By DONALD DeMARCO
I was addressing a group of high school students on a Toronto TV program. One of the students voiced his complaint that I was making reference to old dead guys of the past.
It was a complaint that I had heard too many times. I saw it as indicating youth’s enthusiasm for progress and disdain for the past.
I had mentioned, among others, Martin Buber. Should we relegate this fine theologian/philosopher to oblivion? Is he no longer relevant? His notion of “I-Thou” has been refined, amplified, and applied to the fields of psychology and philosophy. It is a handy way of remembering that our whole being is involved in the “I-Thou” relationship whereas the “I-It” relationship involves just a fraction of our being and is centered on something impersonal, such as fame, fortune, and fineries.
We are incomplete without “I-Thou” relationships and deceiving ourselves if we think that “I-It relationships can satisfy us.
I am not ready to scrap Buber and other contributors from the past, especially those whose thinking is germinal. Buber’s contribution has provided a basis for expanded thought in the areas of existentialism and human relations in general. He has given posterity a root from which many good things have blossomed. In this regard, he is part of true progress. G.K. Chesterton came to disbelieve in progress as the modern world understands it, because, “real development is not leaving things behind, as on the road, but drawing life from them, as from a root.”
Progress in the modern sense consists in creating a distance between ourselves and the past and then trying to begin afresh with nothing to build on but new and rootless ideas. What is needed here is something more miraculous than miracles!
This is the tragedy of the modern world that wants to get rid of the traditional notion of marriage, abandon the role of fatherhood, jettison the concept that life is sacred, make religion socially irrelevant, and reinvent sex as having its chief meaning entirely shorn from siring and raising children.
It is to eviscerate the root and expect the flower to flourish. It is like a certain form of weed killer that causes the weeds to progress so rapidly that they grow out of their roots and die. To cite G.K. once again, “progress is simply a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative.” And what could be the destiny of a rootless world?
Marcello Pera, an atheist philosopher, collaborated with Pope Benedict XVI to produce Without Roots in which they pointed out that all the great scholars of history have confirmed that “Christianity has been the greatest force in Western history.” Without this “greatest force” what can be the future of the West? It is like trying to run a car without fuel. Novelty alone is sterile.
King Henry VIII decided to create his own religion and make Catholicism his sworn enemy. His Act of Supremacy was followed by “The Treasons Act” which legitimized the punishment of anyone who would “disavow the ‘Act of Supremacy’.” As a consequence, many Catholics, including St. Thomas More, were put to death. The Bolshevik Revolution was followed by a reign of totalitarianism. The French Revolution was followed by the Napoleonic Wars. Revolutions that disparage their live-giving roots inevitably bring about disaster.
The American Revolution, it may be said, was not exactly a revolution. It was more truly a preservation of its Christian roots, its belief in God and in the dignity of all human beings. Because it preserved its roots, it could develop.
And yet, we are witnessing in today’s society an attempt to excise the very roots that allowed America to prosper. Moreover, a revolution, because it will soon belong to the scrapheap of the past, must be followed by an unending series of revolutions. This does not describe progress. Rather, it represents a condition of revolving-door social paralysis. One revolution lays the ground for another, making progress impossible and repetition inevitable.
In 1678, John Bunyan produced Pilgrim’s Progress. A succinct summary of the essence of the book is contained in its extended title: From This World to That Which Is to Come. It bears an important similarity to Dante’s Divine Comedy. Later, C.S. Lewis returned to this theme and wrote Pilgrim’s Regress.
Progress is understood in these three works in terms of a journey toward salvation. The worldly view of progress is mainly concerned with prosperity. Bunyan, Dante, and Lewis all made it clear that salvation is of preeminent importance and the road to salvation is a difficult, oftentimes arduous journey. It requires a mysterious blend of personal virtue and divine grace. Prosperity, on the other hand, is temporary and does not fill the soul. “What does it profit a man to gain the whole word and forfeit his soul?” (Matt.16:26).
There is progress in science. That cannot be doubted. We do not want to trade in the computer for the abacus. Yet, that progress does not always carry over into the realm of human affairs. Science can pave the way for more efficient weaponry, but this form of progress does not coincide with human progress. It is an illusion to think that progress in science means progress in general. For Henry Miller, we now live in an “air-conditioned nightmare.”
In the modern drama, progress that incorporates the scientific, economic, and material is often at odds with the progress of pilgrims, a fact that is made only too clear with regard to abortion. This conflict, however, is not necessary. These two forms of progress are not incompatible with each other as long as progress toward salvation remains paramount. As Christ has told us, “Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well” (Matt. 6:33).
(Dr. Donald DeMarco is professor emeritus, St. Jerome’s University, a senior fellow with Human Life International, and an adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College. His book, Why I Am Pro-Life and Not Politically Correct is posted on Amazon.com.)
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress