The Perverse Nature of Christianity
This is not a paper I've written per se, but it is an argument that came up in class today. It was in a class called "Love, Hatred, & Resentment" (which the Sadism and Masochism paper I've posted was for) and we were reading Gilles Deleuze's account of pain and suffering in his essay Coldness and Cruelty. In it, Deleuze states that (while citing Nietzsche) if pain and suffering is to have any meaning, it must be because someone finds enjoyment in it. From this, Deleuze figures that there are only three possibilities, the first two being perversions:
Pain is enjoyable for the person who inflicts it (Sadism)
Pain is enjoyable for the person who suffers it (Masochism)
But the third one is the most interesting:
3. "Pain is pleasing to the gods who contemplate and watch over man" (the so called "normal" one)
Deleuze goes further to say about the third option: "It should be clear that the normal answer is the most fantastic, psychotic of the the three." Clearly, Deleuze is referencing modern Christianity in the third answer. He provides no additional support, nor does he elaborate further, but it is from here where I started my own line of thought.
Nietzsche talks about the moral psychology of Christianity A LOT, and most of the following has in all probably already been said or alluded to by Nietzsche and others, however I want to reiterate in my own words here.
What's most striking about Christianity is how incredibly violent it is. I was raised Catholic and went (read: was dragged) to church fairly regularly and I do remember noticing from an early age the particular iconography that is on display in a Catholic cathedral: depictions of thorns and blood and pain are literally everywhere you look. What is on display in almost every Catholic church is the stations of the cross (bloody in themselves), which always put me at a slight unease.
Now it is true that Catholicism is not the only brand of Christianity. Protestant churches by comparison are much more modest in their aesthetic. The official reason for this was that it was a protest against what it considered to be the lavish excesses and corruptions of the Catholic church. But all of these changes: (modest aesthetics, a more liberal interpretation [for most sects] of the Bible) only obfuscate the main point: that Christianity, no matter how you envision it, is a religion that is founded on the brutal torture and murder of a human being.
Of course many Christians would claim (rather indignantly I would imagine) that this particular understanding is extreme, pessimistic, and misleading (among other things); however I don't see any way around it. Christianity has made use of many different symbols during its life (the lamb, the Ichthys) but the one it seems to prefer is the cross. How else is one supposed to describe this symbol? Literally, it is the depiction of a murdered man (who had been tortured) nailed to a piece of wood.
But what is especially perverse is that not only the torture and murder of a man is the cornerstone of a world-wide faith, it's that the faithful must continually, retroactively demand it. If that man hadn't been tortured and murdered, none of them would be able to get to heaven. It is no wonder why guilt is so pervasive (even necessary) in Christianity. Could you sleep well knowing that a man had to be tortured and murdered so you could sleep well?
The madness goes even further: Jesus let this happen. He willingly let himself be tortured and murdered. I truly don't know what is more psychotic: that billions of people must continually be grateful that, and have demanded that, a man be tortured and murdered for their own gain, or that the man in question
acquiesced!
And what does this say about the Christian god? Even if one realized the madness and pleaded that the crime on Golgotha should never have happened, they too are left in a debt they never agreed to, unfairly bound to a supposed "salvation" they never asked for. I can only imagine the god of Abraham to be of the cruelest disposition in light of this, a despot who takes nothing but pleasure in our guilt, pain, and suffering.
Pain is enjoyable for the person who inflicts it (Sadism)
Pain is enjoyable for the person who suffers it (Masochism)
But the third one is the most interesting:
3. "Pain is pleasing to the gods who contemplate and watch over man" (the so called "normal" one)
Deleuze goes further to say about the third option: "It should be clear that the normal answer is the most fantastic, psychotic of the the three." Clearly, Deleuze is referencing modern Christianity in the third answer. He provides no additional support, nor does he elaborate further, but it is from here where I started my own line of thought.
Nietzsche talks about the moral psychology of Christianity A LOT, and most of the following has in all probably already been said or alluded to by Nietzsche and others, however I want to reiterate in my own words here.
What's most striking about Christianity is how incredibly violent it is. I was raised Catholic and went (read: was dragged) to church fairly regularly and I do remember noticing from an early age the particular iconography that is on display in a Catholic cathedral: depictions of thorns and blood and pain are literally everywhere you look. What is on display in almost every Catholic church is the stations of the cross (bloody in themselves), which always put me at a slight unease.
Now it is true that Catholicism is not the only brand of Christianity. Protestant churches by comparison are much more modest in their aesthetic. The official reason for this was that it was a protest against what it considered to be the lavish excesses and corruptions of the Catholic church. But all of these changes: (modest aesthetics, a more liberal interpretation [for most sects] of the Bible) only obfuscate the main point: that Christianity, no matter how you envision it, is a religion that is founded on the brutal torture and murder of a human being.
Of course many Christians would claim (rather indignantly I would imagine) that this particular understanding is extreme, pessimistic, and misleading (among other things); however I don't see any way around it. Christianity has made use of many different symbols during its life (the lamb, the Ichthys) but the one it seems to prefer is the cross. How else is one supposed to describe this symbol? Literally, it is the depiction of a murdered man (who had been tortured) nailed to a piece of wood.
But what is especially perverse is that not only the torture and murder of a man is the cornerstone of a world-wide faith, it's that the faithful must continually, retroactively demand it. If that man hadn't been tortured and murdered, none of them would be able to get to heaven. It is no wonder why guilt is so pervasive (even necessary) in Christianity. Could you sleep well knowing that a man had to be tortured and murdered so you could sleep well?
The madness goes even further: Jesus let this happen. He willingly let himself be tortured and murdered. I truly don't know what is more psychotic: that billions of people must continually be grateful that, and have demanded that, a man be tortured and murdered for their own gain, or that the man in question
acquiesced!
And what does this say about the Christian god? Even if one realized the madness and pleaded that the crime on Golgotha should never have happened, they too are left in a debt they never agreed to, unfairly bound to a supposed "salvation" they never asked for. I can only imagine the god of Abraham to be of the cruelest disposition in light of this, a despot who takes nothing but pleasure in our guilt, pain, and suffering.
posted by Mike at
5:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home