The Grand Inquisitor, Part 2

It seems like we are fighting the battle of Enlightenment all over again. The logic of reasoning, science, and philosophy are being attacked by the right as being void of morality. A similar struggle happened in Dostoevsky's time, where reason was attacked as being void of human feeling or imagination. This is because the Nihilists rejected all supernatural agencies and trusted only that which can be scientifically verified, including morality. To Dostoevsky, this view was repugnant since it removed any possibility of human freedom and moral responsibility. If everything a man does can be explained by the workings of the laws of Nature, the very ideas of human freedom and of right and wrong become meaningless.

The difference between then and now, however, is vastly different. The "enlightened" side of the struggle has a firm grasp on morality, despite what the religious right says. The right would rather see teens dying from back alley abortions rather than use the rational approach in keeping safe abortions legal, and they even resort to calling pro-choice people "murderers" despite the fact that there are no "pro-abortion" people. It's called logic. How is it that the right bitches about government regulations of corporations but has no problem with government regulations over women's bodies?

The "morality wars" have always been present, and they always will be present. There will always be people who believe they are superior to others, which is a reason that there will always be war. Americans think they are better than the whole world, and this "justifies" doing whatever we want, even attacking other countries when we don't like them.

A sergeant who is in Iraq for his second tour writes:

There is good out there even though at times it all seems bleak. There is also Death. How many have dealt in death? Some would call it murder. Well, I have a confession to make, my platoon and I have had over 192 confirmed kills during our first deployment here (during the war on our way to capture Baghdad). We targeted people and then they just disappeared. Why? They were going to kill me. I had my orders and they had theirs. We were mortal enemies because we were told that we were. There are some who would tell me to not think about what I had to do, or it will drive you insane. For me however, I can't help but think about it. They were men like me. Some of them were even conscripted into military service. What made them fight? Were they more scared of their leader than of us? What has become of their families? How could I forget or not think about all that I have done? Should I wash my hands of it all like Pontius Pilot?

Pontius Pilot, or the Grand Inquistor in Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov, said that people want to be sheep. They want proof in matters of faith and prefer the security of obeying authority rather than making their own decisions. To them, freedom is slavery. Dostoevsky saw that man finds it very appealing not to have to make responsible decisions, but he also saw the arbitrary, unpredictable, and irrational side of human nature-- he knew that people, especially sensitive and intelligent ones, prefer cruel suffering to being sheep. For Dostoevsky, uncertainty, suffering, and freedom go hand in hand.

Christ refused to turn stones into bread, to perform miracles proving the existence of God, and to establish a heavenly kingdom on earth. According to the Grand Inquisitor, the fact that Christ expected man to follow Him under these circumstances proves that He did not know human nature very well; thus, he is notomniscient and, by definition, not God. On the other hand, if Christ did realize that man would suffer as a result of His refusal, this would indicate that He is cruel and, again, not God. The Inquisitor's logic in assessing the nature of God and man is powerfully persuasive, but his argument is only one side of the story. There is still the reaction of Christ to be taken into account. And it is interesting to note that, no matter what position one adopts, the natures of God and man are irretrievably linked. If man is irresponsible, so is God. and vice versa.

But Christ remains silent. Thus, the kiss He bestows on the Inquisitor is ambiguous--is it the kiss of acquiescence or of forgiveness? So, is the soldier responsible for his actions? Is he free? Is he responsible?

To me, several people are responsible for the soldier's actions. The first is, of course, the Bush voter (doubly responsible for voting for him twice.) The second is the person that sits on his ass doing nothing about getting the soldiers back over here. The longer that soldier has to stay in Iraq, the more times he is forced to defend himself. The third is those responsible for the GI Bill which has enticed so many to sign up in return for college money. We sign up to protect and defend our country, not to attack other countries.

He states:

Do you think that there is a special place in hell for people like me? Or will God judge me to have been a man of honor and duty?

Dear soldier, I hope you can take comfort in your remorse, for at least you know you have a soul. At least you don't carry empty Coke bottles around to bash on the heads of Iraqi civilians like some soldiers have done. They ARE responsible, but you with your conscience are closer to forgiveness than they ever will be.