Skip to main content.
May 12th, 2008

Evil By Any Other Name

     The Christian doctrine of Original Sin evokes more hostility from non-Christians than most other Church beliefs, with the possible exception of my personal favorite, Eternal Damnation. Interestingly, the animosity directed at Original Sin is not sourced in empirical research, because more evidence exists proving Adam’s sin has passed to all humanity than supports any other Christian doctrine. I mean, take a look around.

If every person is born with a blank slate, tabula rasa for you Stephen King fans, sooner or later a kid would appear who said “yes” all the time. Youngsters would be taught to share once, and the lesson would stick for a lifetime. Over centuries, humans would perfect child-rearing and societies would be filled with happy, well-adjusted, altruistic, kind, loving, and generous people. Humans would increasingly demonstrate those traits the race found to be admirable. Conflict and the like would, sooner or later, diminish to the point of insignificance. War, crime, and divorce would become the stuff of history. Humanity would get better and better, every day in every way.

     Come to think of it, I guess the notion of tabula rasa is just plain foolish. The reality of it all, as we know too well, is that after 10,000 years of recorded history every generation must learn the same painful lessons our forefathers stumbled over. There are not fewer wars, but more. The 20th century witnessed more war and more killing in war than all previous centuries combined. History students know that’s saying something, for every century has been blighted by conflict, much of it needless, all of it cruel. The 21st century is promising to be another record-setter. A quick glance at neighborhoods, schools, and police blotters suggests humans cannot get along one-on-one any better than do nation-states. Full-scale riots break out on high school campuses. America is imprisoning a higher percentage of its population than ever. It’s as if everyone was infected with something. Hmmm.

Nothing proves Original Sin quite like the tendency of political power to devolve into the control of the brutal and ruthless. Our nation and a few others around the world are recent exceptions in the overall scheme of things, but for most of history and in most countries today dictators rule with an iron fist. If nothing was inherently wrong with humanity, the Marxian mantra of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” might work. But it’s precisely because of the congenital defects in mankind that communism fails so consistently. Humans are greedy and domineering by nature. We have to be taught to share and give and treat others as we want to be treated. When Jesus said, “Love others as you love yourself,” He was giving us an example we could relate too; we always care for ourselves. The drive for power, control, and supremacy is universal, a contest won all too often by the most cunning and unscrupulous.

Which brings me to Myanmar’s ruling military thugs. Taking control of Burma in 1962, the hoodlums have written the standard history of repression, consolidation of power, and outright terror. A cursory reading of Myanmar’s last 45 years reveals the typical pattern of crackdowns and corruption that have ruined hundreds of other unfortunate populations. With the arrival of last week’s cyclone, however, Myanmar’s leadership achieved a new low, at least for the time being.

    Cyclone Nargis wiped out huge swathes of Myanmar, killing thousands and rendering perhaps 1.5 million people homeless. Nations and relief organizations around the world immediately began offering aid, and as we learned following Katrina, time is of the essence in these situations. Disease and starvation may kill far more than the storm’s initial destructive force. But, in a demonstration of cruelty almost beyond comprehension, Myanmar’s leaders continue to inhibit the influx of relief workers and supplies. “The generals continued Friday [May 9th, six days after the storm] to restrict foreign aid entering the country,” reported the Los Angeles Times. Among other restrictions, Myanmar’s rulers are demanding the few supplies trickling into the country be dropped of on airport tarmacs, leaving the distribution to government authorities. Relief workers are uncomfortable with that arrangement, especially after reports surfaced that the Myanmar government is selling its best rice, now very valuable, to neighboring countries while starving Burmese are given rotten food. Additional delay could see the already desperate situation spiral out of control, and recent estimates of possible deaths have reached 1 million.

     Aghast at such barbarism, reasonable people everywhere are straining to understand Myanmar’s reluctance to help its own people. Some have speculated the military leaders have been stung by recent criticism from the United States, and therefore will not accept America’s help. Gwynne Dyer, writing in The Californian, argues that Myanmar’s “commanders are fully aware that most Burmese hate their rulers, and fear that the presence of large numbers of foreigners might serve as a spark for another popular uprising.” Perhaps, but isn’t a revolution more likely when the population is starving to death? Isn’t it more likely the regime would gain credibility, and the security it longs for, by allowing urgently needed aid to enter the country unhindered? Of course, but therein lies the problem of trying to understand evil. 

Sinful behavior never makes sense. Americans spent years trying to understand Bill Clinton’s interaction with Monica Lewinsky. It’s a waste of time. No one can provide a rational explanation when a President of the United States of America risks everything for a few moments pleasure with a nameless intern.  A corrupt LAPD officer, just sentenced to a 13-year prison sentence, confessed to the judge “I became the very thing I hate.” He’ll no doubt spend a good portion of his time trying to figure out “What was I thinking?” Whether he was thinking or not, his behavior cannot be rationally understood.

Neither can we hope to make sense of a government willing to harm its own people, especially when helping them is as simple as opening a door. For my money, the best explanation for irrational behavior is bound up in human nature. We are prone to foibles of ever sort. The Apostle Paul agonized over his proclivity to “practice the very evil that I do not wish.” Truth be told, he is not alone. Self-destructive, irrational, harmful, hateful, and just plain stupid behavior is part of every person’s resume. Neither kings nor peasants are exempt Paul’s bewildering self-assessment; “The good that I wish, I do not do.” It’s a damnable condition, shared by us all, and rightly understood as just one more manifestation of Original Sin.   

Posted by Jerry Pomeroy in Current Affairs

1 Comment »

This entry was posted on Monday, May 12th, 2008 at 6:09 pm and is filed under Current Affairs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

One Response to “Evil By Any Other Name”

  1. howard pomeroy says:

    Why would I care what “non Christians” say about original sin? Why would I care that Catholics actually consider the wafer to be Christ’s body? Why would I care what any religion thinks about anything? It has always seemed to me that religion is particularly individual in nature. If I walked into any Christian church in America on a Sunday morning, and handed out 3X5 cards and asked every person to describe God in their own words (with the one proviso that they could not say that “God is love” because that is the biggest copout in theology and meansnothing), what would I get back on the cards? My guess is as many definitions or descriptions of God as the number of people who answered. It is personal according to our own background, understanding, attitudes.
    Jess and I discussed this blog at some length because the notion of original sin just, plain baffles us. Why blame the human failings and foibles on Adam – because he was first? You mean that there are not any good people on the Earth? There are, of course, all kinds of explanations for bad human behavior – even Bill Clinton’s!
    After some discussion, I told Jess that my take on the need for a belief in original sin really refers to Jesus Christ. If all people were not sinners, then he did not die for everybody and I guess we cannot just have it like that.
    I really should not comment on blogs re religion because I am way out of my league and going up against an expert, fully trained in understanding these concepts. I suppose my ideas re this blog are laughable, and if they are then your day has been brightened although theological ignorance must be tiring to you. It is personal, I have no choice but to see it my way. And yes, I know exactly what I would write on the 3×5 card. I would tell you, but it is personal!

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Anti-Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree