Upper School thesis project

Katherine Burton: Reason, Emotion and Humanism in Twentieth-Century Literature, As Reflected Through Religion

Mrs. Clark

AP English IV

14 Apr 2008

Introduction

            Invisible to physical human perception are the multitudinous, underlying connections that link friend to friend, mother to child, husband to wife; these are connections that satisfy man’s primitive need to be in a relationship with another individual and to be loved and cared for.  But for some, there exists a deeper sense of longing for an entity, whether someone or something, to fulfill an emotional and spiritual need, a task that reaches beyond the capabilities of human relationships.  Perhaps this is an innate pining for a relationship with the Creator, an omnipotent Being who understands the individual more intimately than the individual understands himself.  For everyone, this experience is different; some search for this relationship in worldly possessions or in mind-altering substances; others seek out this connection in an established religion; still others continue on in life without ever recognizing or paying heed to this need.  Truly, religion has proved to be the most effective means of communing with God and discovering spiritual wholeness.  In a religion-based discussion with eight fellow intellectual scholars, Margaret Klenck voiced the opinion that it is necessary to “manifest this religious instinct” because man is “not sufficient unto [himself] as a creature and as a being” (Par 2, 4).  Of course, religion is a hazy issue, as there stands no definitive logical or scientific reasoning to prove its effectiveness, validity or legitimacy.  Yet such is the reason why man was instilled with the ability to reason and justify, to feel emotion and to connect with his fellow human beings in the plights of mankind and the search for a higher power. 

             Religion is an improvable enigma on its own, which is why it requires a leap of faith to accept.  In regards to this idea, Michael Shermer states, “If it was provable, and it was just obvious, then everybody would believe…unless God wanted you to make an emotional leap, and not just reason your way to believe” (Par 2, 6).  Maybe such are the qualifications of religion: mind over matter and faith over logic, where one must “[oppose] intellect and emotion” to reach the highest plane of spiritual elevation.  If the leap of faith is based on emotion, then “religion is both a matter of what we think, and a matter of what we feel” (Gallagher par 8).  Perhaps religion is simply the answer to the “universal need for explanations, comfort, and order in the face of chaos and disorder” (Fraiberg par 7). Frederick Lee responds with the notion that this feeling of wholeness and internal unity “can reflect truth. What if the feeling, or the need to be in communion with an ultimate being, is put there by design? Then that feeling is a reflection of truth” (Par 14).  This truth, then, is the fundamental drive that compels man to turn to religion. 

            If God institutes religion by divine design as a method of interaction between Him and His mortal children, then one can conclude some basic conceptions imperative to be recognized through participating in religious practices.  It is necessary to recognize the existence of God or some Supreme Being, superior to man in His omnipotent power.  It is necessary to recognize that for man to succeed in life and overcome the evils of the world, he needs be equipped with some sort of moral compass, or knowledge of right and wrong.  In addition, these individuals, in acknowledging the existence of God and knowing right from wrong, strive to develop a relationship with Him, the relationship that compelled them to turn to religion in the beginning.  As C.S. Lewis put it, “All your life an unattainable ecstasy has hovered just beyond the grasp of you consciousness.  The day is coming when you will wake to find, beyond all hope, that you have attained it, or else, that it was within your reach and you have lost it forever” (Nicholi 63).  

            As the global community becomes more aware of widespread religion, many twentieth-century authors have incorporated religious views and standpoints into their literature.  In creating characters susceptible to the onslaught of questions faced by mortal man, these authors create a relatable quality between the audience and their novel, as the characters strive for the completeness and closure that man finds in religious supplication.  Just as God instilled the reason, emotion and humanistic roots in His children that would aid them in their search for truth, so have modern day authors created characters whose spiritual journeys parallel those of mortal man in the quest for a spiritual relationship, wholeness of the soul, and internal unity.

Chapter Two: Supporting the Existence of God Through Reason

            It is a time-old conflict that argues the existence of a Supreme Being living high in the heavens above, superiorly reigning over man and all His dominions.  While it reaches beyond the realms of humanity to substantially confirm whether or not God exists, many individuals throughout History and the world have born personal affirmations of His presence and continue to sustain belief in His existence.  While this faith is an essential aspect of religion, it is only through reason that one can effectively convey support on this matter, as is reflected in established religion and persuasive literature. 

            One of the best literary endeavors that attempts to determine the reality of this nebulous entity is C. S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity, a theological masterpiece that reasons through a barrage of arguments to persuade the reader that God exists and that His existence is evident in the ways of humanity.  Lewis begins by establishing a law of right and wrong, or a “Moral Law” (21), a universal, ethical set of principles expected to be upheld by all men, seeing “that everybody has some innate understanding of a proper, moral behavior” (Jacobsen, Par. 3).  If everyone seems to have this universal understanding of morality, there must exist some underlying connection between all men that links them to each other and them to their Creator. Lewis continues on to reason that differentiating between right and wrong is not simply a facet of human nature, but rather an innate quality instilled in every individual by “a Something which is directing the universe, and which appears in [man] as a law urging [him] to do right and making [him] feel responsible…when [he does] wrong” (34).  One can then conclude that this law of right and wrong “must be something above and beyond the actual facts of human behavior…a real law which we did not invent and which we know we ought to obey” (31) and accordingly, a law instilled by a higher power.  While maintaining an objectivist attitude and refraining from advocating Christianity outright, Lewis recapitulates that there exist two pieces of evidence supporting God’s existence, namely the universe, which most certainly was created by a higher power, and the Moral Law that He implemented in the basic nature of man.  From this evidence that it was God who founded a universal Moral Law, we can “conclude that the Being behind the universe is intensely interested in right conduct—in fair play, unselfishness, courage, good faith, honesty and truthfulness” (37).  Here, reason in the basis of man’s belief in God because according to Lewis, the question of a Supreme Intelligence can never be answered via the scientific method.  “He thinks that one way we could expect this power to show itself would be ‘inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way…Something which is directing the universe and which appears in me as a law urging me to do right and making me feel responsible and uncomfortable when I do wrong’ ” (Nicholi 59).

            The existence of God is a common thread throughout twentieth century literature, where many characters believe in His presence and His divine intervention within their lives, evident in their participating in established religion or simply calling on Him in times of need.  A prime example is Elie Wiesel’s Night, an emotionally stirring account of the terrifying time Wiesel spent in Nazi-run concentration camps.  Wiesel was a steadfast member of the Jewish faith, but learned how imperative it was for survival to rely on God’s strength, truly living his religion rather than simply abiding by its tenets.  At first, Wiesel was tenacious in holding on to His faith, but inescapably, the “seeming meaninglessness of the suffering His people endured had to burst into the consciousness of His…indomitable Jewish faith” (Douglas par 5) and he slowly began to doubt God. While Wiesel struggled with the purpose and reasoning behind this unjustified punishment to which he was subjected, other victims saw the imprisonment as an obstacle to draw God’s people closer to Him. Says Akiba Drumer, Weisel’s campmate, of the despairing situation, “God is testing us. He wants to find out whether we can dominate our base instincts and kill the Satan within us…and if he punishes us relentlessly, it’s a sign that He loves us all the more” (Wiesel 42).  While times were hard, the Jews “still had faith that God had a greater purpose in mind, and though they opposed the idea of suffering, they would suffer with pride that they [were] part of God’s plan” (Douglas par 4).  Regarding this perilous and trying time for many, Douglas notes that the Holocaust was “a call to people everywhere to reevaluate the role of God in their lives.  The pain and suffering that we know took place is in dark contrast to what we would have thought possible in the presence of our God…but by asking questions, some have grown to learn that God never did things the way people expect Him to” (Par. 10).  Wiesel knew that God was watching over him and aware of His dreadful plight from the beginning, but the overwhelming sorrow and hopelessness of His situation was eased somewhat in doubting and disbelieving God’s presence. It was only later in life, looking back over this harrowing experience, that Wiesel was able to reevaluate the influence of God in His life and realize that only through God’s watchful care could he have made it through alive. 

            For some, as in the Holocaust, God was viewed as a symbol of hope and strength; for others, like Joan of Arc, the sole purpose of living was to serve God and fulfill His divine role for the individual.  Many viewed Joan as a lunatic teenage girl with outlandish ideas imparted by evil spirits, and she was thus ignored, her heavenly mission unrecognized.  In George Bernard Shaw’s theatrical depiction of the tale, “I hear voices telling me what to do. They come from God,” Joan claims (68).  God tells her that it is her mission to raise the siege of Orleans, to crown the Dauphin in Rheims Cathedral, and to force the English to leave France.  Despite rejection from the king, doubt because of her gender, and disbelief because of her mental state, Joan courageously sets out to fulfill her assignments from on high.  After she has been captured and imprisoned, Shaw depicts a scene during an inquisition prior to her imminent execution.  Joan refuses to recant her beliefs, proclaiming “If you command me to declare that all that I have done and said, and all the visions and revelations I have had, were not from God, then that is impossible: I will not declare it for anything in the world.  What God make me do I will never go back on; and what He has commanded or shall command I will not fail to do in spite of any man alive…and in case the Church should bid me do anything contrary to the command I have from God, I will not consent to it, no matter what it may be” (135).  Joan is portrayed as an individual so devout and devoted to God that she willingly dies in His name and on behalf of her mission for him. 

            While Joan of Arc is an extreme example of the ways in which God may be incorporated into one’s life, belief in His existence is reinforced in living a religion that advocates a personal relationship with him, and a lifestyle that brings His influence daily into the heart of the believer.  The Rapture of Canaan illustrates a fundamentalist family who live their religion down to the letter of a cultist law and are incessantly conscious of how their actions, thoughts and words affect God’s presence within their lives.  All the young children are expected to attend religious night classes where they memorize and recite “laws” of the church’s practice; the girls are expected to wear only dresses and never cut their hair; the family doesn’t believe in doctors or celebrating holidays, and they only eat food grown by the community. “When I was a child, I saw our community as a special place where God’s special children could be safe from the influence of the wicked world.  Later, when I was older, I saw our community differently.  I saw us like an island. Like and island sinking from the weight of fearful hearts”(Reynolds 17) notes Ninah, the teenage girl from whose perspective the story is told.  While she believes in God and His abiding presence, she questions, however daringly, if the religious practices of her family are the most effective ways to feel of His love.  Among these questionable practices, the Church advocates self-infliction of pain, as “physical discomfort is one of the best ways to keep your mind on heaven” (61).  After accidentally dozing off at the dinner table one evening, Ninah’s parents spread cockleburs and nettles over her bed as punishment, hoping that as she sleeps on them and endures this small discomfort, she will be forced throughout the night to think of the pain Jesus suffered on the cross (19-20).  While the belief system of the Church of Fire and Brimstone and God’s Almighty Baptizing Wind may not parallel the practices of other traditional Christian churches, the members wholeheartedly believe in God, the need for prayer, and the methods in which he uses His children as holy conduits of His power.

            In these literary examples, the characters all believe in and depend upon God despite man’s inability to truly prove His existence.  Faith alone justifies their beliefs, and whether the characters are living His commandments or fulfilling their heavenly missions, God is the driving power behind their lives.  For if God did not exist, where would be the meaning in living?  Meursault, the main character in The Stranger is an example of this uncertainty behind the purpose of life, as every day is the same, living tomorrow the way he lived yesterday.  The monotony and pointlessness of this life without reason reaches an indefinable absurdity beyond the needs for justification because there is no point in living another day.  Why should he make a good choice rather than a bad one?  Without any motive or provocation, Meursault kills the Arab on the beach, not even questioning himself or His reasons for doing it.  While awaiting His execution, Meursault is visited by a priest, whose theology and calls for repentance are rebuked by His prisoner.  “I had only a little time left and I didn’t want to waste it on God” (Camus 120).  Despite His looming death, Meursault maintains His careless attitude towards life, saying, “It was as if I had waited all this time for this moment and for the first light of this dawn to be vindicated.  Nothing, nothing mattered, and I knew why” (121). 

            A similar attitude is reflected in Brave New World, a world without God, where His presence is missing so blatantly, that only society’s outsiders, who are not immersed in the deceptive lies implemented to mask His absence, can recognize it.  Bernard notices the injustice in the segregation of the social systems, the self-centered attitude of instant gratification and man’s sorrowful but unnoticed lack of emotion, namely love.  Here, there is no such thing as a “Law of Human Nature,” an unspoken knowledge of what is right and wrong, or even any sense of moral behavior at all.  God is entirely replaced by Henry Ford, the much-worshipped inventor of the automobile and the instigator of a mechanical revolution, and even church services are replaced by the mockery of “Solidarity Services” (Huxley 78).  When John, the outsider from the Indian reservation, is exposed to this unconventional and unethical society, he is labeled as a savage because of “His interest being focused on what he calls ‘the soul,’ which he persists in regarding as an entity independent of the physical environment” (158).  Ironically, the most savage individual in the community understands life on a deeper and more intimate plane than any of the “civilized people.”  He recognizes the absence of God in His life, as unidentifiable as it may be, but prematurely takes His own life out of frustration, sorrow and intolerance for the society in which he was the most human. 

            Thus it is clearly evident how crucial God’s influence is in the sustaining of and success in life, as belief in a higher power brings reason and motivation behind living, and there is always someone to appeal to in times of need.  As Thomas Jefferson once said, “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear” (Robinson 1).   

Chapter Three: Overcoming Emotion to Uncover Priori Knowledge of Right and Wrong

            Never before has there been an era of human existence devoid of temptation or some means of enticement to sin and succumb to the evil pressures of the world.  Such is the nature of life.  There will always be good and bad or right and wrong, and forever more will mankind be engaged in a moral struggle between the two.  While man inherently knows the nature of goodness—beauty, love, trustworthiness or loyalty—it is necessary that man can identify the bad—the forces of dishonesty and deception intent on ensnaring and replacing the good—so that he may be able to keep himself above its insidious influence.  Thus, it is crucial that man be instilled with some kind of moral compass to lead and direct him in his ethical decision-making, steering him towards the good and away from the bad. There are evolving, continually strengthening forces out in the world today that exist solely to twist the bad and the evil into something man desires, and to deceive the population into believing that these concepts of bad are actually good.  As evil continues to permeate the lives, homes and thoughts of mankind, it is evident how steadily the defining line between right and wrong becomes increasingly blurred.  Now, in a time when the degrading forces of evil are so ubiquitous and influential in today’s society, it is imperative that man overcome his emotions, instincts, and impulses to make way for the rationality and logic within the realms of his innate knowledge of right and wrong. 

           “No aspect of our mental life is more important to the quality and meaning of our existence than emotions.  They are what make life worth living” (Sousa Par 1). Truly, the emotions and feelings of the individual are the elements that comprise his personality and define his character.  But one must be careful in giving heed to his emotions; emotion can lead a man to make a good logical choice out of reason and based on thought, while emotion can also drive a man to react impetuously as a result of stimulation or provocation.  “A totally emotional decision is typically very fast…This is the reactive (and largely subconscious) decision-making that you encounter in heated arguments or when faced with immediate danger…Another common use of emotion in decision is to start with logic and then use emotion in the final choice” (Emotion and Decision par 4).  This subconscious and reactive execution of an act is what differentiates impulsive emotion from logic-based emotion in the face of deciding between right and wrong, good or bad.  Still, one must be prudent in acting according to his emotions, as they cloud man’s perception of reason; clarity is only attainable in detaching oneself from his feelings and making himself available to his innate knowledge of right and wrong.  On this subject, C.S. Lewis says, “It is a mistake to think that some of our impulses—say mother love or patriotism—are good, and others, like sex or the fighting instinct, are bad.  All we mean is that the occasions on which the fighting instinct or the sexual desire need to be restrained are rather more frequent than those for restraining mother love or patriotism” (23).  Without emotion or innate instinct, man would be reduced to a robotic state of existence and life would be devoid of meaning or purpose.  Yet, emotions comprise the central underlying factors that affect one’s choices between good and bad when man should be relying more on his priori knowledge of right and wrong instead. 

            C.S. Lewis adroitly illustrates this relationship of right and wrong, showing how it relates to humanity by establishing the concept of a universal law to which all men are subjected, while they retain the choice to follow or disregard the law.   For example, quarrelling and arguing are natural human behaviors, which Lewis adapts to prove his point.  “Quarrelling means trying to show that the other man is in the wrong,” but both parties must have “some sort of agreement as to what Right and Wrong are,” a rule that composes the basis for determining the Law of Nature (Lewis 18).  This law exists as a universally accepted standard applicable to all people, defining the nature of what is right and what is wrong. “If no set of moral ideas were truer or better than any other, there would be no sense in preferring civilized morality to savage morality, or Christian morality to Nazi morality” (25).  All men inherently know that it is right to love and wrong to kill, but for some, knowing an act is wrong is no obstacle in the path of action.  According to Lewis, this law of human behavior is of a different nature than our laws of science in that “a body could not choose whether it obeyed the law of gravitation or not, but a man could choose either to obey the law of Human Nature or to disobey it” (18).  Such is the effect of emotion, one of the primary determining factors influencing an individual to make a choice, where the emotion serves as the motive, a common central conflict found in the pages of twentieth century literature.

            Instinct is the primary driving force behind Camus’ character in The Stranger, Meursault, a man devoid of significant emotions, who lives an existentialist life of absurdity. On a weekend vacation to the beach, Meursault encounters a lone, Arab man lying on the sand.  Under the beating rays of the hot sun, Meursault is overcome by the strong urge to shoot the innocent stranger without provocation.  As an adult, Meursault undoubtedly knows the penalties of killing a fellow man and the despicability of such an act, but finds this raw, overpowering desire easier to give heed to than a nagging conscience.  “It was this burning, which I couldn’t stand anymore, that made me move forward…My whole being tensed and I squeezed my hand round the revolver.  The trigger gave…I knew that I had shattered the…exceptional silence of a beach where I’d been happy” (Camus 59).  When establishing grounds for Meursault’s impending trial, his attorney asked, “if I had felt any sadness that day.  I answered that I had pretty much lost the habit of analyzing myself and that it was hard for me to tell him what he wanted to know” (65).  Upon reflection, Meursault is unable to recall his particular emotions or thought processes before committing the murder, but the reader is aware that there was a severe, burning compulsion to kill the man that day on the beach, an instinct that drives him to immediate action, wrong as it was.  Had he not responded to this fleeting urge and instead taken a moment to compose his current mental state of being, he would have given himself the chance to let the clarity of his common sense overpower the gnawing desire to kill a fellow man.

Another example of this impulsive instinct-driven decision-making is illustrated in Sheri Reynolds’ The Rapture of Canaan.   Ninah Langston is a maturing, teenage girl who finds herself burdened with an unwanted pregnancy after sinking into a precarious relationship with her cousin James.  In an effort to draw closer to the Lord, Ninah is assigned to be prayer partners with James; the two pray together in private every night in hopes to develop a relationship with the Savior on a more personal level and create a spiritual bond with each other, a relationship that eventually escalates to involve premarital sex.  Both James and Ninah know that their conduct during prayer partners is in complete opposition to the teachings of their religious community, but they rationalize that Jesus was using them as vessels through which to convey His holy spirit (Reynolds 146), and they continued this behavior without considering the consequences of their actions.  As a result of this new and exhilarating inundation of spiritual passion, Ninah unexpectedly finds herself pregnant, battling her family’s extreme disappointment, attempting to cope with James’ suicide and struggling with the prospect of raising a child on her own. 

In these instances, both Ninah and Meursault found themselves in morally compromising situations after reacting impetuously to the overpowering animalistic desire for bloodshed and lust, giving in to emotion rather than the rationality of their priori knowledge of right and wrong. Meursault unquestionably knows that killing another man is contrary to the ethical principles of society and aware that there would be a penalty associated with his actions.  During his interrogation, Meursault reveals that he fired the first fatal shot, paused, and then fired four more into the Arab’s body.  In that minuscule, yet revealing hesitation, he realizes the alarming seriousness and reality of his actions in addition to his commission of a crime, but saw no way out and finalized his fate by metaphorically “knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness” (Camus 59).  In the case of Ninah and James, they were pursuing happiness and God, or so they told themselves; both teenagers were aware that there existed consequences for participating in premarital relations, that it was wrong and against the principles of their religion.  Yet when they were overcome with such strong and irrepressible urges, the two disposed of reason and chastity to engage in prayer and supplication on a more intimate level. As a result of this behavior, Ninah was left a single mother ostracized in her community and disowned by her family, fending the consequences of an ill-made decision in the heat of passion.  In yielding to desire, these two characters made poor split-second decisions with life-altering repercussions as a result of responding to emotion rather than employing the more rational filter of right and wrong.  

            In contrast to these examples of accountability for one’s choices influenced by instinct, some twentieth century authors such as Aldous Huxley envisioned scenarios in which morality did not exist, individuals were not ruled by conscience, and choices were based on means of instant gratification of the physical appetites.  Within this civilization, man has been desensitized to the subtle whisperings of rationality, and the majority of society lacks the priori knowledge of right and wrong that would influence them to make reasonable and beneficial decisions.  Brave New World illustrates a demented idea of a utopian society where man has been conditioned to live a life beyond emotions or ethics, and society’s concepts of good and bad are completely backwards.  Promiscuity is advocated over monogamous relationships, social statuses are rigidly enforced, and people are urged to take an addictive, behavior-altering drug to escape from the pressures of everyday life.  One of the few shallow emotions this society can feel is a false sense of “happiness [derived] from consuming mass-produced goods…promiscuous sex, “the feelies,” and most famously of all, a supposedly perfect pleasure-drug, soma” (Pearce par 11).  While drugs are ubiquitious even in today’s society, soma is much more potent in the way it takes complete and inescapable control over the mind; it is “all about instant gratification…and the happiness it offers is amoral” (Pearce par 13).  Not a soul realizes the extent of the drug’s destructive nature and as the use of soma rids the individual of present emotion and rationality, the user is rendered unknowingly helpless, unaware of his inability to recognize the evil of this government-sponsored poison trap.  It “provides a mindless, inauthentic “imbecile happiness” –a vacuous escapism which makes people comfortable with their lack of freedom.  The drug heightens suggestibility, leaving its users vulnerable to government propaganda” (Pearce par 13). 

John the Savage, the only truly human member of the society, remains subject to his emotions despite the unreasonable way in which he is expected to live, as he is unable to relinquish them to the reigning power of soma.  John’s “happiness and sorrows don’t derive from taking a soul-corrupting chemical.  His emotional responses are apparently based on reasons” (Pearce par 17).  John is unable to function in this environment because he lacks the insensitivity and inability to relate to others, and knows deep down that it is wrong the way this society refutes all concepts of goodness.  Despite his immersion in this perverted society, he still retains the inbred emotions from his former life, and his innate consciousness of right and wrong indicates to him the distortion of goodness that this culture has undergone.  There exists no perception of morality, no Law of Human Nature, and no standards of right or wrong to live by.  Children’s education consists of perverted falsehoods such as the appropriateness of engaging in erotic play (Huxley 32), the evils of books and flowers (21), and the uselessness of moral learning (26).  Family, monogamy, and romance are all outdated ideals from the past (40), and the society takes pride in mass-producing humans by the thousands (8).  These people who live in this perverse utopian bubble “don’t ever grieve or treat each other’s existence as special.  They are conditioned to treat death as natural and even pleasant…Life on soma leaves them oblivious to the true welfare of others” (Pearce par 18).  This failure to feel or heed natural human emotions has desensitized the society to such an extent that consciences, ethics and principles are all things of the past. 

            In effect, emotions are simply another facet of the extraordinarily complicated human composition that make a person the individual he is, but as illustrated by twentieth-century authors, demise befalls those who solely pay heed to emotions without factoring in rationality or reason. In the end, it is the choices a man makes, influenced by his ingrained knowledge both right and wrong, that define the essence of his character at the core of his being.

Chapter Four: Using Religious Views of Existentialism and Humanism to Establish a Relationship With God

            For the last six thousand years since the creation of Adam, man has been plagued by the mystery of his origin, his existence, and his essential purpose in life.  Such enigmatic uncertainties have spawned the fundamental questions that religion serves to answer.  Instead of leaving man to feel alone and insignificant in the vastness of the universe, religion can be seen as a comforting security that provides the believer with a personal relationship with God.  There is believed to be a companionship between mortal man and the Supreme Being, a two-way partnership in which man communicates his needs, and then God reveals His hand within that individual’s life.  Without pinpointing a specific religion but simply leaving the matter open to a philosophical perspective, it is evident in twentieth century literature how authors incorporate religious views of existentialism and humanism through which their characters may establish an intimate relationship with God.

            Religious existentialism may seem oddly paradoxical as a philosophical belief system, but in actuality, it “places an emphasis on the social gospel and on the personal relationship with God through Christ.”  It also “traces back to the writings of Søren Kierkegaard and believes in the authority of the Bible, as God’s revelation to humanity” (Sunami Par 6).  Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, believed that a religious attitude was critical to the full understanding of life.  He held that “in the religious life, divine command is paramount and love for God is expressed in the willingness to set aside mortal habits and respond to the divine command” ( Soren Kierkegaard par 3).  This belief system advocates the view that “God has set us in a situation in which our choices…cannot be made rationally but are finally criteria less,” a view that is utterly “essential to the life of faith” (Soren Kierkegaard par 3).  Religious existentialists live primarily in obedience to God, accepting no secondary authority to Him other than their consciences, and take full responsibility for their actions while taking comfort in the omnipresent “sovereignty, guidance and mercy of God” (Sunami par 2).  In essence, one must “submit [himself] totally to God without reasoning,” allowing his faith and trust to transcend the boundaries of rationalism” (Christian Existentialism par 5). 

            Joan of Arc, can be viewed as a character that lived in accordance with religious existentialist tenets through George Bernard Shaw’s literary depiction of her in Saint Joan.  Joan believes that she has been chosen as a sacred messenger of God, selected to act in His name and fulfill His plans among men; she hears voices in her head and interprets them as His sacred instructions for her.  “I hear voices telling me what to do.  They come from God” (Shaw 68).  Despite the doubt and disbelief of others in the validity of her alleged holy partnership with God, Joan remains steadfast in her beliefs, trusting in Him entirely no matter how impossible the tasks ahead of her loom.  “The Dauphin will give me all I need to raise the siege of Orleans…Yes, that is what God is sending me to do” (63). “And to crown the Dauphin in Rheims Cathedral…and to make the English leave France” (68).    When Joan approaches Captain Baudricourt, demanding horses and soldiers for her army, he initially refuses on the grounds that she is crazy.  “They all say I am mad until I talk to them, squire.  But you see that it is the will of God that you are to do what He has put into my mind” (62) is her confident response.  While her superiors question her sanity and the authority behind her requests to build an army under her direction, Joan falters not once in her knowledge that she acting in accordance with God’s will. 

This steadfast and unwavering faith in God leads to a very intimate and personal relationship for Joan between her and her Lord.  “I now see that the loneliness of God is His strength…Well, my loneliness shall be my strength too; it is better to be alone with God: His friendship will not fail me, nor His counsel, nor His love.  In His strength I will dare, and dare, and dare, until I die” (119).  In this instance, Joan has submitted herself wholly to the demands of her God, refusing to surrender to any authority other than divinity, in a firm spirit of loyalty that parallels Kierkegaard’s basic views of religious existentialist conviction.  Upon being questioned before her imminent and impending death, Joan is asked if she will submit herself to the church and its leaders.  Joan confidently replies, “God must be served first.  My voices do not tell me to disobey the Church; but God must be served first” (136).  Even when faced with the penalty of death according to unjust accusations, Joan’s faith remains resolute. While she was seen as a radical, yet naive and foolhardy young girl, Joan’s incredible faith and trust in a higher power is the very essence upon which religious existentialist views are based. 

            Religious humanism is somewhat different from religious existentialism in that it is seen as a faculty that “serve[s] personal needs, offers a basis for moral values, an inspiring set of ideals, methods for dealing with life’s harsher realities…and an overall sense of purpose” (Religious Humanism).  In effect, religious humanism is seen less as a system of teachings to be followed but more as philosophical outlook, less stringent than religion but providing the same assurance of security.  Historian Carl Becker summarized some key points of this perspective that included the views that “man is capable, guided solely by the light of reason and experience of perfecting the good life on earth, as a result of freeing of men’s minds from the bonds of ignorance and superstition” (Hoertdoerfer).  In regards to religion, humanism incorporates a “shifting of emphasis from God to man…who must, by his own effort carve out his own destiny” (Hoertdoerfer).  It is also believed that “meaning is not so much discovered as created out of…our own experience, the interplay of our self with others, history and nature.  To us, divine revelation is but human knowledge projected on a cosmic screen; the will of God is the projection of human needs on a divine backdrop” (Hoertdoerfer).  This concept entails a belief in and subjection to the holy reign of God while the individual remains independent, free to think for himself, and “give[s] love, justice, peace and all his beloved moral values embodiment in human relations” (Olds).  Man should be concerned for the well-being of others, is free to act for his beliefs, and accepts responsibility for his actions while participating “in the human quest for the good life in a shared world” (Olds).  In essence, it is the union of religious ideals and moral values with humanist thought.  

            Sheri Reynold’s depiction of an isolated fundamentalist community in The Rapture of Canaan provides the backdrop for the central figure, Ninah, to deal with the consequences of past choices and carve out a place for herself in the eyes of God while striving to make the world a better place for her family and her child.  It is believed within this church that speaking in tongues is a sign of God’s love for His children, and certain members are chosen as vessels through which His spirit could be conveyed.  “I was embarrassed that God had never shared with me His language, had never given me special words, his almighty baptizing wind” (Reynolds 45).  Even in her early teenage years, Ninah yearns for a close relationship with her Lord, wishing that He would entrust her to deliver a message of holiness to the rest of the congregation.  All the while, she remains conscious of the family dynamics, wishing the best life for others with a humanistic attitude despite the mire of sorrow and trials afflicting her loved ones.  She tells her brother David, “I just wanted to say that I’m sorry you and Laura won’t be having a baby.  I know how much you want to build the family” (113).  When Ninah and James are assigned to be prayer partners, to share time with each other in supplication to God, even James pleads for Him to speak to and acknowledge Ninah.  “And God, we’ve been talking to you for weeks now, asking you to speak through us.  So I’m begging you now to give Ninah the special words you want me to hear” (118).  The two cousins believe that in the heat of physical relations with each other, God speaks to them clearer than at any other time.  James and Ninah rationalize their sins on the grounds that through sex, they are establishing a relationship with God where they can act as holy conduits for his sacred power.  “But I didn’t consider anything I’d done to be fornicating.  There was no way a big word like that could describe anything as nice as knowing Jesus all the way through” (134).  Ninah sees her actions as intentionally innocent, just as Joan did, but true to the precepts of religious humanist thought, she is still responsible for her behavior and must account for the consequences, despite her attempts to spiritually enhance her and James’ lives.  Even though Ninah may not die for her religious causes like the canonized Joan of Arc, in bearing a child out of wedlock, she will be forced to stand alone in defense against her religiously extremist family.  Ironically, it is the misinterpretation of a hallowed relationship with God that leads to an unintentional pregnancy and James’ suicide.  But despite the pains of James’ death and teenage childbirth, Ninah feels closer to God as a result, and only wants the best for her newborn child. 

            Both of the aforementioned novels develop characters that believe in God and His almighty reigning power, and both Joan and Ninah discover enhanced meaning and purpose within their lives from sustaining a relationship with God while incorporating principles from a philosophical point of view.  But what about characters who live under purely existential or purely humanist mindsets?  When the presence of God is absent from one’s existence, life quickly grows monotonous as every passing day blurs into perpetual absurdity, lacking direction or guidance, as is seen in the life of Meursault, Camus’ central character in The Stranger.  Stunned by his mother’s death, Meursault has nowhere or no one to turn to for relief, comfort or solace, but internalizes and then buries all of his feelings.  Joan of Arc is similar to Meursault in that, despite her religion, she was consigned to a solitary life, with no one to turn to in a world of opposition.  “[The procession] got under way…after that, everything seemed to happen so fast, so deliberately, so naturally that I don’t remember any of it anymore” (Camus 17).  Living in this capacity where life lacks meaning or purpose, Meursault gives little heed to his emotions.  “[Marie] asked me if I loved her.  I told her it didn’t mean anything and that I didn’t think so” (35).  “That evening Marie came by to see me and asked me if I wanted to marry her.  I said it didn’t make any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to” (41).  His relationship with Marie seems to be primarily physical and while he does enjoy her companionship, he experiences neither feelings of love or a desire to marry. 

To Meursault, life is meaningless after death; this is where he and Joan differ, as Joan was living with a driving cause, living to fulfill God’s wishes for His people through her.  “What He has commanded or shall command I will not fail to do in spite of any man alive” (Shaw I.VI. 135) As Meursault lives, in contrast, without the security of a belief in God or a saving religion, what is the point of loving, marrying or making good choices?  In a strangely impulsive act, Meursault mercilessly shoots a lone Arab man while out on the beach one summer day.  “I knew that I had shattered the harmony of the day, the exceptional silence of a beach where I’d been happy” (59) yet he offers no logical or emotional justification behind the impulse that led him to commit the murder.  During his interrogations in jail, a priest asked him if he “believed in God.  I said no…He said it was impossible; all men believed in God, even those who turn their backs on him…As far as I could see, it didn’t have anything to do with me, and I told him so” (69).  Without this pivotal relationship between man and God that serves to give purpose and direction to the mystery of one’s existence, Meursault is left fumbling alone in the darkness that obscures enlightened vision, making foolish decisions that ultimately lead to an unhappy end.

            “Humanity is something special in creation and has a special relationship to God.  This relationship is expressed in salvation, and the principle concern of every human being should be precisely this salvation” (Early Christianity).  If God is truly the omnipotent father of man’s body, spirit and soul, He is most assuredly interested in the events of man’s daily life and the effect that today will have on his future.  As He is portrayed in twentieth-century literature, it can be believed that God yearns for a relationship with his children just as much as they desire to know and learn of Him.  While religion is not the only means of establishing this connection, opening up one’s mind to the broader horizons that encompass philosophical thought can instill the same results, but on an elevated plane through religion.  If not religion, maybe existentialism or humanism; if not enlightened thought, perhaps literature will emerge as the key that ultimately provides the unifying link between man and deity.    

Chapter 5: Conclusion

 

            The ability to think, feel, rationalize and make decisions comprise the defining factors that delineate man as a human being, separate and superior to the creatures of the animal kingdom and yet eternally inferior to God, the almighty reigning power in the universe.

            Of the qualities with which mankind has been endowed, reason, emotion, and humanism are some of the select few that characterize the human race as a decisive and logical, yet empathetic race, unique among individuals but so closely related as a whole.  Reason and logic allow man to think, solve problems, and devise new methods of invention, creation or expression.  Emotion furnishes man as an entity rather than an object, allowing one to feel and relate to another, a means of bonding and forming relationships.  Humanism corresponds to the universal brotherhood of mankind, the need to help and contribute, the simultaneous betterment of the individual and the society. 

            All of the aforementioned qualities are good traits that essentially define man, but each attribute swells in goodness and its ability to better the individual when linked to God and its purpose in religion.  Incorporating reason into one’s belief in the origin of man coupled with one’s trust in the role of a higher power leads him to believe in the existence of God.  If God does exist and He wanted man to thrive physically, mentally, socially and spiritually, He ensured such by bestowing man with an innate sense of goodness, an inherent distinction between right and wrong that would assist him in making good choices and excelling in life.  He also would have wanted man to find joy and pleasure in life, through experiences, accomplishments and interactions with others, one effect of emotion.  But the difficulty lies in remaining open and subject to one’s emotions without giving them dominion or allowing them to override inherent reason and rationality.  In addition, God would have wanted His children to feel a kinship towards each other, to respond to the need to help out and make the world a better place to live. 

            Twentieth-century authors have incorporated many of these views into their literature and the composition of their characters, whether subconsciously or intentionally.  George Bernard Shaw depicted an account of the trials, disbelief and opposition Joan of Arc must have encountered on her missions as a religious zealot.  In remaining steadfast to her initial undertaking, she most certainly believed in God’s existence, employed emotion as a means of channeling her faith, and in following God’s orders, strove to improve the martial and religious state of France.  Ninah, the young protagonist in The Rapture of Canaan struggled with her religious beliefs, her relationship with God and with her family, in addition to her teenage pregnancy.  Ninah devoutly believed in the existence of God, but faced difficulty in dealing with the consequences of responding to emotion rather than reason.  Huxley’s Brave New World and Camus’ The Stranger both served as counter-examples to the aforesaid novels, incorporating characters and environments where reason, emotion and humanism either did not exist, or the characters were above subjection to such laws.  In both works of literature, as a result of the suppression of these naturally-occurring and vital human qualities, the characters and societies met their imminent demise in death, indifference and unhappiness. 

            God endowed man with reason, emotion and humanism as traits that would bring him happiness, joy, comfort and success.  As illustrated in twentieth-century literature, God’s sole motive for doing so was to create an eternal bond with His children. 

Works Cited

Camus, Albert. The Stranger.  Vintage International: New York, 1988.

“Christian Existentialism.”  All About Philosophy. 2008. 23 Feb 2008 <http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/christian-existentialism-faq.htm>.

Douglas, Robert E. Jr. “Elie Wiesel’s Relationship with God.”  Sufficiency Course Sequence 31 Sept 1995. 29 Oct 2007 <http://www-int.stsci.edu/~rdouglas/publications/suff/suff.html>.

“Early Christianity.”  Humanism.  2007. 19 Feb 2008. <http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/REN/HUMANISM.HTM>.

 “Emotion and Decision” ChangingMinds. 2007. 10 Apr 2008 <http://changingminds.org/explanations/emotions/emotion_decision.htm>.

Fraiberg, Jeremy.  “ A Transcendent Experience.”  The Question of God: Nine Conversations. PBS. 5 Apr 2008 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/nineconv/transcend.html>.

Gallagher, Winifred. “Why Believe?” The Question of God: Nine Conversations. PBS. 5 Apr 2008 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/nineconv/whybelieve.html>.

Hoertdoerfer, Pat.  “Religious Humanism: The Past We Inherit; The Future We Create.”  Humanism Today. 2007. 23 Feb 2008.  <http://www.humanismtoday.org/vol12/hoertdoerfer.html>.

Huxley, Aldous.  Brave New World.  Perennial Classics: New York, 1998.

Jacobsen, Paul.  “A Commentary of C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity.” Mere Christianity 27 Oct 2007 <www.caseagainstfaith.com/articles/mere_christianity.htm>.

Klenck, Margaret.  “ A Transcendent Experience.”  The Question of God: Nine Conversations. PBS. 5 Apr 2008 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/nineconv/transcend.html>.

Lee, Frederick. “The Exalted Father.” The Question of God: Nine Conversations. PBS. 5 Apr 2008 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/nineconv/father.html>.

Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity.  New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1952.

Nicholi, Dr. Armand M. Jr.  The Question of God.  Free Press: New York 2003.

Olds, Mason.  Religious Humanism.  1995. 23 Feb 2008 <http://www.humanistsofutah.org/1996/artapril96.htm>.

Pearce, David.  “Brave New World? A Defense of Paradise-Engineering” Aldous Huxley: Brave New World. 2007. 3 Jan 2008 <http://www.huxley.net/>.

“Religious Humanism.” IHumanism. 2007.  19 Feb 2008 <http://www.ihumanism.org>.

Reynolds, Sheri. The Rapture of Canaan.  Berkley Books: New York, 1997.

Robinson, B. A. “Agnosticism: Uncertainty About Whether God Exists.”  Religious Tolerance 18 July 2007.  27 Oct 2007 <http://www.religioustolerance.org/agnostic.htm>.

Shaw, George Bernard. Saint Joan.  Penguin Classics, New York 2003.

Shermer, Michael.  “Why Believe?” The Question of God: Nine Conversations. PBS. 5 Apr 2008 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/nineconv/whybelieve.html>.

“Soren Kierkegaard.” Existentialism.  2007. 23 Feb 2008 <http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/wphil/lectures/wphil_theme20.htm>. 

Sousa, Ronald De. “Emotion” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 3 Feb 2003. 24 Sept 2007 <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/emotion/>.

Sunami, Christopher.  “Christian Existential Humanism.” Kitopedia. 2005. 19 Feb 2008 <http://kitoba.com/pedia/Why+CEH.html>.

Wiesel, Elie. Night.  Bantam Books: New York, 1982.