Choice

I have realised that I talked a lot about choice. I have more or less implied that we can choose whether we believe in God or not as there is no way of ever knowing the answer.

But have we really a choice about our creed? Can anybody become an atheist? Can we convince everybody, given enough time and resources, that they should abandon their prejudices, their habits, their philosophy and their faith?

My personal answer has been yes, I had a choice. Not only had I grown in a ‘communist’ country with its definite separation of the Church from the state, but both my parents were divided in their philosophies, my mother being a traditional (superficial) Catholic and my father a declared atheist. However, he had given up to her demands and we (my brother and I) were being brought up as Catholics.

Freedom to query, awareness of various positions and options became part of my personality. I loved asking ‘difficult questions’. I cheered every opportunity for a fervent discussion. I sought any chance to share my ideas as a way to create and develop.

Probably I needed others to really feel that I knew something… I am referring to a period in my life that I recall with significant grief even if not regret.
(I was taught not to regret my experiences but rather to draw a lesson from them.)

Soon after I tentatively accepted Yeshua as my master and a prophet, and was still in the process of sorting out which of the ‘revelations’ from the Bible I could accept as truthful (I was very sceptical about the sources of the message and further ‘editions’ introduced by pious ancient idiots (so called church doctors and saints), I had a misfortune of meeting with people from a catholic version of Christian Youth or whatever. They were university students like me but they would spend their spare time meeting with other catholic students to attend the Mass and then discuss the Bible. It wasn’t a formal organisation, (it would be illegal during communist times). They called it the Movement of Light and Life, which was founded by Father Professor Franciszek Blachnicki. I am recording the name here because he is a candidate for a saint and he already has a couple of streets in Poland named after him. He survived Auschwitz and made surviving of Catholicism in the communist Poland the mission of his life.

He was definitely a decent man and more, he had a good sense of humour. One problem with him was that his sermons were usually very theological, very scholarly, very long and very boring. It was quite normal for at least a couple of people to fall asleep during his sermon or a lecture. He didn’t really mind – I remember his admonishing one of the altar boys that the minimum decency would be try not to snore! Well, he should know himself. His students from Lublin Catholic University recognised him as the professor who would fall asleep during his own lecture!
I have to admit I have a lot of respect for him. He embraced the teaching of Vatican II and struggled to reform the Church. He despaired of ever getting across to his fellow priests, so he addressed young laymen. He was very open-minded and ready to learn from ancient ‘enemies’ – Protestants and evangelical preachers. You can conclude that he approved ecumenism and recognised mistakes (errors and crimes) that the Roman Catholic Church made in the past.
So we, who belonged to this movement of Light and Life, were well coached in the Bible and the Church past and present disputes. While remaining Catholics, we wouldn’t mind praying and socialising with other Christians.

I made this extended digression to sketch the environment in which following exchange had place.

One of my friends from this Movement, Tomek, told me that he envied my ability to make a choice about faith.

He had none according to him. He was born in a very traditional Catholic family in a rural area. From his early years he always belonged to the church. He was 4 when he first became a junior altar boy with his little bell. He prayed to Virgin Mary every night. (She never appeared on my horizon!) He just could not question the teaching. It was the only reality, the only way to explain the world. And he wasn’t a simpleton! I lost contact with most of my old friends from that Movement (nobody likes company of an apostate) and my memory is fading, but not only was he a technical university student (automatics) but also a great humanist, philosopher and a poet.

Well, I guess you need either poetry or philosophy to harmonise incompatible realities!

He was the first to open my eyes to this issue. I didn’t know that I was privileged. I used to scorn and despise people who wouldn’t stop and question their position.

Now, many years after that exchange, I know that many have no choice at all. Not only they lack knowledge but they have no need to acquire it. They feel safer in the philosophical (religious) systems they took from their parents and grandparents. Loyalty to this system defines sometimes a baseline beyond which they could not face themselves. They can only think about themselves as decent if they stick to those old values.

I am afraid it takes more than just one book, even written by such a brilliant scientist like Richard Dawkins to shake them badly enough. Sometimes a real crisis, a real tragedy is necessary for them to start questioning their own beliefs.

Is it really a choice then?