis for living. The opposite is Much harder.
People simply must find strong, positive, inner motivations in order to overcome (in their souls) a whole world of evil.
I don't think any genuinely good advice can nowadays be generic; the only good advice would come from someone who knew and genuinely cared for a particular person, and could suggest a very specific path for him; taking into account his motivations, abilities and situation.
Thank you, Bruce!
Post a Comment