We face this
sort of choice again and again in our lives. It never fully ends. The pressure
of fitting in, the pressure of keeping a job, the pressure of maintaining
friendships, the pressure of many other things will often put us into a position
of needing to choose: do I want these people to see me as good and continue to
accept me, or do I want to actually do the right thing? This is a common
pressure on us. It takes character to make the right decision consistently.
John C.
Wright reflects on this in his book Transhuman and Subhuman, in light of
another book, The Glory Game:
"The theme of the book, as I said above, is abnormally
clear, because Laumer skillfully has left out anything which might detract or
delay from emphasizing that theme. This story is as sharply pointed as a fable
by Aesop. The point is the answer to the question famously asked by Socrates,
but surely asked by all men in all ages when they reach a certain age, whether
it is better to be seen as evil while truly being good, or to be seen as good
while truly being evil?
The question divorces the reward of virtue from the reality
of virtue, at least, in the view of the world where the only reward is the
esteem and applause of men. Tan Dalton does what is right, come hellfire or
floodwater, and does not flinch at paying the price in terms of esteem lost,
prestige ruined, career savaged, character slandered—and he does not get the
girl in the end.
The setup of the paradox of seeming rather than being good is
simple enough: Dalton is presented with two political parties, a stupid party
and an evil party, both of whom have a dumb and cowardly answer to a
not-very-complex question, but a question that requires bravery and fortitude
to answer. He cannot in good conscience join with either party, and so he is
isolated, despised by both, and scorned by all. In other words, he is given for
his goodness the exact same reward rightly given to evil men.
One thing that particularly delighted me both as a child and
as a man about Dalton’s answer is the pragmatic idealism of it. Pragmatically,
it is unwise either to overreact or underreact to the aggression of an
ambitious but weaker alien menace. But whether it is unwise or not, it is
unfair on idealistic grounds not just to Mankind, but to the Hukk aggressor
also, to meet aggression with a reward, because it confuses them into a false
picture of the world, one where they can make many small piecemeal attacks with
no fear of massive, overwhelming, or, (in this case), genocidal retaliation.
Now surely no one raised in a Christian nation, (even one
that is culturally Christian if not officially), is unaware of the answer to
the Socratic question. The non-Christians who, for whatever reason, accept
Christian value judgments as valid can see in the example of Christ on the
cross, or Socrates drinking hemlock, the reward of being good rather than
looking good. Until very recently, the picture of a man willing to make any
sacrifice to do the right thing, despite any slander or false accusation, was a
paramount ideal of our civilization.
The self-aggrandizing hucksterism of a Cassius Clay was not a
mainstream ideal, nor was success at any cost, nor did anyone listen to
smirking cads who said that winning was not everything, but the only thing.
Even children were taught the ideal of seeking the reward of
virtue not in the opinion of the fickle world: Superman is garbed as a drab and
mild mannered reporter who cannot even get a date, no worldly reward comes to
Clark Kent for his good deeds; Spider-Man is hated as a menace by the city he
saves, so if anything, his reward is even less. These are the men upheld, and
rightly so, as heroes to our children. Glory Hounds like Booster Gold or
Gilderoy Lockheart are rightly portrayed as distasteful, comedic, or
villainous.
We are a society that by tradition—Christian
tradition—mistrusts those who seek the good opinion of society."[i]
I think one
of the most important points in this section of Wright's discussion is this one:
“Until very recently, the picture of a man willing to make any sacrifice to do
the right thing, despite any slander or false accusation, was a paramount ideal
of our civilization.” Our modern moral code has completely changed, which is
why the anti-hero, who is really often just an interesting villain, is so
common in today’s pop-culture. The idea of the clever, but devious, ordinary
man who uses any means at his disposal to get “what is his” is a picture of the
new pagan morality overcoming our society…which is really just the old pagan morality
returning. A morality with no real higher guide or judge, one that simply does
what seems right or feels necessary in the situation.
But the
truly noble person, the truly good man, does not focus on success at any price
or any cost. He is willing to suffer for doing what is right. The world might
mock the Ned Starks of society and look at them as foolish, or pity them for
their old morality, but our western culture was so successful, in part, because
it was built by people who had a higher sense of morality than just doing what
worked, or what succeeded. Men and women who knew it was correct to do what was
right, and not just because of some expedient reason or belief they would
necessarily always prosper. They knew that doing what was right was the correct thing to do because they knew they would be judged by a higher power; God.
Paul
reflects on this in the book of Galatians. In this book he is dealing with some
popular false teachers, and that is a key point; they are popular. He reflects
on the motivations for his ministry by saying, “10 For am I now seeking the
approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still
trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10). Paul’s
concern is not popularity or success, even though he does want to flourish in
his ministry. Paul’s main concern is that he is doing what Christ commanded him
to do. Success, for Paul, is receiving that commendation from his Lord, “Well
done good and faithful servant.” Paul had many failures and many successes in
his ministry. But overall it was a barnstorming success, as he was part of the
early generations of the Church which made the Church the power force in this
world that it became. But this success was a bonus to his ministry, serving his
Lord was the goal.
It may be
popular today to look at doing what works, whether it is right and good or not.
It may be popular to go along with this culture, because this is the increasing
zeitgeist of our world today, as reflected by the pop-culture push for the
break all the rules, even decency rules, character of a lot of modern media.
But Paul, and many other Christians, were willing to suffer for doing what was
right in a culture that rarely rewarded that, basically guaranteeing that they
would face persecution of some kind and a often a very hard road.
Our modern
culture is reviving that old pagan moral code, which is really a lack of moral
code and whatever works, or whatever serves the cultural idols of the day. But
we have not yet completely lost that different morality that the Church unleashed
on the world. A morality that did exist before the Son of God came to earth as
a man, we see it in Joseph, Daniel, David and many others in the Old Testament,
but which did not really transform the culture until Jesus unlocked the Church
from the law of Moses through his death and resurrection. Then this morality spread
like wildfire, especially among the heathen Gentiles of Europe, and transformed
the European nations remarkably, eventually creating western civilisation. This
Christian impact has not completely faded. I don’t even know if it can
completely fade.
So, in light
of that, we should be far more willing to suffer and far more willing to do
what is good rather than worry about being seen as good by our decadent society,
because we live in a culture where it is easier to do that. I did not say it is
easy, it is often hard, but it is not as hard in our culture as it was in first
century Judea, Corinth, or Rome.
The only way
we can hold ourselves to this standard, and do so consistently, is to remember
we do not primarily serve men or governments, but God, and he will judge us
according to how we did what was right, and he will frown on us doing what made
us accepted by this world just to look good. Jesus gave us a heads up that this
would be part of following him;
“18 If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before
it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own;
but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world,
therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A
servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also
persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. 21 But all
these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not
know him who sent me.” (John 15:19-21).
We should
not be surprised when this happens. We were forewarned. But we were also
promised we would be rewarded. Knowing that we will be rewarded for what we
lose in this life for doing the right thing, helps us to have the strength to
do that.
This does
not mean we will always get it right and stand on the right principles. We are
fallen, prideful and stubborn creatures, we will get a lot wrong. But it does
mean we know the challenge set before us is not an impossible one. Previous generations
of believers maintained their nobility in even more trying circumstances. It is
simply our job to trust in Jesus, believe his words and carry on the tradition.
List of References
[i] Wright,
John C. Transhuman and Subhuman: Essays on Science Fiction and Awful Truth (pp.
129-130). Still Waters Books. Kindle Edition.
No comments:
Post a Comment