Those seeking some economic or political exploration here will sadly be disappointed. I was in business management for too many years not to know that what exists 'on paper' has small relation to reality - for example, when 'the economy is good,' it tends to mean '95% of the population are so broke that they are forced into usurious loans.' When grocery prices have doubled, statistics will insist they rose by 6%. I well remember a puzzling, if clever (and misleading), presentation to the effect that someone who drives could save a small fortune (the figures clearly were manipulated) by taking the train (this assuming that anyone who had a train nearby would drive in the first place, but I'm too logical deep down.) The basis for this argument was that someone whose car is worth more than some houses was commuting 160 miles a day - the 'savings' was in depreciation of the vehicle's value (and there was no allowance for the cost of taking the train, or how one would get there.)
In an odd fashion, a thought that made me smirk earlier this week came back to haunt me today. My regulars (are there any, I wonder?) will recall that, a few years ago, I did an extensive study of the 19th century theological trends. I'm no fan of the Enlightenment, but I do see irony in that, when deism was enormously popular (and the Creator apparently had little interest in engaging with the cosmos once it was set in motion), there still were ideas that, for example, Protestant England was blessed - not having endured famine or the murder of the monarch as did France, or the crises in Belgium and so forth. There was much emphasis on such divine favour, despite that the general pattern of belief was in a God who washed his hands after creating the universe. As well, there was a general belief that miracles in the New Testament could be used to prove Christ's divinity (even if later miracles were 'superstition.') I sense a loose connection - that one needs some flavour of the miraculous to believe God intervenes now and then, where I think my old friend Thomas would have cautioned against such a view, with it leaving implicit that God isn't around much in the first place.
(Those who doubt that the bizarre 'divine favour reflected in military or economic superiority, real or supposed' idea is still alive should recall the weirder idea, popular in at least a few Internet circles around 9 years ago, that God had removed a 'veil of protection' from North America - where I had it on good authority that both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans remained intact.)
Now, where is this taking me? I am all but worn out from keeping my mouth shut (which I occasionally am capable of doing, when I know that doing otherwise would come to nothing) from an encounter this morning that a really expert writer could have used for a satirical sketch. I was at a church coffee hour, seeking, in vain, for congenial company. (This is not to say that such does not exist - only that people I know and with whom I would enjoy conversing seemed to be in short supply today.) Earlier today, I'd attended a presentation that had to do with Yahweh and the 'sacrifice of the first-born,' and it seems that being a friend of God's was about the worst fate one could have - when one was not murdered, the best one could hope for was exile and humiliation. I'll take sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, please, and it did occur to me that the sordid characters we were studying (Jacob and Esau, Cain and Abel, Joseph and Jacob's other wonderful sons who inherited many dispositions towards filial and fraternal piety from their father) had no love in them whatever. I hardly thought that God was responsible for their humiliation and exile - if one is an outcast for fratricide, I can't say I'm all that sympathetic. I can certainly see that, if one was the object of divine favour (even if one was a trickster to get this), others, out of envy, rage, and covetousness, might act out in violence - and anyone who is cheeky enough to report dreams which indicate his family members are going to fall down in homage before him would be something of a trial. But, even before my third coffee, I was seeing far more that God's purposes (covenant, Israel as his chosen) cannot be thwarted by human wickedness - not that He was the source of the evil in itself.
When I was seeking my own release from 'exile' at this coffee hour, another who attended the class referenced my admission that I had been puzzled, and, in an exposition of mental gymnastics that should qualify him for Sophistry Olympics, related the OT accounts we'd been exploring to capitalism.
I've seen 19th century speeches and writings that should have prepared me for some of this - Jacob Marley always was a good man of business... Yet I doubt I've ever heard of capitalism's being related to Genesis. I'm uncertain of what the market economy could have been in the time of Cain and Abel (in fact, I'm still wondering from where both Mrs Cain and the hordes who would seek to kill Cain materialised.) This impromptu speech (my saying I didn't see the connection only led to a repeated, "Why not?," which is invariably a sophist's refuge, and never acceptable other than in philosophical arguments based on the principle of credulity) related Joseph (of the many coloured coat) to the talented capitalist who God chose because he was the only one who could accomplish the goal of wealth. (Ah, references to famines and favour once again...) This genius even told me that 'there is no poverty with capitalism,' which I found surprising since I've worked with the homeless for seven years and spent far longer watching them huddle together with makeshift 'huts' of cardboard. If I had a transcript of the entire exposition, I still doubt I could make sense of any of this. (Nor could anyone, I suspect - even if they don't wear a Franciscan tau cross.)
...Let me see if I can piece together at least a few bits... Oh, now I can see... It wasn't that the divine election of Israel (Jacob) showed that grace cannot be thwarted even if the human instrument has a lion's share of failings. God blessed capitalism, and even minted the concept millennia in advance. Grace is not a free gift, but one bought with manipulation. See one's (equally dreadful) brother in danger of dying of hunger, and make sure he signs over the birthright and blessing before sharing a few lentils... profitable, that.
Why am I suddenly remembering a Charles Schulz cartoon I saw many years ago? Pianist Schroeder told Charlie Brown "I have perfect pitch!," to which Charlie replied, "you mean a perfect pitch - and what does it matter, since baseball season is over?" I feel like quoting Schroeder's line - that sometimes I feel like putting in for a transfer to another comic strip. The loose association with comic strips just brought yet another to mind. This one showed a dinosaur addressing a convention of his own kind, announcing bad news: "The climate is changing, the mammals are taking over, and we all have a brain the size of a walnut."
If my illogical silliness seems inappropriate, I'll admit that I'm using it to shield myself from an element of darkness that is more illogical still, and assuredly would not have been the author's intent. (This apart from that violence, which usually arises from a thirst for power, terrifies me in any event.) I cannot help but shudder, on another level, at the thought of God's wanting sacrifice (death, exile, humiliation) for his Chosen (which I am associating here with Israel.) The constant struggles which the Hebrews endured in the OT times are tragic but not unusual - what makes me cringe is what they endured in the Christian era (and heaven knows that, in the 'enlightened' modern era, renaissance onward, much of it was the worst - particularly in the very 'advanced' 20th century.)
I must obtain a copy of the book on which these presentations are based. I enjoyed another work by the same author, which leads me to think there is an element (perhaps too lengthy or complicated to be referenced in full) other than the 'bare bones' I referenced above. I can only say that, based on the presentation if not the text, I don't think I would have liked that 'god' very much - I may have seen if Zeus, Isis, or Vishnu might present a better deal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment