 |
|
| Brrrrrrr..... | | Date Created: Jun 01, 2005, 09:00 AM |
That sound you hear is my teeth chattering. You see, Hell has finally frozen over. How can I be sure that it's a cold day in Hades and not just another Michigan cold snap? Well, the most obvious sign is this: I agree with George Will about something.
In a recent Newsweek column Will writes, "... the greatest threat to civility—and ultimately to civilization—is an excess of certitude. The world is much menaced just now by people who think that the world and their duties in it are clear and simple. They are certain that they know what—who—created the universe and what this creator wants them to do to make our little speck in the universe perfect, even if extreme measures—even violence—are required."
This from a conservative! See? You're starting to feel the chill now too, aren't you? Goosebumps starting to form on your arms and the back of your neck yet?
Many liberals gave up certainty a long time ago. Between Quantum Mechanics and Postmodernism, the idea that we actually know anything became passé, silly even. We giggle at those lunatic conservatives, particularly those of an evangelical bent, who are so sure about everything, particularly that they're right, we're wrong, and therefore we hate America, hate our troops, hate God, and intentionally step on cracks to break our mothers' backs. Unfortunately, often, we liberals back into a corner and blubber like babies because we've given up certainty and embraced the whole "what's right for you is right for you, but not necessarily right for me" relativism.
The problem is this: Certainty Sells. People like easy answers, unqualified by specifics and details. And I'm not just talking about the cattle, I'm talking about myself -- and probably you too. We like to know what's what, we like to think we're sure of what's going on, we like to be sure of other people, their motives, and basically the whole world around us. We get cranky when things get complicated. We manipulate our surroundings (and probably other people) so that we can still cling to some certainty and maintain control.
And moral certainty is our favorite thing in the whole world, lately.
This has been on my mind for a few days. See, the New Testement reading in church on Sunday was just about this kind of misplaced certainty. From the book of Matthew (RSV), "18: A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
19: Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20: Thus you will know them by their fruits.
21: "Not every one who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22: On that day many will say to me, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?'
23: And then will I declare to them, `I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.' "
So what's a liberal (or liberal Christian) to do, in the face of all that certainty from those who oppose basic human decency for everyone? In this age of an "excess of certainty," how can I know they're wrong and I'm right? (Because they are wrong, and I am right, of course.)
You don't even have to be Christian to see the value in the assessment, "You will know them by their fruits."
(hee hee...I said "fruits")
Update (6/2/05): Catching up on my Newsweek reading, obviously. Anna Quindlen has a great column in last week's edition on the same topic of certainty: "The intolerant, the monomaniacal, the zealots driven by religious certainty engineered the worst attack on American soil, and the result has been intolerance, monomania and zealotry driven by religious certainty. President Bollinger cited the contempt of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., the legendary Supreme Court justice, for the man who "knows that he knows." If Holmes lived today, of course, he would be either lionized or demonized. And he would find, much to his sorrow, that America had been hijacked by those who cannot tell the difference between opponents and enemies, between disagreement and heresy, between discussion and destruction." |
|
|
|
|
