Cynthia Halpern's book: suffering, politics, and power - Essay Example

Commencing with a comprehensive and highly informative account of the theocratic philosophical precepts which informed, even precipitated Luther’s Protestant Reformation, Cynthia Halpern critically analyzes the divide between the temporal and the spiritual world across several philosophers and ages. While conceding to the fact that “Suffering in the Context of Religion,” is dominated by Luther’s writings, an explanation and analysis of his stance vis-à-vis the dual nature of man and the world he occupies, the shift to Locke, Rousseau, Nietzsche and Skinner, to name but a few, is seamless. This is primarily because, as the reader soon realizes, the focus is not on Luther per se but on a set of themes which much of his discourses and writings revolved around and which, subsequently figured into the writings and discourses of the named philosophers. These themes are loyalty and obedience to temporal rulers versus loyalty and obedience towards God; the absence of God in material form versus the emphatically material presence of the Church; the church which resides within the faithful Christian and which is found wherever the faithful conglomerate for worship versus the artificial Church which has been imposed upon the faithful by those who have set themselves up as the mediators between God and man; and the suffering which the faithful must endure and whether religiosity is inextricably linked with suffering. These are questions which Luther raised and which later philosophers analyzed from various interpretive angles, ultimately culminating in Nietzsche’s declaration that `God was dead.’ They are question to which there are no satisfactory answers or at least, answers which would satisfy the collective. While the reader may experience a sense of frustration at Halpern’s failure to provide definitive answers to the questions raised, he/she realizes that the purpose is not the provision of answers but the exposition of Luther’s (and others) thoughts and theories on these questions, ultimately inciting the reader to explore these questions him/herself. Man occupies two worlds and, accordingly, his self is divided. Halpern clearly explains Luther’s philosophical outlook on the stated and relates it to the theme of suffering in the context of religion. As she explains, man occupies a temporal and a spiritual world and is himself torn between his material and his spiritual inclinations. The spiritual world, the realm of religion and faith, is the world of suffering. The temporal world, or material world, is that of earthly pleasures but, for the faithful it can also be a world of suffering. The reason lies in the two world’s conflicting laws and rules, with man expected to simultaneously abide by both. Therefore, as mat be deduced from Halpern’s analysis, religious reformers and philosophers, most notably Luther, primarily saw the faithful as sufferers. Halpern’s lucid explanation of a complex philosophical and theocratic notion actually gives readers an insight into the real-world interplay between temporal and the spiritual world and the intricate interrelationship between religion and suffering. As we ourselves may determine from our personal observations, religions are based on suffering insofar as they call for the oppression of the self. Quite simply stated, they impose a set of moral rules and behavioral rituals upon adherents and demand that they abide by them, irrespective of their natural inclinations. For example, Christianity demands celibacy from both the males and the females who join the religious order. Granted that some Christian sects no longer make that demand of the males but significant sects, such as the Catholic, still do. The point here is that this is an unnatural requirement which calls upon those who supposedly chose to devote their life to worship and the service of religion, to suppress their natural inclinations and oppress their real selves. In other words, faith appears to demand constant sacrifices which entail suffering. Indeed, the interrelationship between faith and suffering, the very notion of sacrifice as a measure of faith, is almost impossible to ignore, if only for the impact it has upon our world. Hardly a week goes by without the news carrying a story about a suicide bomber. From the perspective of many viewers, suicide bombers may be nothing more than psychotic sociopaths with a death wish. From their perspective, or from the perspective of their understanding of what their religion demands of them, the picture is different. In essence, they see themselves as people who have renounced the material world and who have entirely devoted themselves to the spiritual world. The paradise which the spiritual world promises, at least from the perspective of their understanding of the requirements of their faith, calls for an act of self-sacrifice which, at the same time, harms the un-faithful. Operating on the basis of such a belief, they kill what we consider innocent civilians but whom they consider enemies of God and, in so doing, sacrifice their own lives. They believe that they have, by so doing, earned themselves a place in paradise. For these people, the demonstration of faith is intimately connected to suffering and the ultimate sacrifice of the self. The actions of a handful of suicide bombers have effectively changed the world as we know it. Their commitment to sacrifice and their unshakeable belief that spirituality is synonymous with suffering, led them to the senseless murder of thousands of men, women and children on September 11th, 2001. At the same time, they opened the eyes of the world to religion as a threat. It is not simply the actions of the suicide bombers which establishes the interrelationship between faith, sacrifice and suffering but the actions of numerous others. Christian fundamentalist groups and preachers have called for mass suicide; have imposed upon their followers the requirement of self-sacrifice as a measure of faith. In this respect, the dominant example is Reverend Jim Jones. He effectively persuaded his followers to drink poison, to feed their children poison, and die because this is what God wanted and demanded of them. The majority of us may not be able to understand how a person can arrive at this stage but, nevertheless, we do know that it is possible. In other words, one discovers that religion is not necessarily a peaceful force but one which can be quite threatening. Certainly, in her analysis of Luther’s precepts on the interrelationship between religion and suffering, Halpern does not touch on the phenomenon of self-sacrifice. Nevertheless, her presentation of Luther, and other’s philosophical/theocratic stance on the question, motivates one to seek its application to the world around us. Should the reader does so, he/she may very well discover that not only has religion deeply impacted the world but that the belief that faith entails suffering has changed the world. Indeed, even were we to try to apply this to our own selves, we will find that, on a personal level, our faith has often entailed a degree of suffering. Certainly, suffering here does not imply the phenomenon of self-sacrifice earlier discussed but it refers to the fact that we have often stopped short of doing certain things, no matter how much we may have wanted to, because of an innate belief that such actions defy religious principles. The point here is that even those who do not consider themselves to be religious and openly declare their lack of belief in God have religious principles inculcated into them, possibly communicated through culture and their surrounding environment, and these principles function to restrain their actions and thoughts. Indeed, it can very well be claimed that the majority are divided between their spiritual obligations and their temporal ones and, the fact that they can often clash, weighs down upon one, leading to spiritual restlessness and a sense of anxiety/worry. From a personal perspective, this is what Halpern allows one to understand. Read More