Searching for God #10

 What is the difference, if any that might be significant, between the Christian exhortation in James to ‘good works’ and Tolstoy’s ‘Resist all evil!’ from Matthew?

This is not a subject I have heard or read about, it seems, in well over eight decades.

And, while there may even be some overlap, there is a very different mind-set, aspiration, vision and certainly motivation between the two.

There is so much to commend good works, including the benefits for the recipient of the beneficence, the public acclaim and both awards and rewards that follow. There are even tax breaks for many of the ‘good works’ that occur outside the defined roles of various specific occupational roles. Doctors do ‘good works’ every hour and day in their offices, clinics, and emergency and operating rooms. Similarly lawyers, in the offices, court rooms, board rooms, and all situations in which they are advocating for the voiceless, in any conflictual predicament. Teachers, nurses, social workers, engineers, research scientists, bankers, sales and marketing professionals, manufacturers and their executives. Even, dare I say, politicians, (at least a few of those who come to mind, epically disqualifying others whose names also come to mind) are to a degree motivated to do ‘good works’ as they often define those works, in a manner that seems to focus on their vision and foresight and imagination, even if it is both long overdue and minimal by any reasonable measure.

And then there are the churches.

Missionaries, and both sisters and brothers of the church, of many various orders, are dedicated to ‘worshipping God, in and through the discipline of their vows and orders, as well as in and through the ‘good works’ they offer to the homeless, the refugees, the indigent, the hungry, and the prisoners, through the prison chaplaincies. Similarly, ordained and lay clergy visit patients in hospital rooms nursing homes, long-term care homes, as well as those prisoners too, and in catechetical sessions, confirmation training sessions, and liturgical rituals such as baptisms, marriages, funerals and the penitential. Of course there are also the weekly eucharists, sometimes more frequent, to which few and fewer people are congregating.

Sometimes, and apparently increasingly, politicians, in their efforts to legislate and protect the public from dangers for which the integrous, and scientific research demonstrates the need for legislation, the public will rise up in anger and make the public figure who sponsors such legislation the object of threats, slander, character defamation and worse. This dynamic while growing, can and will also decline as public literacy and confidence in the use of words as carriers of political and civil discourse grows. (English and all language teachers, please take note!) Generally, and without specific sociological research as support, those engaged in good works experience a preponderance of awards, rewards and gratitude.

Those who conscientiously, and deliberately, openly and thoughtfully, both contemplate and undertake acts that ‘resist all evil’ face a very different kind of public recognition. While it may be redundant and inappropriate to refer to his words again in this context. Martin Luther King’s quote still rings both true and provocative:

The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.

The same idea rings slightly differently when put in reverse:

The silence of the good people is more dangerous than the brutality of the bad people.

Taking offence at injustice(s) for many is a discernment and decision that brings with it an instant ‘foot-on-the-brake’ response. It says, in that quiet private inner voice, ‘What will X think, if I do or say that?’ We all have an inner critical parent whose voice may be a mélange of mother/father, sister/brother, teacher/principal, or even priest/athletic coach, or some unique cocktail whose origins and flavour shift depending on the situation. Additionally, there is so much, on so many fronts, in so many different ‘theatres of public information and action’ that, for anyone even to contemplate ‘resisting even one evil’ poses a significant question: Which evil? And Why that specific one?

Social custom and convention disavow criticism of an injustice, especially one still unfamiliar to those gathered…..that is until everyone eventually considers it a problem. And at that point, everyone in a chorus of unison voices, declares, “That’s is just so horrible…and I simply do not have any idea how to counteract that!’

Shoulder shrugs ripple across the room in agreement, everyone takes another sip of their drink, and someone, triggering a collective sigh, mutters something like: ‘How are the Blue Jays doing these days? At which point, everyone drops both the injustice and whatever might even be discussed in order to push back recognizing that the social decorum that attends this ‘moment’ and ‘occasion’ frees everyone from guilt, and the option of engagement. “Keeping it light” is the phrase that both guides and sanctions the public event (some call it small talk, as a way of both making new friends and avoiding alienating others). We all want to make a good impression; it reinforces our own self-esteem, and confidence. It also generates interest from especially lonely and ambitious, if also somewhat tentative, men and women seeking to ‘network’ as another of the basic business and relationship skills taught and expected by those mentoring the incipient managerial and executive ‘class’ of this generation. “No one succeeds alone” is one epithet that echoes in popular culture; another is ‘we are all hard wired to be social’ (borrowed from David Brooks)….And also, ‘there is no “I” in team’!

And then there is something insightful attributed to Hunter S. Thompson*:

We are all alone, born alone, die alone, and-in spite of True romance magazines—we shall some day look back on our lives and see that, in spite of our company we were alone the whole way. I do not say lonely—at least not all the time—but essentially, and finally alone. This is what makes your self-respect so important, and I don’t see how you can respect yourself if you must look in the hearts and minds of others for your happiness.

(*Hunter S. Thompson, American journalist, and author, author of Hell’s Angels (1967), for which he lived one year among that group. He also helped establish a subgenre of New Journalism  (he called it Gonzo)  in which the writer becomes central to and a participant in the narrative.)

Alone, and deeply within a social group, attempting to tease out a comparison between ‘good works’ and ‘resist all evil’…all the while, attempting to make a living, raise a family, pay the bills, climb the ladder of ‘success’ and ‘victory’ and trying to stay both healthy and happy….not a small order!

Back to the ‘resist all evils’ notion….and, well, I can let that issue be addressed by those much more familiar and better equipped to fix it. If it is law enforcement that is needed, we have that. If it is arson, we have a fire department. If it is domestic violence, both police and social workers can and do handle those threats. If it is injustice in the classroom, there are teachers and principals and superintendents for that. And if it is racism, or ageism or sexism or homophobia?? Oh, I guess that belongs to all of us….so I might do my part if and when I seem to have no other choice, without seeming to set myself as superior to those engaged in racial epithets. “I never do that!” and “I find it despicable when I hear those attitudes!” and “of course I am indignant, but what do you expect me to do, punch the guy out who is racist?”…..

Resisting all evils need not be an invitation to further violence, although that is definitely a possibility. No one takes kindly to someone who appears to be setting himself up as some ‘critical parent’ of the society and culture to which “I” belong. We each have that critical parent voice rumbling around in our head. And we all cling, almost involuntarily and unconsciously to the traditions, habits and customs of our ‘family, tribe, town, and both region and province and nation.

Furthermore, all the evidence that we have about those who ‘risk’ resisting all evil is that those in power, the establishment, are both the usual suspects of whatever injustice we are confronting, as well as those who will attempt to silence any who might be so bold, so arrogant, and so presumptuous as to challenge the established order, the status quo.

So, just as in the case of double jeopardy, when a victim of a crime is subjected to a viscious and nefarious interrogation in order to check whether h/she instigated that crime, those who resist evil in the face of the power structure that either created or generated the original injustice, are taking a double risk: first to identify and to make public the injustice, in a manner that attracts the attention of others like the media, and then  to face the retributions that are inevitably about to descend.

Double jeopardy is clearly neither an invitation nor an encouragement to resist all evils. Indeed, it may well be an apparent justification for silence, complicity and buried resentment.

So….where does all this lead? Three things come to mind: first, any of us who undertake contemplating ‘resist all evil’s have to gather several basket of detailed information: about ourselves, the support of those near us, the evidence that unequivocally and indisputably proves the injustice, the identity of the perpetrator(s) (and this might be very difficult to discern clearly, given the history of the injustice), our capacity and skill and talent and confidence to mount any form of resistance, and also a clear concise, comprehensive and cogent preparation of the ‘case’ and the method and means of presentation.

A second is the ‘strengths, weaknesses, supports and strengths of the forces that will be mounted against any such resistance. And these will have to be identified in as intricately and as detailed a manner as feasible. The depth of commitment of those forces to the injustice, and the recipients and victims of the injustice. Recipients may be as dangerous to the exposure as those perpetrating the injustice, especially if they are benefitting profoundly from it.

A third, although linked deeply with the first, is the degree of commitment and the among of energy, resources and dedication I wish to make to execute this resistance. And that may well be a first question to face and to answer.

Lest any of us think that we have no role models, think Mandela, King, Rosa Parks, Vaclav Havel, Bonhoeffer, Gandhi, Tiananmen Square citizen lying in front of that tank, Women in France, Germany and Holland who resisted the Nazis, John Lewis and manym others.

And while Tolstoy and Gandhi may have been the more prominent voices in the history of this non-violent resistance to injustice, Jay Alison, in his book, The Joy of Being Wrong, posits another.

The act of the willing, sacrificial victim of the injustice underlying the Crucifixion, a death for which there was simply no wrong committed by the subject amid the mob’s cry for his death, serves as exemplar of the qualities, values and discipline which underly and even seed all human relationships. Resisting violence, without seeking fame, or revenge, or intimidation or honours or medals, can still be revisited even today. Of course, we walk on the shoulders of others who have caught a glimpse of this paradoxical and ironic insight, that can and does cross the boundaries of nations, religions, ethnicities and periods of history.

And, today, for men, especially, this model, when put adjacent to  the ‘alpha male’ of domination, entitlement, insouciance, hubris, racism, sexism, anti-intellectualism and raw exercise of power with self-declared impunity and immunity, seems especially worthy of reflective consideration.

To be continued…..