The Ball and the Cross

I mentioned earlier that I had read a book that I found quite insightful and interesting. It was G. K. Chesterton's The Ball and the Cross. The author seemed to emphasize two themes. The first was probably the hegemony of skepticism and relativism. No person is allowed to have certainty about the world except insofar as something is empirically verifiable. The problem with this, as Chesterton demonstrates, is that as a result, no moral or religious position is legitimate because that necessarily posits something beyond the material about the material.

The second and more salient point, however, builds upon this last. We are no longer permitted any serious conviction concerning life and its ultimate value. In the education system (sadly including much Christian education) we suffer perpetual doubt concerning questions about God and man's purpose on this earth. We dare not say anything too strong, anything too extreme, anything too (apparently) offensive.

It's obvious that we cannot impose our own views upon others. Too often, though, this principle is taken to the extreme of not even being able to voice our own beliefs in the presence of those whose beliefs are different. The problem goes one step further. It moves beyond simple "respectful silence" (if it is even that) and actually inundates people - particularly the youth - with the idea that the opinion itself is somehow unacceptable. Too many, particularly children, are not able to make precise logical distinctions, and so when something is unacceptable in one realm, it must be unacceptable altogether.

Chesterton's book presents two men arguing about the virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. One uses the "historical sciences" to "prove" that the virgin-birth was a myth. The other is a devout Catholic who decries the "arrogance" of modern philosophical and scientific methods. Both, however, share one thing in common: sincere belief. The one is a convicted atheist, the other a convicted Catholic. Society at large, however, cannot stand either of them because simply by arguing publicly about such a "frivolous" religious issue they cause a ruckus. Ultimately, the book concludes, society just cannot stand the fact that it has had its foundation ripped out from underneath it. Society despises their conviction because it feels cheated for not being able to have conviction about its positions. People loathe to see anyone not struggle with their same doubt and they refuse to tolerate anyone who is truly religious.

What strikes me in this is that the same problem seems to run rampant today. So many today constantly have to retract their comments or make apologies for what they say because someone else misinterprets and takes offense at them, or many simply do not say what they really believe at all. Consider children again: they are being raised in a society where belief is unacceptable and doubt and uncertainty are the standard mark of anyone who is "authentically thoughtful." Questioning, uncertainty and doubt have become the cardinal virtues for modern man.

Most disconcerting about this for me is that this doubt is something which, to varying degrees, we all eventually face. It is something, actually, which God utilizes in His great plan for redemption. Look to the example of many of the greatest saints: St. Thomas Aquinas (if Chesterton's assertion in The Dumb Ox is accurate), St. John of the Cross, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, Bl. Mother Teresa of Calcutta. All of these holy people faced great trials of faith, in darkness and uncertainty. Nevertheless, this came for them only after years of spiritual consolation and the building of the foundation of knowing and experiencing God's love. Darkness and doubt are a part of the life of a Christian, but when it is the standard from the very beginnings of life, that faith is likely to be weak, nearly dead. Even in a situation where, after years of much confusion, pain and struggle, a conversion is brought about, chances are that there will still be much doubt in the life of the convert.

After reading The Ball and the Cros, a paradox becomes apparent to me. The paradox is that we have reversed the order of belief and doubt today. Whereas, in the past, one would have had intellectual conviction and religious faith to accompany him into the darkness (when God brought him there), today, he has no such virtue and hence when trials beset him, his first reaction is to doubt his first principles and is likely to cave to the temptation that he is wrong. Because many have chosen not to persevere through the difficulties inherent in having faith, they have (perhaps unknowingly) created a dangerous trap for youth today such that a lifetime of Catholic faith is nigh impossible, even for those who desire it. Only by weathering the winters of faith - as dark as they may be - will we be able to rise out of this and provide a fertile bed of intellectual conviction and religious belief for the generations to follow.