Fools Say In Their Hearts There Is No God

 

I think that the second source of disenchantment, “voluntarist self-creation”, is the biggest “challenge” for those who are disenchanted.  To recapitulate Dr. Lemmons’ description, disenchantment is the cultural displacement of religious belief.  Two things are important about this description.  First, the displacement is cultural, a larger movement than disaffected individuals.  Second, there is a displacement of religious belief, a loss of relationship with the Creator of the larger world outside of the self and a lack of belief that religion is important for living “freely, fully, and happily” (R. Mary Hayden Lemmons, "Modes of Re-enchantment: John Paul II and the Role of Familial Love," Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies XXIX (2017): 91-114).

 

The “voluntarist self-creation” type of disenchantment “’seeks fulfillment through the definition and articulation of one’s own identity” (Ibid.), where one says “I exist because I will myself” rather than “I think therefore I am”.  And this leaves those disenchanted without recourse to relationship “…when willfulness is identified as the key to self-identity, human interactions become a test of invented identities.  That leaves no way to transcend egocentricity and bridge interpersonal differences without sacrificing one’s own identity or that of another”.  (Ibid.)  This is reminiscent of the “holodeck”, a place of virtual reality defined by the user, in the series “Star Trek: The Next Generation”.  One can live out fictional relationships of one’s own creation as long as one isolates oneself from actual relationships.  Obviously such a path requires the rejection of objective truth.

 

Is there a way back to “enchantment”, to singing God’s praises, for those who take this path?  Dr Lemmons offers paths of re-enchantment through developing religious faith, especially through “familial” engagement and it is true that healing comes through relationship, especially through covenant community.  The motivation for re-enchantment for the “voluntarist self-creator” is constricted by the nature of the disenchantment: “The willfulness that is so essential to voluntarist self-creation draws its power from human pride, the thrill of dominating and dismissing truth, and the pleasures of self-gratification.  Re-enchantment, thus, must wait until the lifestyle of self-gratification ceases to please” (Ibid.).  While misery is motivating, the self-centeredness of “self-creation” does migrate to “anger, rage, isolation, cynicism, and incipient despair” (Ibid.) that entraps the bloated will which would rather "rule in Hell rather than serve in Heaven". 

 

Given that access to the Truth is necessary for re-enchantment, this is made more difficult by the “de-Hellenization” of Western culture, in which the possibility of transcendent truth is removed from the culture, as so eloquently explained by Michael Hanby: “Philosophically speaking, de-Hellenization means the eclipse of an order of being, nature, and truth that transcends history, the triumph of time over eternity, with the corresponding reduction of nature to meaningless matter and a reduction of truth to so many social, political, or psychological “situations.” . . .Of course, as we have seen, one need not deny or refute this traditional understanding to effect a paradigm shift to a de-Hellenized Christianity. Indeed, one could even affirm or exalt it in an ideal sense. It is enough that it simply ceases to factor into our understanding of God and the world in any meaningful way. This will always involve a denial of the obvious if the Greek sense of being is true, but turning a blind eye to reality is an art at which we have become quite practiced.” (Michael Hanby, “A False Paradigm” in First Things, November 2018).

Apart From Me You Can Do Nothing

         “By living "as if God did not exist", man not only loses sight of the mystery of God, but also of the mystery of the world and the mystery of his own being.

The eclipse of the sense of God and of man inevitably leads to a practical materialism, which breeds individualism, utilitarianism and hedonism. Here too we see the permanent validity of the words of the Apostle: "And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct" (Rom 1:28). The values of being are replaced by those of having. The only goal which counts is the pursuit of one's own material well-being. The so-called "quality of life" is interpreted primarily or exclusively as economic efficiency, inordinate consumerism, physical beauty and pleasure, to the neglect of the more profound dimensions-interpersonal, spiritual and religious-of existence.

In such a context suffering, an inescapable burden of human existence but also a factor of possible personal growth, is "censored", rejected as useless, indeed opposed as an evil, always and in every way to be avoided. When it cannot be avoided and the prospect of even some future well-being vanishes, then life appears to have lost all meaning and the temptation grows in man to claim the right to suppress it.

Within this same cultural climate, the body is no longer perceived as a properly personal reality, a sign and place of relations with others, with God and with the world. It is reduced to pure materiality: it is simply a complex of organs, functions and energies to be used according to the sole criteria of pleasure and efficiency. Consequently, sexuality too is depersonalized and exploited: from being the sign, place and language of love, that is, of the gift of self and acceptance of another, in all the other's richness as a person, it increasingly becomes the occasion and instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction of personal desires and instincts. Thus the original import of human sexuality is distorted and falsified, and the two meanings, unitive and procreative, inherent in the very nature of the conjugal act, are artificially separated: in this way the marriage union is betrayed and its fruitfulness is subjected to the caprice of the couple. Procreation then becomes the "enemy" to be avoided in sexual activity: if it is welcomed, this is only because it expresses a desire, or indeed the intention, to have a child "at all costs", and not because it signifies the complete acceptance of the other and therefore an openness to the richness of life which the child represents.

In the materialistic perspective described so far, interpersonal relations are seriously impoverished. The first to be harmed are women, children, the sick or suffering, and the elderly. The criterion of personal dignity-which demands respect, generosity and service-is replaced by the criterion of efficiency, functionality and usefulness: others are considered not for what they "are", but for what they "have, do and produce". This is the supremacy of the strong over the weak.” (John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, Section 22-23).

 

          While there were many noteworthy sections I found Section 23 of Evangelium Vitae most haunting, perhaps because it describes our decaying “Western” culture both presciently as well as historically.  One of John Paul II’s unique positions in history is that of living under the oppression of German and Soviet socialism, an experience that provides an historical base from which to teach about “the culture of life” and “the culture of death”.  And one of his fundamental themes is the connection between “the mystery of God”, “the mystery of the world”, and “the mystery of his [man’s] own being”.  Mystery here means more than a lack of knowledge, rather the complexity and fullness  of relationships that precludes the inability to take and  fully comprehend them.  The “safe” way to handle mystery is to ignore it, to pretend it does not exist, so that one can possess the illusion of control over one’s life and avoid the inherent suffering of love present in relationships.

          Since we exist in the context of relationships this retreat from mystery deprives one of humanity and personal relationships.  The cost of focusing on personal control leads inevitably to the utilitarianism: “There are in life but two things, love and power, and no one has both” (Malcolm Muggeridge, The Infernal Grove, page 67).  The pursuit of power that leads to the use of others in utilitarianism is paradoxical since the pursuit of pleasure is expected to lead to a vigorous life of enjoyment.  However, through utilitarianism one loses the capacity for personal relationships (cf. Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, Chapter 1) and, thus, the possibility of practicing the communio personarum in which life has meaning and true pleasure.

          This loss of pleasure, and the mistaking of sensation for it, is compounded by the loss of “personal reality”, of the matrix of relationships that include physical and sexual relationships which lead to joy.  As such, the rejection of communio personarum leads to a rejection of fecundity since the addictive use and pursuit of sensation are the only end desired: “Procreation then becomes the ‘enemy’ to be avoided in sexual activity”.  This deprivation of happiness, which is the fruit of relationship, leaves a person angry and bitter at their unintended loneliness, leaving them recourse only to rage and hatred as the means to attempt relationship with others.  The good news of life is no longer available and the pursuit of power through “the culture of death” leads to the natural endpoint of depression and emptiness.