Suspicion & Faith #3: Marx

Karl Marx was an atheist and the founder of communist ideals. Because of this, many American Christians reject his ideas before even giving them an initial hearing. However, he displayed a concern for the poor and weak in society than aligns more closely with the prophet Amos and Jesus himself than most of us actually demonstrate. Therefore, it is in Marx’s Christ-likeness (even if we judge that a small area) that Christians can hear a challenging prophetic word.

Marx’s opinion of faith is most succinctly and famously summarized in his statement that religion is “the opium of the people” (137). This concept needs to be unpacked a bit. The opium stands as a painkiller, one for the oppressed masses to help them “deal with the physical and emotional deprivations of poverty and powerlessness” and also for the oppressive masters “to assuage their guilty consciences” (138). Thus, Marx argues, religion serves the political and economic purpose of allowing suffering to endure in society. The oppressed ‘escape’ or even accept their lot by believing that the “Bible’s message of liberation [should be] interpreted exclusively in innerworldly, otherworldly, and afterworldly terms” (187), while the oppressor justifies his domination as the will of God. However, Westphal argues this is not an inherent aspect of religion, but evidence that religion has been co-opted as an ideology that legitimizes social practices and institutions. Religion too often becomes the servant of the sociopolitical status quo in which the powerful dominate the weak. When our religious beliefs and practices lead us to “total, uncritical acceptance of the status quo, sinful silence in the face of human suffering and manipulation of the Word of God in order to justify oppression” (192), we are following a man-made ideology that Marx, the prophet Amos, and Jesus reject in unison.

In previous posts, I have described instrumental religion (we use God as a means to our own ends) and possessive religion (we seek to monopolize God as our private property). To this, Westphal adds the One-Way Covenant in which we “unilaterally dictate the terms of our relation to God’s power and authority” (207). The One-Way Covenant reminds me of a brief scene from the Simpsons: Homer has gotten himself into a jam. The problem is so bad that he is driven to prayer. In a sacrifice to the divine, he has set out milk and cookies. As Homer closes his supplication for God’s intervention, he finishes with “and if you want me to eat the cookies and milk, give me no sign.” This is the One-Way Covenant in which we tell God what we want and then assume he has signed off on it. We do this on a personal level with our plans and desires and at the collective level with institutions and actions (war, oppression). We often defend our activity with “God said…” or “I prayed about it before…” in order to stamp God’s sanction on our decisions and behavior.

The One-Way Covenant leads inevitably toward idolatry—the “baalization of Yahweh” (210). We do not reject Yahweh outright, but he is “revised to suit our economic convenience” and to “sanctify social injustice, if not by ‘embracing’ it, at least by ‘enduring’ it” (210). It is this process that allows Christians to love God and follow Jesus without actually loving what God loves or doing what Christ did. An honest reading of the Jewish Law or the various prophets or the words and acts of Christ demonstrates that God has a bias toward the poor, weak, needy, widow, orphan, and foreigner. Marx’s value to the Church is that he translates the social justice messages of Amos and Jesus from thousands of years ago into our modern, secular, capitalist society. In addition, rather than reading Marx’s atheism as an affront to God, it can be read by the believer as a challenge to our idolatrous, instrumental religion that we have constructed.

This is the third of 4 posts on Merold Westphal's Suspicion & Faith.

Suspicion & Faith #2: Freud

It is tempting, even understandable, for a Christian to dismiss Sigmund Freud outright, before even giving him an opportunity to speak. However, his thoughts on religion, even if rooted in a disdain for Christianity, may have some prophetic word to challenge the believer. According to Westphal, Freud’s critique of the Christian faith might be summarized in one thought: wish-fulfillment. The God we worship tends to be the very God we would want to have. We are his favorite children. He punishes our enemies for their sins while tending toward mercy when addressing our errors. He rewards us for the sacrifices we make in life. He protects us from the terror of death. “The believing soul fashions a God who is only seemingly stern and who plays favorites with me and my people...a doting, spoiling grandfather...a thoroughly domesticated parent” (Westphal, 63).

At the corporate level (religious denomination, national policy, cultural worldview), we tend to:

• demonize the enemy...Our enemy becomes the enemy of God and therefore our violence (verbal and physical) toward them is justified, even morally good.
• elevate ourselves...We see ourselves as “God’s specially chosen instrument” for justice or righteousness or civilization in the world.
• project our desires...We put our desires for power and control into the mind and mouth of God, “thereby transforming action...from atrocity to duty” (75).

It is common for us to “domesticate the divine power to co-opt and control it for one’s own purpose” (108). While claiming that we are defending God’s honor and dignity by “insisting that God be worshipped precisely through the rites that we practice, and that these be interpreted only as we interpret them”, we actually “annihilate God’s freedom” and make him “our personal property” (108-109). Though we may dismiss Freud on numerous levels, are we so certain of our purity that we can ignore the accusation (no matter the source) that we have formed a god after our own heart?

This is the second of 4 posts on Merold Westphal's Suspicion & Faith.

Suspicion & Faith #1: Introduction

For most Christians, it would seem strange, even blatantly wrong, to welcome virulent atheists to the pulpit on a Sunday morning to propound their views on religion. However, that is what Merold Westphal seeks to do in Suspicion & Faith: The Religious Uses of Modern Atheism. Westphal proposes ways in which the believing community can hear the ideas of Freud, Marx, and Nietzsche as prophetic calls for reflection rather than attacks to be feared and resisted.

Suspicion vs. Skepticism. First, Westphal distinguishes between atheism of skepticism and atheism of suspicion. Atheism of skepticism focuses on doctrinal claims and evidence. The basic argument of skepticism is that there is not enough legitimate evidence for the believer to make his claims or the skeptic to accept them. This is the common atheism we encounter in Bertrand Russell and the New Atheists (Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris). However, Westphal focuses his attention on the atheism of suspicion found in the works of Freud, Marx, and Nietzsche. Where skepticism challenges the evidence for God-claims, suspicion narrows in on the heart of the believer and the believing community. Skepticism questions the evidence; suspicion searches for motives and self-deception in the believer. Westphal, therefore, argues that atheism of suspicion bears a striking resemblance to many of the pronouncements made by the Old Testament prophets (Isa. 64:6, Jer. 17:9, Amos 5:23) and Christ himself (Matt. 23:27, Mark 11:17).

Instrumental Religion. “There is an atheism,” Westphal contends, “that is closer to the truth than a certain kind of religion” (6). Atheism of suspicion has a prophetic word for a Christianity that frequently “reduces God to a means to the believer’s own ends” (8). This reappropriation of God is called instrumental religion: we turn God into an instrument, a tool, for our own purposes. Religion becomes idolatrous when it is “primarily motivated by the believing soul’s self-interest” (26). Too often, our acts of worship are offered to “a god we hope to domesticate” (15). Our preferences become God’s commands; our goals become God’s plan; our opponents become God’s enemies. It is probable that we are unaware of this in our own lives; however, suspicion (like a prophet) confronts the believer with his or her own underlying (and hidden) motives and self-deception.

Faith Purified. Paul Ricouer writes that “this ‘destruction’ of religion can be the counterpart of a faith purified of all idolatry….The question remains open for every [person] whether the destruction of idols is without remainder” (56). To clarify: If I remove all of the idolatrous (man-made) aspects of my religion, is there any God left? Again, this is not essentially an assault on the existence of God, but rather an interrogation of the structures we have built and acclaimed as God. Do we truly desire to know and follow the Living God enough to search out and destroy all idolatrous aspects (Ex. 20: 3-6) of our own religious belief and practice, no matter the cost, loss, or shock?

This is the first of 4 posts on Merold Westphal's Suspicion & Faith.