Unitarian Universalist Meeting of South Berkshire

 

January 8, 2006

 

“The Devil Built a Chapel There:

 

Understanding Evil, the Devil, and other ‘Burning Questions’”

 

 

Rev. Kathy Duhon

 

            I have taken on some huge and difficult topics today – evil, the Devil – so, let’s start with the ‘burning questions’:  “Did you hear what happened when the first Unitarian moved into Georgia?  The K.K.K. burned a question mark on his lawn.”

Burning questions are more our style than talking about evil, the Devil, or even the KKK.  And we are not alone.  Liberal religion of all kinds dwells strongly in hope, and speaks much of love and faith and joy.  Certainly, most folks are not comfortable with the concept of evil or the Devil – our mind tends to go either to the cartoonish images of Halloween or to the grotesqueries of genocide – and not to want to dwell on either type of image.  

The Universalist side of our tradition dispensed with the theology of Hell, declaring it to not be Biblically true, nor relevant religiously.  A good God, they reasoned, would not damn beloved humanity, and they could back it up with Bible verses.  Satan was a myth, not a real being.  Even though there were temptations and sins, in the end, all people would be saved – so universalism taught. 

When folks first heard about this theology of universalism, they expressed concern, like the Baptist minister a couple of hundred years ago, who was traveling briefly with the Universalist minister Hosea Ballou.  He was alarmed at the idea that God would not condemn the wicked to eternal hellfire and said to Ballou, “Why, if I were a Universalist, I could knock you over the head, ride off with your money and horse, and have nothing to worry about!” 

“If you were a Universalist,” replied Ballou, “the thought would never even occur to you.”  The argument that folks made against universal salvation was that people would do evil things if they did not have Hell to worry about.  Two hundred years of universalism has not borne that out, nor do we find all who believe in Hell to be saints.

            One of my teachers in theological school, a Midwesterner, said that when he was growing up, folks would be concerned about young people when they doubted the existence of God.  Concerned, but not too worried, because they had faith that a deeper faith would arise out of the doubting and searching.  In our reading, Joan Chittister wrote about the absence of God and the dark night of the soul being what can lead you to a fuller faith.  On the other hand, my teacher said, if folks out in the Midwest heard that you quit believing in the Devil, they were seriously worried.  Nothing good could come of that!  I suppose the implication was that a belief in the Devil keeps you toeing the line, behaving yourself, and so it is good for society.

            I remember when, many years ago, I went to the opposite extreme in my faith walk.  I began to wonder if belief in the Devil represented giving credence to something that it would be better not to even think about.  Having a powerful devil figure in one’s theology seems to imply giving power to evil, at least that’s what I was concerned about.  I knew too many people who blamed the devil for their faults, were afraid of the devil’s power to overcome them, and especially, were willing to decide that others were possessed by the devil.  Not only does this kind of thinking and believing seem magical, it is dangerous – it says that evil is the most powerful force, and somehow beyond our human abilities, or even God’s Love.  

            Later, I studied about the devil, or Satan, both in theological school, and afterwards in reading Elaine Pagels’ book, The Origins of Satan, which we heard from earlier.  The early Universalists were not far off the mark of what modern Biblical scholars have to say about Satan.  Satan is a Hebrew word that means “adversary”, and not really a clear figure in Judaism.  This is similar to the word for angel, which means “messenger”.  Anyone or anything could serve as a messenger or an adversary – it was a way of naming the dynamics of life, not necessarily supernatural beings.  The word devil is related to the word slanderer, again, giving the sense of naming the struggle, not a spirit.

Demon, or Daemon, is a spirit, an evil spirit, but comes from a word that had to do with an outer force.  It was related to Daimon, more of an inner force, and sometimes used as a word for a god, as Homer did.  The Hebrew, Greek and Roman cultures were all involved in developing this idea of devil.

The figure of Satan evolved over time, and is considered the Lord of evil, to some extent in Judaism, but especially so in Christianity.  Satan is the dark and fallen angel who rules Hell and tempts humans into evildoing.  The Devil, the Demon, has a whole history that is alluded to in the Bible, but actually exists mostly in texts that are not canonical, that did not make the cut into the Bible, like the Gospel of Bartholomew, with its descriptions of hell and of Satan’s angels.  In that so-called gospel, we are told that of the 30,000 souls who leave the world each day, only 3 go to Paradise!

Unfortunately, these gloomy and fiery images still dominate many people’s understandings, keeping them fearful, and feeling fallen.  I even came across a U.S. district court case in 1971 against “Satan and his staff”.  It was “a civil rights action against Satan and his servants who allegedly placed deliberate obstacles in [the] plaintiff's path and caused his downfall, wherein [the] plaintiff prayed for leave to proceed in forma pauperis”, in other words, not having to pay for court fees, declaring bankruptcy of the spirit and the wallet.  He was denied, partly because they could not establish a residence for Satan in their jurisdiction.

In our understanding of the words for devil and the words written about the devil, the most important argument, I believe, is put forth by Elaine Pagels.  The use of the devil concept has been tied to demonizing, she maintains, to declaring some people to be so “other” that they are of the devil, of that other force for evil, and not of us good folks.  The most recent evolution of Satan, and I believe Pagels would agree, is expressed by Southern Baptist president Jack Graham, who said, “Satan is the ultimate terrorist”, and went on, “this is a war between Christians and the forces of evil.”  This demonizing is surely a horrible use of religion, accomplishing the opposite of what we are supposed to be doing – distancing and disconnecting us from each other, rather than binding us in love and hope, and in the truth of the interdependent web of all existence.

With the concepts of devil, Satan, and Hell so obviously problematic, what about evil?  Those concepts are at base mythic devices that have been used to help understand and grapple with evil, though they have been much abused.  Our knowledge has grown, so for example, much of the demonic possession stories in the gospels were clearly used to explain what we know to be disease and mental illness.  To use demonology to scare people into behaving may or may not work, and is fraught with problems, but to ignore evil altogether may be to abandon people to the ‘hellishness’ of ‘devilish’ behavior.  Seriously, evil is something real and sometimes even palpable, and if we take away mythic and metaphoric ways to capture it, we need to find other ways to speak about evil.

At the apex of Western religion’s humanistic “onwards and upwards” forever theology of the early 20th century, we were confronted with the realities of massive evil in World War II, and immediately began wondering if God was dead, asleep, or irrelevant.  Any modern theology or philosophy must consider evil, in the wake of recent history. 

Liberation theology came along in the ‘70s and ‘80s and grappled with the question of evil.  Those theologians noticed that evil is not simply what individuals do, and certainly not what a powerful evil horned creature out there does or makes us do, but has a systemic, structural aspect to it.  It’s not that society is evil, per se, as in Reinhold Niebuhr’s “moral man and immoral society”, but that systems and structures in society have the power to do much evil, and that we are therefore implicated, and must fight these systems and structures. 

Using liberation theology to instruct us, we realize that if war is fought using our tax dollars, then we are responsible for the killing.  If people suffer from the lack of adequate medical care, housing, or food, and we live in a society of abundance where we benefit at the expense of others, then we are culpable for their suffering.  Evil is a complex reality and we need to try to understand its power in order to defeat it personally and structurally.

To me, our beginning quote today, “Wherever God erects a house of prayer, The Devil always builds a chapel there” is not primarily about God, congregations, or the Devil, but a metaphoric statement about human nature.  It implies that wherever you try to establish anything good, like a church, you are at risk of inviting evil. 

Both governments and religion often end up with power ‘to burn’, so to speak, and people are persecuted.  Our U.S. Constitution’s first amendment separation of church and state is there to protect both civil rights and freedom of religion, and also to keep both the state and religion from the corruption of that dangerous mingled power of state religions.  Any group that brings people together has power, and any power can be corrupted.  In our democratic form of government, we take checks and balances very seriously, in order to keep power from being corrupted, as had seemed inevitable in the imperial governments the world had mostly known before our nation’s beginnings. 

We do well to continue to defend the Constitution whenever we notice its violation, for power that squelches the rights of the people is power that is evil.  Since our President has violated the Constitution in his administration’s illegal use of wiretapping, discovered recently, as well as in the internationally illegal and immoral waging of war in Iraq, and the unconstitutional abridgement of rights through the PATRIOT ACT, I have joined the many who are calling for his impeachment.  Evil is being done in our name, by our government, and if we are passive, as Bonhoeffer warned – and he knew, having been imprisoned by the Nazis – we will join the “fools” who are “capable of any evil” and “incapable of seeing that it is evil”.

            Now I have come to the crux of the matter, for me.  I have just spoken about the existence of evil out there in the world – am I demonizing?  That’s a burning question.  Were I to humbly confess my own evil, and I do, I am complicit – I believe we all are – in the great suffering that is caused and done in our name, with our resources, then I would be on safe ground, right?  But I have named evil out there, in the way that our government is acting, and I have witnessed to confronting that evil, mine and the administration’s. 

I am on shaky ground, and I know it.  If I want to continue to love others, and not to make of the other a demon, then I must continue to affirm the humanity and goodness of those I am calling to account for the evil that they are perhaps even incapable of seeing as evil, including our President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and others, while still holding them accountable for the evil that they are indeed perpetuating.  Who am I to judge that evil?  That is a burning question.  I hope that I am informed by my religion and my government and my society and my knowledge of history and my ethical values, but I know that I must also always question my ability to make such a judgment. 

There is a simple phrase from my past, mostly from my work for prisoner’s rights, though it comes from Christianity – “Love the sinner, hate the sin”.  That is perhaps too simple, and awfully hard to do.  I believe it takes a strong, vigilant, prayerful, reflectiveness to continue to oppose evil, while not demonizing the other, but rather, working for reconciliation and redemption.  But this is the religious task.  It also takes humility and humor, and I am still working on all these things.  I will close with a little humor that reflects upon our religious values in the face of evil.

            The Unitarian Ambrose Bierce created a newspaper column in the 1920’s in which he wrote some cynical stuff, and invented new definitions for words, which were insightful, humorous, and perhaps a little wicked.  They were collected and printed as The Devil’s Dictionary.  Of note are his definitions of Unitarian and Universalist, which were 2 different religions at the time.

            Unitarian (n.)   One who denies the divinity of a Trinitarian.

(Not the divinity of the Trinity, mind you, but the divinity of the Trinitarian.)  To deny that others can speak for God, as though they are God, is to confront a most pernicious evil.  It is when people give themselves that degree of absolute power that they can be absolutely corrupted. 

          Universalist (n.) One who foregoes the advantage of a Hell for persons of another faith.

We may name the evil, confront it, and deny the false faith in a puppet God who does one’s bidding, but we cannot say that the person we are in conflict with is possessed by the Devil, or will burn in Hell.  We are working without a net, folks, without a framework of ultimate punishments or an eternal threat. 

How do we confront evil?  With good, the goodness that is our core, and is at the heart of the universe.  We confront evil with the Spirit of Life, Universal Love, with the God of Truth if that is our foundation, and with our entire beings.  We have all the power that is needed – and we really must use it to confront the powers and principalities of evil. 

Defoe is wrong, when it comes to us, here – the devil does not have the largest congregation among us.  Love does.  May our power always be turned to the good.  Amen.