I was walking alone on a long road in the middle of nowhere. I had an ice-cream cone that had no ice-cream in it. But I knew that if I kept walking, an ice-cream parlor would be ahead somewhere in the distance, eventually. Then I walked past a little girl. She was less fortunate than I—this I knew. She asked me for my ice-cream cone. I said, “Of course I'd give you my ice-cream cone, but see? There’s no ice-cream in it.” I was relieved to have such a great excuse: I didn’t want to give up my future ice-cream cone, but I didn't want to have to feel selfish either. But the little girl said, “Yes, but if I keep walking, there’s surely a place ahead where I can get ice-cream for the cone.” I was bested by the truth. She won. And I gave her the cone.
Moral of the story: Don’t hide behind convenient mundane truth in order to obfuscate inconvenient universal truth.
The Russians have two words for truth: pravda (well known because of the newspaper of that name), which refers to factual truth. But there’s also istina, which is more like “universal, essential truth.” The latter has a very strong spiritual and/or religious connotation. It has the connotation of something greater, something possibly unattainable or inconceivable. Something that can’t be proven; something that just is.
I watched a clip yesterday of Christine O’Donnell (the born-again Tea Partier recently nominated to be the Republican senatorial candidate for Delaware) on Politically Incorrect, Bill Maher’s show from back in the day. In the episode, O’Donnell goes on and on about how there’s never, ever any reason to not tell the truth.
Eddie Izzard was on the show too, and he challenged her by asking what she thought of him. She responded by saying she loved his lipstick.
It’s a perfect example of what I’m talking about here. Like I tried to do in my ice-cream dream, O’Donnell, with this lipstick comment, was hiding behind a little truth to obscure the big truth: As a born-again, she thought he was a sinner and that his transvestite lifestyle was an affront to God. (The way I see it is, if you can insult God, he isn't all that great to begin with, but I digress.)
Izzard posed another challenge to O’Donnell. He asked her to imagine it was World War II and she was hiding Jews in her home. Then Hitler comes to the door and asked her if there are any Jews in her home. “Would you lie then,” he asked.
She said she would not. She said that God would help her find a way to tell the truth, and to help her through this difficult situation. (The link above is only of part 2 of the episode; YouTube has parts 1, 2, and 3 of the episode, if you really want to get yourself worked up.)
Besides the lipstick, O’Donnell is hiding behind another truth: That she is morally sound because she follows the 10 Commandments (which can be disputed, but that’s the basic argument, in her perspective).
It seems to me that many born-agains hide behind Biblical morality, all the while having beliefs, thoughts, and words that would make Jesus weep.
Maybe this is all very obvious to say, but I can't get over it. And all I can say is that I’m extremely curious to see how this is all going to play out in November. And that if you’re a Democratic please, please vote.
I'm also really curious to hear your thoughts on truth and morality. Please post!
it's interesting, because in a way it's a question of absolutes. The Truth, the spiritual truth that is represented by istina is a very attractive idea (if it can be called an idea) to me, but I think part of the appeal is its absoluteness. There's something about black and white that is so attractive, at least to me, cuz it absolves me of my human responsibility to weigh things and make a choice, a decision which is never 100% certain. I think this appeal is at the basis of religious feeling too, for better or worse. This born-again woman is trying (or claiming to) live in that absolute state-- telling Only the truth. But I think Izzard's examples demonstrate how difficult that is to do, and perhaps even morally questionable. It is ironic that the desire to live by the truth can lead to such fanaticism (if we were to believe in the good faith of a born-again person).
ReplyDeleteYet, for me the most interesting part is your dream Wendy. The child is a perfect symbol of our search for absoluteness, because I think this thirst comes from infancy, from the complete vulnerability with which we are born (haha guess where my head is at!) and the complete and absolute care and attention that we need. I think what we are seeking is not necessarily absolute Truth but absolute Love and it's natural to confuse the two. The dream says it all so poetically, as is the wonder of dreams. Thank you for this lovely complex post!
Hey, how did you get two other posts up here before I found them?
ReplyDeleteDon't worry, it's a rhetorical question. I do not want to induce any angst, now that you have been discovered by a fireman:)
Being compulsively analytical, I see threads of personal relevancy and psychological significance in all three post, personal to you that is. In "Get Ove it Already: On Vonnegut's Razor and Going Public" you mention "leading lives overwhelmed by the anxiety of limitless choice". I think that is a brilliant insight. And it does make me a little nervous. But, being an old fucker, I can harken back to a pre digitized, simpler time (however back then I too did acid; twice! dispite the fact that the first experience sucked).
In "Truths' Mothers Are Bigger Than Other Truths..." Your contempt - a comtempt I share -for religious fundamentalism is apparent. I have always believed that fundamental religious belief is another form of rule mindedness, an attempt to reduce the anxiety of limitless choice. If one knows the Truth it makes life appear simpler.
A few years ago I discovered the mathmatics of Mandlebot. Mandlebot was one of the first mathmaticians to use computers to create moving images generated by itterations of graphical formulas with imaginary numbers (Ask Benoit). The resulting display resembled patterns from nature: clouds, shorelines, tree branches, the shape of biology. I found it fascinating. There exists a mathmatical formula for the chaotic patterns of nature. Amazing!
Recently I saw Mandlebot speaking on TED. Now in his eighties, he has a deligful acceptance of the vagaries of life one seems to develope as we age. It's kind of an "oh what the fuck" attitude we get as our motality looms ever larger. Mandlebot gave an overview of his mathmatical discoveries, smiled at the camera, and said: "it's too bad there is not much use for this".
"I don't know" is a courageous answer Wendy.
Love,
Charlie
@charlie: Thanks for reading!
ReplyDeleteAs someone who's known a time a fewer choices and today's world of seemingly endless ones, what do you think? Is more choice worth the mindfuck? I was kind of sentient before personal computers, the Internet, and cell phones, and I remember it as a simpler time . . . but then again, I was a kid. I'd love to know more about how you feel about the difference in quality of life.
Kierkegaard said, "Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom." I say amen to that. But I do believe we can learn to choose from a multitude, and to be confident in those choices, and not to look back. That's the next step in our collective-consciousness's evolution, perhaps.
I have watched the Mandelbrot TED talk of fractals. You're right, he was on the one hand acknowledging how profound and mysterious it was, and on the other hand sort of shrugging his shoulders about how knowledge of this awesome thing didn't really matter much anyway, in the grand scheme of things.
And I feel you're right that the better our grasp on our own mortality, the freer and looser we become. I'll probably address a future post to that very subject.
I subscribed to your blogs. Looking forward to reading. (And send me a chapter and an outline of you know what!)
I consider myself a "born-again" but not a fundamentalist, though I believe enough of the stuff that people think is stupid to make me fundamentalist-adjacent, I guess. Believing in some concrete truth doesn't make life all that easier, believe me. Also, I have gay friends--even gay Christian friends, and there are many born-agains who stand proudly with their gay brothers and sisters in Christ. Really.
ReplyDeleteI think often about what you said as a parenthetical, that many religious people (not just Christians) exert a lot of energy trying to protect the Almighty God from getting His feelings hurt, which is pretty ridiculous, if you really believe He's almighty. It's us frail mortals that need to be defended from insults and meanness. It griefs me that a lot of that comes from Christians but most Christians I know are loving, generous people, and I don't forget that either. People like my Mom, who joins freecycle just so she can drive 30 miles to pick up some appliance that she knows some needy person needs. People like her don't make headlines the way people who burn the Quran do, or who picket people's funerals with hateful signs do, but just as most Muslims aren't terrorists, most Christians aren't hatemongers either. Really.
The vanity of goodness is a neat little trap that many religious people fall into. And not just religious people, either, I mean, is there anything harder to do than not judge other people? I do it hourly. I'd do it minutely except I'm so wrapped up in my own head most of the time I can't think about other people long enough to judge them.
Anyway, O'Donnell is clearly more interested in her own "goodness", the letter of the law, than the spirit of the law. I would lie to save the Jews in my basement. The idea that God would be upset by this lie is unfathomable to me. To not lie is putting your own moral scorecard over the lives of other people. It's selfish, and the antithesis of what I've always been taught to be my mission as a Christian on Earth--to love others, to be a servant of others, to put their needs first. Really.
There's a great discussion about freedom vs. the law in the Book of Romans in the New Testament, an its one that Christians struggle with--with it, themselves, and others. I don't truck with those that think it's their job to make sure the world is clean when Jesus shows up, but I so struggle with my own habits, of being my worst self and knowing that God will forgive me, instead of striving to be good. It makes me sad when I think of the pettiness I'm capable, and that people who know I'm a Christian see it in me they think, "yeah, I knew that Christian stuff was bullshit." And there's my vanity again. :)
Keep writing, your brain is a very interesting place to visit!
Your friend, Christine
@Christine: I'm so glad you took the time to share all this! As I mentioned before, you were the inspiration for my Facebook-post question about mystical/religious experience, because I noticed on your Facebook profile that you consider yourself a "Christian Lefty"--and it struck me that in all the years I knew you (growing up with you in grade, middle, and high school, through Blue Birds and Brownies and maybe a tiny bit of Girl Scouts even), I kind of vaguely knew that you and your family went to church on Sunday, and that you were very very good people, but that you never seemed to judge the behavior of other people, you didn't seem to take yourselves too seriously, and you never talked about God, even though God seemed to be a big part of your personal lives.
ReplyDeleteI'm very moved by that. Even as a child, I thought, "They understand something that I don't."
And when I was reminded of your spirituality by your Facebook profile, I thought, "I bet Christine has had at least one very powerful experience that she can't explain."
I want to apologize for using the term "born-again" when what I really meant was something more like "morally violent Christians who think the government should rule according to their interpretation of the Bible." I admit, I've been lumping those two things together in my brain, and that was wrong. I'm really sorry for that. Is there a term I can use that's more accurate? (Come on, help me judge and categorize people! Just kidding.)
And you're dead-on, of course, that religious people aren't the only ones guilty of judging others and trying to impose their own stricter morality on others. It's just that the most vociferous outrage seems to come from the most hypocritical Christians. It's the hypocrisy that gets to me, not the imperfection.
Would you link me to the discussion about freedom vs the law in the Book of Romans? I'd love to read it.
And by the way, wow. I mean, I knew you were awesome, and that YOUR brain is an interesting place to visit, but I just want to read your post over and over again. It's so well-written, humble, clear, and thoughtful.
I'm really super happy that you're sharing this stuff about your religion and your personal beliefs about morality here. I've always admired your perspective and your intelligence, and as a nonreligious nonatheist, I have like a million questions for Christians. But because I'm not a Christian, I don't have many practicing Christians in my life. And of those that I've met, they've not been able to answer my questions without feeling defensive (even though that's totally not where I'm coming from, it's really just pure curiosity) or just incapable of giving me answers that make sense to me.
And by the way, just for the record, in case you're wondering, I *don't* think that Christian stuff is bullshit. I just frankly haven't known many Christians who both 1) come even remotely close to practicing what they preach, and 2) don't make me feel like I have to talk on eggshells about my own beliefs and morality. (Awkward!!!)
I don't feel like that with you, and I love your curious, open mind, as I always have, and I feel like you appreciate mine...so I hope we will continue this and other discussions about these topics.
Christine! So many fond silly memories being verbally creative with you and Jen! Do you still have that drawing we did in government, of James Madison being a Constitution nerd?
xoxowendy
P.S.: "Adultery, John."
Wendy--I recently (and I mean, in the last few years) found one of those cartoons we did. I should see if I still have it. It was so much fun being your friend. I remember having really deep conversations with you--about dreams and aliens and stuff, and then all the goofy stuff too :)
ReplyDeleteI don't know what to call those angry Christians. I hesitate to say they aren't Christians, because that's between them and God. Though the irony that the Bible says more about not judging others than it does about, say, homosexuality is not lost on me.
If you ever have questions about Christianity, feel free to ask me--I don't pretend to have all the answers. I've always wrestled with nothingness, the fear that there is no God. When I encounter Christians who say they've never doubted God, even in very dark times, it surprises me, because some pretty lame things have caused me to say "Oh Lord, why have You forsaken me?!" And the idea of infinity weirds me out too. The idea of not existing after death terrifies me, but so does the idea of living forever! I'm so hard to please ;)
The part of Romans I was talking about is here http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+3&version=NIV starting around verse 21 and also here: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+14&version=NIV
Basically, Paul is writing about what it means to be saved by faith. What does that do to the law? If I'm saved merely by my belief, than do my actions matter? A lot of topics come up, about vanity--about using your good deeds to boast about yourself, etc. Chapter 14 was important to me when I went to a Christian University. I went to school with (some) people who thought dancing was wrong, drinking was wrong. I disagree, but chapter 14 is basically Paul saying "Don't be a dick about it." :D
One of my favorite portions of the Bible is here http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2012&version=NIV Romans 12:9-21. It's how I try to live.
Love always, Christine
Christine, I'm reading Romans now. Book 3 verse 5 made me laugh out loud. It's like he's saying, "So when I screw up, it's beneficial, because I'm actually making God look really good in comparison!"
ReplyDeleteAm I reading that right? Is there humor in the Bible?!
I've always latched on to the fact that in ancient Greek (which is what the New Testament was written in), the word that's been translated as "sin" was "hamartano" or "hamartani," which actually means "to miss the point."
If that's the case, most of us *are* all sinners! Unless we're enlightened beings or in the midst of epiphany, or in the midst of a truly selfless act, we are indeed missing the point. And zealots (I found my word for them!) are of course completely missing the point, ridiculously so.
I know I'm talking like I know it all, and of course I know I don't. All I can say is that I think about these things a lot, and I have had fleeting moments of deep insight, moments where I got the point--moments which I can never recall in their full dimension, but which I can still use as a touchstone when I get hopelessly confused, again and again. I guess what I mean is that I've gotten the point enough to recognize when it's not around.
I'm going to have to take this to a new original blog post. But for now, I'm returning to Romans.
xowendy
I doubt Paul was trying to be funny, but I've always liked him because he's kind of a jerk, but in touch with it, lol. I do think you interpreted that verse right, and it is funny. I don't think there is much humor in the Bible, but I think God has a sense of humor. I think humor is one of the best things about being human, and have had moments where I've been really into my own bullshit and really felt God elbowing me in the ribs, "Ah, c'mon. Get over yourself." :)
ReplyDeleteEloquently written and awesome follow-up. My brain is fuzzy tonight, sorry I have nothing to contribute other than kudos. You've got me thinking though!
ReplyDelete