Like many people, I have generally thought of disillusionment as being something "bad," but in a recent sermon, my pastor talked about how disillusionment can be a good thing. In that message, Pastor Nanette read an excerpt from Barbara Brown Taylor’s book The Preaching Life, and right away, I ordered a used copy of it.
Barbara
Brown Taylor is an American Episcopal priest,
academic, and author. She was ordained in 1984, and The Preaching Life (1993)
is the first of her many published books. It is largely autobiographical (Part
One) and a collection of sermons (Part Two). Pastor Nanette quoted from the
first chapter, “A Church in Ruins.”
In that
chapter, Taylor (b. 1951) writes about how in the 1970s, when she was in college,
many students and other young adults were becoming increasingly disillusioned
with Christianity. In that connection, she then wrote about a young father who
was grieving the loss of an infant daughter.
The devastated
father said, “If God is going to let something like this happen, then what’s
the use of believing at all?” To this, Taylor remarks: “His disillusionment is
emblematic of the post-Christian era, when the perceived promises of Christendom
lie broken and the existence of God—never mind the omnipotence of God—seems a
fantasy.”*1
In that context, Taylor surprisingly avers that perhaps disillusionment “is not so bad.” She explains:
Disillusionment is the loss of illusion—about ourselves, about the world, about God—and while it is almost always painful, it is not a bad thing to lose the lies we have mistaken for the truth. … Disillusioned, we find out what is not true and are set free to seek what is.
What an
important insight!
So many
people who have rejected Christianity or faith in God have done so because of
having harbored some illusion, some lie they mistook for the truth. But many
who became disillusioned were, indeed, liberated from some lie and set free to
seek and to find the truth.
Sigmund
Freud wrote/spoke much about religion/faith in God as being an illusion. One of
his most famous books is The Future of an Illusion (1927; Eng. trans.,
1928). In the sixth chapter, he states, “Religious doctrines are all illusions,
they do not admit of proof, and no one can be compelled to consider them as
true or to believe in them.”
In that
same chapter, Freud wrote, “What is characteristic of illusions is that
they are derived from human wishes. … The illusion of religion is fulfilled in
the belief in a God who protects us and compensates us in a future life.”
Back in
October 2014, I posted a blog article titled “Was Freud a Fraud?” My conclusion
was that, indeed, in many ways, he could be considered so. And now (with the
help of ChatGPT), I am more convinced that my criticism of Freud then was well-grounded.
Many of
Freud’s main assertions were illusions, in the sense that they did not admit of
proof (as they were neither empirically verifiable nor falsifiable) and no one
could be “compelled to consider them as true or to believe in them.” Just like
many religious beliefs, they may be true or false, but they can’t be
scientifically proven to be one or the other.
Just as
many religious people need to be disillusioned, that
is, liberated from the lies they have mistaken for the truth so that they
can seek and (ideally) find that which is true, it is the same for those who embrace
“scientism,” people such as Freud and philosopher Daniel Dennett.*2
Dennett (1942~2024)
is one of the "four horsemen" of what has often been called the “new atheism.”*3
Dennett is often quoted as saying, "There's simply no polite way to tell
people they’ve dedicated their lives to an illusion."
Well,
since they are already dead, perhaps I don’t need to be polite, but it seems
clear to me that Freud and Dennett did devote their lives to an illusion. They
badly needed to be disillusioned, but never were, as far as we know.
Disillusionment
is the best thing that could happen to present-day people whose worldview is
similar to Freud’s, Dennett’s, and others who embrace scientism and complete
secularism.
What, though,
could be better than being liberated from lies and finding the truth that sets
one free!
_____
*1
When I read those words, I wrote “Oord” in the margin, referring to theologian
Thomas Jay Oord, the author of a seminal book on this issue about whom (in
January of this year) I posted a blog article. Oord rejects the idea of God’s
omnipotence (as it is usually conceived). If you want to (re)read that post, click
here.
*2
Scientism is the belief that science is the only valid path to knowledge
and that scientific methods should be applied to all areas of inquiry, dismissing
philosophy and/or religion as illegitimate or inferior.
*3
The other three are Christopher Hitchens (1949~2011), Richard Dawkins (b.
1941), and Sam Harris (b. 1967).
About two hours ago, I received the first comments regarding this blog post from local Thinking Friend Vern Barnet:
ReplyDelete"What will it take for the MAGA crowd to become disillusioned about our charlatan President? It may be indeed be a painful experience but may lead to political health."
Thanks for your pertinent comments, Vern. I don't know what it will take, but I think the future of our country (and our democracy), depends to a large degree on an increasing number of MAGA people becoming disillusioned, finding out "what is not true and ... set free to seek what is," as Barbara Brown Taylor wrote.
DeleteThen I received an email from a Thinking Friend in New York. He wrote, in part,
ReplyDelete"Thanks for this ... piece Leroy. A provocative take on 'disillusion.' The bigger question of why take God seriously in a world full of woes is one of the great ones. ...
"I personally do not rule out the existence of a powerful God (Pascal and all that). But I don't remember the philosopher(s) and theologians who posit that God set the universe in motion (in different ways) and then just let things unfold. For me G*d in no way would attend to the details of mere mortals on this 1 blue marble."
The philosophical and theological belief that posits the existence of a supreme creator who designed the universe but does not intervene in its operations is usually called deism.
DeleteTwo of the noted thinkers who propounded deism are Voltaire and Thomas Paine--and despite what many Christian nationalists are now saying, that seems to have been the theological position of Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, among others.
It seems to me though, the thinkers/politicians just mentioned needed to be disillusioned, that is, set free from the illusion that belief in a Creator God necessitates belief in God directly creating and manipulating everything so that everything, good or bad, is directly due to the will of the Creator. This illusion is based on the traditional believe in the inerrancy of the Bible which, it is thought, must be interpreted literally. Thus, the creation story in Genesis is seen as being factually true rather than a "myth" asserting the truth of God as Creator but devoid of facts about when or how that was done. Thus, people need to see that the idea of God as being much like a puppeteer in direct control of everything in the world and of everything that happens in the world is an illusion. Physical evolution is a fact, and many people need to be disillusioned so they see the truth of what is rather factual.
So here is my point: we can "take God seriously in a world full of woes" because those woes are not directly caused by God. Rather, if we so desire, God nourishes us when we face the various woes of the world and strengthens us to join with other people of good will to help those who because of those woes are suffering much more than we are.
[I also appreciate the reference to Pascal, and since the TF who made the above comments wasn't reading my blog back then, I am recommending to him (and other newer readers) the consideration of my blog article about Pascal that I posted in October 2017:
https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2017/10/in-praise-of-pascal.html
Local Thinking Friend Ed Kail comments,
ReplyDelete"I remember hearing it during my C[linical] P[astoral] E[ducation] course the summer of 1976: 'The good thing about disillusionment is that it reveals that you had an illusion that you need to be “dissed” from'.”
Thanks for sharing this, Ed. That is the point Barbara Brown Taylor was making, but you heard that long before her book that I cited was published.
DeleteToo complicated and Philosophical for me and we will All find out who was disillusioned when we get to Heaven!
ReplyDeleteI'm fully onboard with your description (and Taylor's) of becoming disillusioned with things that are not true in order to be set free to seek what is, because that accurately describes both the disillusionment I experienced with much Evangelical/Fundamentalist dogma—and my freedom now to pursue something closer to Jesus' original good news.
ReplyDeleteI am not under the delusion that I have no delusions. But I don't know what they are. If anything that cannot be proved true is delusion, then every statement of faith is delusional. But then, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for (NB, not "wished for"), the evidence of things not seen.
ReplyDelete