Post-trip trip-up

The post-trip meeting was something like I might've expected--a couple people missing, an atmosphere of a sad semi-goodbye mixed with celebration and fond memories--but there were two surprises: Jonathan gave a good exercise and a book lead for learning about liberation theology, and we discussed utopias. The latter threw me for a loop, because I was unprepared to deal with the preconception that utopias are obtainable. The exercise we did was based upon that, and I had no concise way to challenge it for everyone--interestingly, much in the way (which I happened to have not experienced yet) people were telling that telling others about the trip was met without reception. That is, you'd go to tell about the meat of the trip (which I'm still trying to define), and people's eyes would glaze over. They would rather hear about how the weather and the water was. Well, I did feel that, but surprisingly, it was trying to explain to my group-mates that none of the things they were listing under Utopia were causes--even circular ones--but merely effects or symptoms.

The "true" utopia (juxtaposed against our Western consumerist-bent "false" utopia) was based on the Jon Sobrino quote we were given: "[T]hat everyone have the basics of life, enough to eat, have a home, have health, to not be despised." You may ask what the harm is in working for such an ideal. As I'll get to, the last ten years of my life have been a discovery of the fact that and reason behind why such utopias aren't meant to be.

The next part of the quote leads in well: "The only thing that stands in the way of this true utopia is the false utopia." I disagree.

Please sit back down while I explain. There's no doubt that the false utopia stands in the way of those characteristics Sobrino and our groups gathered under the heading of the "true utopia". The contention lies in the word "only". If that crucial part of his statement was true, then by all means, I would wholeheartedly agree with the entire scheme of working towards such a utopia.

The two utopias here can be distilled much further than a North-versus-South or individualistic-versus-communal matchup, but I should warn you that when we do, we're getting to the real heart of the problem, which changes those boundaries somewhat: sin.

When I tried to explain to our sub-group that a true change of heart--that is, seeking communion with God constantly--is what a real utopia is, and that all the other pure things we imagine about utopias would flow naturally from this state, I got some blank stares, and one person told me that you can only say that if you're really spiritual.

I hate to interrupt with a pair of quotes from the disappointing Matrix: Reloaded, but it was the only part of the movie that I liked, and it applies directly:

"[Gosh darn] it, Morpheus! Not everyone believes what you believe!"

"My beliefs do not require them to."

This is why I do not expect to have to secularize my thinking in order to have a discussion, especially about things such as utopias and what it means to truly live. All too often people see having faith in faith (to paraphrase Willard) as acceptable--even a cultural positive--but actual faith in God as something religious that must be kept private.

It's dangerous to ignore the spiritual reality behind the world, writing off belief as Mere Christianity, as one of the wiser of our twentieth-century writers put it.

Better yet, as it was put to me more recently, working towards a secular humanistic utopia such as this is like stapling fresh fruit on a rotting tree. (Oh, if I were a political cartoonist...)

...

To be continued.