The Courage to Become (Pt II)

"Because we cannot tolerate greatness in our midst, we do all we can to destroy it."

"Others see their possibility in the reality of you. Be, therefore, a model to all the world."

Many years ago, during a summer internship, I learned 'The Rules' of Corporate America. Only two of those rules have remained with me through every subsequent job. They are - It's more important to be liked by your co-workers than it is to be good at your job. - and - Being good at your job can keep your from being liked by your co-workers. Presumably the second rule has something to do with the idea that stellar performance only serves to highlight less-adequate performance, and subsequently raises the bar for everyone else. (There's going to be a point in a minute. Hang in there.)

The other day I picked up a book called Tomorrow's God. (I am insatiably curious about alternative views of theology and spirituality.) Due to a well-placed library bar code, I did not realize (until I began reading it) that this book was written by the author of the Conversations with God series. Naturally it quickly became clear that this book was written as a dialogue with God. As far as I can tell so far, the author believes that he was having a conversation with God, or at least it wasn't ever made clear that the author was using dialogue simply as a literary technique. Okay. I occasionally like to indulge in the idea that I'm having a dialogue with the Universe. (The Universe is an amusing conversationalist, with very clever and subtle ways of letting me know that it knows more than I do.) So I'll read this book until I can't take it anymore, or until I reach the end.

I'm about 150 pages into it so far, and now I'm driven to read it because so much of what the author is saying (as 'God') is what any good humanist philosopher would say. (Indeed he has formed something called Humanity's Team, which I haven't investigated yet.) And I'm wondering, with increasing force - Why did the author feel the need to attribute this wisdom to God? Why couldn't he claim it as a legacy of his own thinking and studies? [Disclaimer: Apparently the 'proof' that this wisdom originates from God is in the last chapter, which I haven't read yet.]

I have a theory about this, which goes back to the idea that we don't easily tolerate greatness. If we do tolerate it, we do so by wanting to own it, dissect it, and understand it. And because we also have a tendency to equate greatness with infallibility, we are happy when 'greatness' self-destructs, and we armchair-quarterback the hell out of its mistakes. We also frequently judge our own self-worth by our proximity to greatness, rather than our own accomplishments and sense of satisfaction.

Indeed, Walsch (the author) discusses his perception of others expecting him to be in a place of "high consciousness" all the time. But perhaps this is related to his other fear - "... if I say that I am making this all up, they'll lose their faith in you, in me, and in this whole process." In other words, he fears that our reaction to these ideas is dependent upon our perception of their source. A humble man who claims to talk to God is more easily tolerated than a simple person who dares to say 'I think I might see a better way.' 'God' is more infallible than Man, therefore a more credible source. I don't claim to know what the author was experiencing while writing these books. I can only say that, so far, the ideas in this book frequently reflect the wisdom of our time, culture, and history, with no ideas that I haven't seen before. I don't doubt that the author wishes for a better future for Mankind.

And this brings me to the point. Perhaps one reason we cling to the notion of 'God' is because it provides an excuse for greatness and a defense against the hostility that man visits upon his fellows when he perceives them as a threat to himself. Of course, some have used the idea of being 'touched by God' as an excuse for vile acts as well. Somehow though, overall, we are usually more tolerant of that which makes us look good by comparison, than we are of that which makes us look bad. (Psychological threats - those which impact our beliefs about ourselves and our world - are frequently met with more hostility than purely physical threats.) I would also argue that we frequently suppress our everyday abilities for 'greatness' out of similar fears.

Fans of Erich Fromm may be able to guess where this line of thinking is going next, but for now I'll end with this quote...

"Your friends need what you can be when you are no longer afraid, when you know who you are, and why you are, and what you want. When you are no longer looking for reasons to live, but can simply be."