After years of fighting against returning to Christianity, a few years ago I finally gave up and returned to the flock. I use this defeatist language quite consciously, because for years a very strong part of me yearned to return, but I struggled against it. It felt like swimming upstream, but I didn’t want to give in because I wasn’t exactly sure where this impulse came from and if I could trust it. So what changed? Did I end up making sense of the impulse? Not really. In a way, I decided that it didn’t matter. And that fighting it didn’t really make sense. So I gave up, and gave in.
As I mentioned above, the reason I took so long to make a decision was because I was suspicious and confused about what was pulling me back to Christianity. The mystics among you might explain it as a some sort of spiritual movement. A cerebral Christian might say that it was the natural conclusion to years of seeking, finally coming to terms with undeniability of a perceived spiritual Truth. The cynic or unbeliever would say that I simply gave into a religious indoctrination that I have been unable to shake off since my childhood. At different times, I have agreed with all of you to a certain extent. I have seen my pull as something spiritual, as something intellectual, or delusional.
For a long time, I really struggled with this issue. I agonized over whether I was the subject of a kind of pavlovian conditioning that involved a church bell instead of a dinner bell. At my most cynical I was pretty sure that even though my rational mind knew that it was just a bell, I couldn’t help but salivate. But other days I would wake up certain that the more study and searching I did (which, in my defense, was quite a bit), and the farther I distanced myself from Christianity, the more reasonable it seemed. But I still couldn’t help but wonder how much of my brain was hardwired to see certain arguments and realities as reasonable. But, after a while, I realized something: it didn’t really matter what was pushing me towards a certain set of beliefs.
I came to realize that I would never be happy without Christianity. Whether it was because it had become undeniable, or because it was hardwired within me, all my attempts to disprove it or leave it behind were simply making me more unhappy. So I changed tactics. I embraced it. I thought, "if the whole point of this is happiness* and the only way I will ever be happy is to be a Christian. It doesn't matter why I am inexorably drawn back towards these things, the fact of the matter is that I am. So be it."
Now, I recognize the weaknesses of this approach. Heck, I even recognize how intellectually sloppy and even irresponsible it is, to a certain degree. At the same time, I cannot argue with the resulting peace that has come with this decision. I am also aware of all the other psychological forces at work, and how hard they are to extricate from the process, and that in the end I had to accept that the resulting peace of acceptance would be the same, regardless of what the driving force was. In some ways, perhaps this can help people who have been miserably fighting these forces for a long time too.
*I’ll admit that this premise is appoint of a lot of philosophical contention...
------
I hesitate to post the next section because: a) I don’t think it’s very good; b) I would much rather people discuss the ideas above. But I suppose I’ll post it anyway, in the hopes that it won’t dominate the comments section.
I realize that much of my thinking above is based on the idea that the ultimate goal of Man’s spiritual search is contentment, not Truth. As it says in the blog’s Caveat section. I am not a philosopher, and am not looking for a battle of logic. Nevertheless, here are some of my thoughts on why this makes sense to me:
First of all, in my search for spiritual truth, I am dealing with something essentially unknowable or unprovable (not to be confused with untrue). There are plenty of brilliant, genius people on every side of this issue. In the end, some sort of personal choice is unavoidable. You may base it on your interpretation of the facts, your gut feeling, or a combination, but in the end, as with Captain Planet, the power is yours.
If spiritual truth is therefore reasonably unknowable, the purpose of a spiritual quest is not simply to find "the Truth." If it were, then it would be quixotic at best. From a pragmatic perspective, we must accept that we are really seeking to find Peace. We are trying to find a place where our brains are comfortable enough to make the aforementioned "choice," that leap of faith.
But why is peace and faith important? Because we are restless and unhappy. I really don't think that anyone goes looking for spiritual enlightenment because they are happy. There is something inside us that needs satisfaction. If struggling against Christianity was ultimately making me unhappy, it seemed to me that it also defeated the ultimate purpose of my spiritual quest. After all, it seemed that a very strong part of me had already decided that it was comfortable with, or even needed, the Christian faith as a framework within which to continue seeking greater and greater inner peace. Even if there was the danger that I was basing my decision on an urge that was not completely my own, if I was never going to be able to come to logical proof of any of my reasons for making spiritual choices, what did it matter? Greater peace and happiness (and an unavoidable set of doubts) would be the product of any leap of faith or decision.
I suppose I must add that, despite this rationalization, I don’t think that this is the greatest gain that Man can derive from seeking for Truth. I simply think it is our greatest motivation. Hopefully, a search for truth will yield it, but seeing as how it is impossible to work from a provable and objective position, one must work from within one's human limitations.
11 comments:
I really appreciate your honesty. And, to me, that is what is important. Whether or not you are a Christian, you understand what your motives are. Or better said, you don't fully understand what your motives are, but you recognize that. And you have come to realize that what really matters to you, is peace, regardless of how you get there.
I think that your willingness to examine your motives and then your willingness to accept them, without yet being able to fully comprehend them, is all part of your own spiritual path. You may never have the answers to those questions, but the fact that you can honestly ask them and then honestly NOT know the answer is a wonderful thing.
I think too many people are so desperate for ANSWERS of any kind that they will not bother to ask questions which may not have answers they can understand. Or, they may fabricate an answer just so they can put the questions out of their minds. The fact that you can hold those questions and the lack of answers to them at the same time is a very mature response to this particular spiritual struggle.
thanks for sharing that ryan.
i know exactly what you mean, i understand every bit of your post... it´s strange. i´m in the process of sorting these things out too. i still haven´t given in though, because i´m not sure that´s what´s going to bring me peace...
I struggled about if and how I should write this post. Because it sounds, to a degree, like an intellectual cop-out. But to me it doesn't feel that way at all, sure there is a certain amount of fatalism or acceptance about the inevitability of my limitations, but I worried that I would give the impression that I was accepting to believe something that I deep inside believed to be untrue. Not so.
Deep inside I have doubts, true, but deep inside I also have faith. What I chose was to follow the faith, because my interior impulse was pushing me in that way. Despite my concerns about where that impulse was coming from, I decided to let it take me towards belief instead of unbelief, which seemed like more work.
Working towards unbelief seemed pointless as well. After all, if my doubts were true and all this God and Christianity turned out to be untrue, then it matters little whether I follow it or not. In that case, I am left with a secular reality that logically should lead me to view life as a simple pursuit of personal happiness.
Of course, if this were true, then it would be ridiculous for me to reject Christianity in the first place, for I am naturally happier living according to its worldview.
But I must reiterate that in addition to (and crucial to) this fairly (it seems to me) pragmatic decision to follow christianity there has been an undeniable sense of personal faith and belief (despite being mixed with a great deal of doubt and confusion). This belief has come at the expense of great deal of study and searching. But I suppose I that realized that I could only take that so far.
Ryan, I think you did a good job expressing yourself. Discussing spirituality is always difficult because it is all so subjective and personal and that opens the whole topic up to a lot of misunderstanding. We also come from a background teeming with judgment about the "right" way to have a spiritual life and the "right" way to be a Christian, so it is even more difficult to be open about these things and the need to feel understood is even greater. You did well.
i just feel that Christianity doesn´t quite deal adequately with the spectrum that is human existence... at least not Christianity the way i was taught and raised.
basically i´m having trouble with the black and white duality and guilt-tripping of Christianity the way we were taught it.
i´ve realized i have to come to a better understanding of Jesus in order to accept or reject Christianity in any form.
i think what jenn says is very interesting about the ability to hold questions and their lack of answers and be ok...
ryan, can you and do you believe in Jesus being the Son of God both human and divine and the Only Way to Eternal Salvation? if so, what do these things mean to you? (if you don´t mind my asking:-)
Daniel, it is like F. Scott Fitzgerald said: "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able to see that things are hopeless and yet be determined to make them otherwise."
As to your question about Christ, that is a topic that is way too big for me to explain, and it is a topic that I do not understand well enough myself in order to give a proper explanation of it. But I will at least give you a short answer. Do I believe those things you asked? In a short answer, yes. But definitely not in the same way or for the same reasons that I was instructed growing up. Neither do I see these issues as being as vital to salvation as we were once told.
How interested are you in these topics? In other words, are you interested enough to actually read some books about them, or have you not reached that point yet?
Ryan, if you are handing out book recommendations on the topic of Christ's divinity and such, I am totally open to them. I won't get around to reading them for years, probably, but it is always good to have them in the background. The issues of Christ's divinity is ultimately what has made me decide that I am not a Christian. But I would love to reach a place in my life where I can and do research this topic more. Perhaps my understanding will change.
hm.... don´t know about that fitzgerald quote... if things are truly hopeless i don´t see the point.
there must be some hope of something in order to be determined to change things... or maybe i have a second rate intelligence. or maybe i have something against f.s.fitzgerald.
i do actually read books (sometimes), ryan, and not just for entertainment:-) the truth is i don´t read anything just for entertainment anymore.... anyway, i´m still getting through the bible again, so i know i won´t be getting around to reading other books at least for a while, but please do recommend. i don´t know, i prefer discussion when it comes to these topics, just because i feel like i had to study them for so long, but i´m ready to start studying again (slowly).
jenn, if you have time send me that mindfulness email please:-)
Ryan,
You say you're no philosopher, but at the heart of this post is a rather thoughtful argument. You asserted, plausibly, that if you have believing truths as a high-order goal, then you are compelled toward Christianity. You then asserted, also plausibly, that even if you can't make yourself believe what you'd otherwise be compelled toward in Christianity, then you should pursue contentment; but that also pushes you toward Christianity. Sure, there's some fudging in there, but overall I think that's a pretty good description of the state many people find themselves in.
G
Thanks greg, thats good to hear from someone whose logic skills are much more developed than mine.
I somehow missed this post. I relate to the second part in a conversation I had in the 2nd or 3rd year of University Philosophy. I was talking to a good friend and we had gone from Aristotle and Plato to more modern guys like Schopenhauer (obviously, a lot of stuff in between). The point was that originally Philosophy contained the pursuit of happiness, especially in Aristotle. He thought people would be better and, therefore, happier, if they knew more about themselves and the world. However, as the discipline progressed, for it turned into a strange quest for intellectual "honesty" or something, but completely estranged now from a quest for happiness. I wondered aloud to my friend: "Why in the world would we study Philosophy if we wanted to be happy?" It made me think a lot. Anyway...
Post a Comment