The Church is in the world, it is part of the suffering in the world, and though Christ condemned the disciple who struck off the ear of the high priest's servent, our hearts go out in sympathy to all who are moved to violence by the suffering of others. The Church condemns violence, but it condemns indifference more harshly. Violence can be the expression of love, indifference never. One is an imperfection of charity, the other the perfection of egoism. In the days of fear, doubt and confusion, the simplicity and loyalty of one apostle advocated a political solution. He was wrong, but I would rather be wrong with St Thomas than right with the cold and the craven. Let us go up to Jerusalem and die with him.
Graham Greene - The Comedians
Graham Greene - The Comedians
4 comments:
Hmm. Interesting. I do agree that indifference is horrible. I know some people, not naming names who have no idea what is going on in the world. I mentioned the other day to one that Hamas was elected in Palestine and she said, "Oh, i hate reading the paper and watching the news, it's so depressing." So are you going to go and committ some violence now?
well, that's the question isn't it? I've been pondering the ideas of pacifism and revolution lately. When does violence become necessary and if it can ever be moral?
Another quote from the same book that I liked:
"Catholics and Communists have committed great crimes, but at leaast they have not stood aside, like an established society, and been indifferent. I would rather have blood on my hands then water like Pilate."
That makes me think of something I've been reading lately. I took two days off of work this week to work on that paper for Harvard on Martin Buber on suffering. Anyway, in his book "The Eclipse of God," he speaks about religion and ethics. Then he goes on to describe a "suspension of the ethical." he gives on example, when God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. Murder is wrong. But in this case, it would have been right, because it was doing what God commanded. Yet
Buber makes the point, when is the all relative? I mean, how do we know. One line I loved that Buber said was that
-“the apes of the Absolute, to be sure, have always in the past bustled about on earth. Ever and ever again men are commanded from out of the darkness to sacrifice their Isaac.”
I wonder who the apes of the Absolute are today? And do they speak for God? I don't think so.
I would make a comparison here to US politics, but I am choosing not to be so direct.
Post a Comment