Chris Smith reflects on faith, idolatry and Paul Tillich’s ‘Ground of Being’.
What do we mean by the word ‘faith’? When we talk of putting our faith in another person, we feel able to trust and rely on them with complete confidence. The use of the word in a religious sense has come to mean different things to different people, embracing ideas such as the active belief in a set of doctrines, the acceptance of divine revelation aside from absolute proof, and putting our trust in a cosmic being (or theistic God) who created us and is able to give us security. We tend to view a person of faith as someone who believes that the universe is not entirely chaotic but unfolding in a way that is not without purpose. Today a vast number of people are sceptical about the concept of a theistic God and many have lost sight altogether of a spiritual dimension to life. Faith, as a concept that gives direction and a sense of purpose to life, has gone out of fashion because many people no longer perceive it to be relevant in the twenty-first century. There is a need to define faith in terms of a conceptual framework to which modern human beings can relate, because much of traditional religion is framed in language that reflects a world view that is no longer tenable.
Over fifty years ago, the theologian Paul Tillich set about the task of defining faith as a process that was independent of dogma. It required a commitment on the part of the individual to what he or she perceived to be of ultimate concern. He pointed out that we have many concerns (e.g. food and shelter) some of which are urgent, but suggested that the concern which claims ultimacy demands the total commitment of him or her who accepts this claim. One could say that such an ultimate concern is a person’s god. Tillich maintained that if faith is the state of being ultimately concerned, then everybody would appear to have a faith of some description with a specific content, because everybody has a concern which they will perceive to be ultimate. If your ultimate concern is your country then the content of your faith will be patriotic concern for its best interests above all others. People whose ultimate concern is money will be absorbed with generating wealth, and those who crave success or stardom will be focused on ‘climbing the ladder’ or becoming a celebrity.
Idolatry
However, what if the content of this faith and its associated god proves to be illusory? What if the individual comes to the realisation that what appeared to be unconditional and ultimate is inauthentic? If this happens then the sense of meaning in one’s life can break down; the ‘faith’ and its associated god disappear leaving a void at the centre of the ‘believer’, what Viktor Frankl would describe as an existential vacuum. The nature of the faith is revealed as idolatrous, as less than ultimate and, unless it is replaced by a new focus of ultimate concern, the individual is liable to feel the despair of a meaningless existence.
We see many examples in life where people discover that their personal god is less than ultimate, and experience the sense of disillusionment and suffering that accompanies this realisation. When Hitler came to power in Germany during the 1930s he had a personal aura that commanded authority. Many saw him as a great leader who would restore pride and respect to the German people following the humiliation of the First World War. Their ultimate concern, or faith, became the Fatherland and they regarded Hitler as a god-like figure who would lead them to great things in the future. Thousands of men were so passionate about their faith that they were prepared to fight bravely and die for their country.
Many of his followers were influenced by the power of his rhetoric, deluded by propaganda and lost the ability to use their own discriminatory powers of reason to question what was happening. This is particularly true of those who perpetrated hideous crimes in the concentration camps, whilst they showed care and concern toward their own families. By the time many realised the idolatrous nature of their faith, a lot of the damage had been done and they felt powerless to change the status quo, or turn back the clock.
Other examples can be seen in everyday life where, for example, those who make money their god can sometimes fall prey to corruption. People who become ultimately concerned with their physical appearance and are obsessed with how they look will, sooner or later, experience the transitory nature of their god as the ageing process eventually takes its toll. We can see that those who become ultimately concerned with physical appearance, celebrity, materialism or jingoism are likely to discover the less than ultimate nature of these concerns and, when this happens, they experience the idolatrous nature of these ‘faiths’.
Ultimate Concern
Science suggests that reality can be conceived of as a flowing process of universal flux (or energy) that leads to the creation of matter, nature and thought. When we think about life we realise that the human body is a hive of activity with millions of different cells working together for the good of the organism. There seems to be a vital process operating that arises from the life energy of our ‘being’ or what we refer to as spirit, which must surely be rooted in the universal flux. Speaking metaphorically, it seems to me that, among other things, we can visualise this universal flux as a ‘cosmic national grid’ of infinite proportions which breathes life into creation in the same way that electricity brings our machines and tools to life. The nature of the electricity that powers each of our homes is essentially the same and comes from a common high energy source. In an analogous sense, it seems to me that the essence of ‘being’ is the same for each of us and we come from a source of infinite energy from which we cannot be separated. Paul Tillich referred to this as the ‘Ground of Being’, which is the source of the spiritual energy that gives life to creation.
Although our experiences, feelings and thoughts are conditioned and finite, we are driven towards faith by an awareness of the infinite, to which we feel a sense of connection, a reality which is part of our identity and subsumes it. If we are to have an ultimate concern, it must involve the ‘Ground of Being’ (a phenomenon that could be referred to as God), and must reasonably embrace the relationship of our own ‘being’ with that of our fellow human beings, because they are inextricably linked. Any other concern will be less than ultimate and although it may have an unconditional hold over the individual, the faith it inspires will be less than ultimate and shown to be idolatrous.
Our life is given form in terms of the physiology of our body and the psychology of our mind but I believe that the kernel of meaning in life, the focus of that which is of ultimate concern, is embryonic within the spiritual dimension of our ‘being’. It is related to the process of spiritual union that we call love. Authentic religious activity is concerned with the pursuit of this purpose. Love reveals itself psycho-physically through the expression of empathy and compassion. But if love is the ultimate concern which is the subject of authentic faith, why is it so difficult to live from a perspective where we love others unconditionally?
Nevertheless, it is not impossible. When we look at history we see examples of individuals who bore testament to the power of faith as commitment to love. Characters like Jesus, Edith Cavell, Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King. Each of these remarkable human beings was committed to a love of humanity that recognised a universal spiritual reality that crossed racial, national, social and religious boundaries. Their ‘faith’ was so strong that it enabled them to access what Tillich referred to as ‘the courage to be’, which gave them the strength to deal with the harrowing experiences they had to face. Furthermore, they were able to meet their experiences of injustice in a way that overcame hatred and expressed the wisdom of forgiveness.
This was a commitment to love as an ultimate concern, a manifestation of true faith which inspired true courage. Could it be that when our commitment to love is so strong, we are able to access the ‘courage to be’ that enables us to remain stable, absorb pain and adapt to any situation, even unto death? It is significant that most of us respect and revere men and women of courage who are prepared to sacrifice their lives in upholding the spiritual value of love. Is this not a commitment to what is of ultimate concern and the true nature of faith?
Chris Smith graduated in chemistry but pursued a career in education. He retired as head of a C of E primary school. His book The Mystery of Reality: its Implications for Love, Religious Faith and the Courage to be Oneself was published by Matador in 2013.