Celebrants: David Fougere and the Rev. Dr. Gretchen Woods

READING from People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil by M. Scott Peck, M.D. (pp. 76-77)

We come now to a sort of paradox. I have said that evil people feel themselves to be perfect. At the same time, however, I think they have an unacknowledged sense of their own evil nature. Indeed, it is this very sense from which they are frantically trying to flee. The essential component of evil is not the absence of a sense of sin or imperfection but the un willingness to tolerate that sense. At one and the same time, the evil are aware of their evil and desperately trying to avoid the awareness. Rather than blissfully lacking a sense of morality, like the psychopath, they are continually engaged in sweeping the evidence of their evil under the rug of their own consciousness. For everything they did, Bobby’s parents had a rationalization - the whitewash good enough for themselves even if not for me. The problem is not a defect of conscience but the effort to deny the conscience its due. We become evil by attempting to hide from ourselves. The wickedness of the evil is not committed directly, but indirectly as a part of this cover-up process. Evil originates not in the absence of guilt but in the effort to escape it.
It often happens, then, that the evil may be recognized by its very disguise. The lie can be perceived before the misdeed it is designed to hide - the cover-up before the fact. We see the smile that hides the hatred, the smooth and oily manner that masks the fury, the velvet glove that covers the fist. Because they are such experts at disguise, it is seldom possible to pinpoint the maliciousness of the evil. The disguise is usually impenetrable. But what we can catch are glimpses of “The uncanny game of hide-and-seek in the obscurity of the soul, in which it, the single human soul, evades itself, hides from itself.” (quote from Martin Buber, Good and Evil, p. 111.)

from The Prince of Darkness: Radical Evil and the Power of Good in History by Jeffrey Burton Russell (pp. 246-247)
The good Lord and the Devil, Jung argued, are two sides to the fullness of a single reality. “The shadow belongs to the light as the evil belongs to the good and vice versa.” Light needs darkness to define it; otherwise it could not appear as good. Evil is ontologically real; the Devil is morally and psychologically real. Lucifer’s challenge to God produces a higher, deeper wisdom in creation and so is part of God’s ultimate plan. The demonic energy is part of the natural order of the cosmos, but when it is repressed it manifests itself in overt evil. If the enormously powerful cosmic energy represented by the Devil is denied and repressed, it will burst forth with a destructiveness proportional to the degree of its repression. But if it is integrated, its energy can be turned toward the greater good. Repression leads to mental illness in individuals and to fanatical irrationality in society; integration leads to health, wholeness, and creativity. The demonic energy is never neutral; if it is not channeled toward the constructive, it will sweep with equal power into the destructive.

SERMON
What is evil? How does it affect us in our daily lives, not just in the big picture of history? And how does suffering relate to evil, if at all? What can we possibly do about it? These are questions thinking people must address.
Certainly, as caring human beings, we find evil around us and within us, though we often don’t know whether to identify it as evil or not. Certainly, the characters in Buffy, the Vampire Slayer constantly struggled with evil within and out side themselves. We usually agree that Hitler perpetrated evil, given the shoah: that horrid “final solution:” the genocide of Jews, gypsies, gay men (women did not count), Poles and sundry others. We might assume that the boys who shot their classmates at Columbine High School on Hitler’s birthday (April 20) were evil – or maybe just bullied, frustrated, and misunderstood. And what of our own day-to-day unkindness and resistances to the creativity and love of others? How quickly our self-righteousness can water down our willingness to see the reality within! Given our desire to make meaning and our ambivalence about the concept of evil, we are challenged to address evil.
Today we limit ourselves to just a few perspectives on evil. As our reading tells us, M. Scott Peck sees evil primarily as a human experience, coming from an unwillingness to tolerate our own sense of imperfection, of experiencing our own human frailties. Webster’s New World Dictionary defines evil as “1. morally bad or wrong; wicked; depraved. 2. causing pain or trouble; harmful; injurious. Liz Fischer, author of Rise Up and Call Her Name , in a private conversation, suggested that evil results from tears in the interdependent web. I often think of evil as disharmony in the music of the spheres. But mostly I think of evil as that which denies or obstructs our Source as energy/ consciousness from working for the greater good of all, or blocking and/or withholding love. My experience of evil is that it is a force that keeps us from being the fullness of our selves as creative forces in the world.
When my sons played Dungeons and Dragons, they introduced me to two concepts of evil: intentional and chaotic. Both are related to the consciousness one acknowledges. This makes sense to me. Intentional evil is that aware or conscious force in the human psyche, whether it takes the form of genocide or power-over, that is repressive. Intentional evil uses violence, mis- or dis-information to maintain power-over or destroy others. Chaotic evil is unconscious or preconscious in the human psyche and denies its very existence. It blames others and takes no responsibility.
I think chaotic evil may prove the more dangerous of the two, because it has no acknowledged consciousness. Someone who refuses to acknowledge to herself or himself that she or he wants power-over and manipulates information or emotions to gain power is wielding chaotic evil. I suspect each of you can think of an example from your experience. Some of my mother’s behaviors come to mind. In an effort to make me a better person, she often would give me the sense that I had no inherent value unless I did what she desired, using her notion of love to manipulate my behavior. I found that destructive for me, and, honestly, I fear doing it to other people. It is a seductive power-over.
C.G. Jung reminds us that each of us has the potential for evil in ourselves [The Prince of Darkness: Radical Evil and the Power of Good in History by Jeffrey Burton Russell (pp. 246-247)]. It is when we try to eliminate or deny evil, to cut it away from our awareness, that we give it its greatest power. Along with Native Americans, I believe that self-possession, owning all of one’s consciousness and emotions, even those that seem dishonorable, gives each of us better ability to cope with the evil within and without. Again, consciousness of our truth is essential.
The last century saw terrible evils: genocide in Germany, Cambodia, Rwanda, Serbia, Kosovo, and the Middle East come to mind. In each case, power-over and refusal to acknowledge that one is destroying others’ consciousness in order to maintain power is clear. This is the worst kind of self-righteousness: the refusal to be open to the possibility that another’s consciousness may have validity for the whole of creation just as much as one’s own. Culture and society’s values of belonging may contribute to this lack of consciousness – this is tribalism that is disastrous to all who encounter it. The balance between the individual’s values and those of the group must be taken into account. The individual is not always right, nor is the group. Again, willingness, consciously, in polylogue, to examine the whole dynamic is necessary for greater understanding and consciousness.
Are acts of nature evil? Can a hurricane or an earthquake be evil? Can a cat killing a bird be evil? We often perceive them to be so. I was upset when our fat old red tabby caught and ate a little Junco. But is that evil? Is it possible that these are examples of our values not resonating with natural forces in these situations?
What about cancer? This gets really dicey, and that is why I have chosen this example. There is evidence that cancer is sometimes caused by environmental situations, sometimes by lifestyle choices, sometimes by genetic predispositions, and, most often, it is a mystery. I feel uncomfortable with those who maintain that, if the victim had only not repressed her or his emotions, she or he wouldn’t have cancer. It may be true. It may not be true. But I don’t believe it is healing or helpful to throw that stuff in someone’s face at a time of diagnosis.
To my mind, cancer is a perfect example of circular causality, having many potential causes and effects, and coming together for each person differently, despite common diagnoses. I suspect there is a lot preconscious or unconscious about cancer, and that we shall take a whole lot longer to get to the heart of its causes.
This brings us to suffering: “the bearing or undergoing of pain, distress, or injury.” (Webster, again). I recall a wag once noting, “Pain is inevitable; suffering is optional.” According to Webster, they are the same, but I suspect that most of us see suffering as prolonged, unnecessary pain. Suffering is not usually that of natural childbirth or most natural deaths, but pain which somehow seems avoidable, as in prolonged death when life is unnaturally maintained beyond what is natural.
As someone who has worked with hospices in three different states over the last 25 years, I know that the value of such care is that it strives to avoid suffering: prolonging life, not prolonging death. While I am not a fan of Dr. Jack Kervorkian, I can understand those who value him, especially if they have watched a loved one die in agony. I do know that the last days of pain-managed life can be the most healing for all concerned, even though cure is not possible. I am deeply grateful that one of my former congregants was able to see his wife peaceful on the last day of her life, and that another released a lot of her anger and fear through the dying process. Each was conscious of what was happening and pain-managed as much as possible, thanks to hospice. This is true death with dignity.
However, when a group of people in power continually torture or kill those they deem less valuable, whether in Guantanamo or Rwanda, suffering occurs on a scale that is not humane. When we learn that human beings can hurt or kill others, just because they were ordered to do so, without a clear sense of mission for the greater good of all, we must ask how this is evil. Consider the Nuremburg Defense, in which human beings maintain they were “only obeying orders.” This was disallowed for defendants at the Rwanda war crimes trials. It assumes we are relieved of responsibility by those in authority. That may be evil.
But what of those Americans in the Stanley Milgrim experiment which served as the basis for the TV special, “The Tenth Level?” Milgrim found that ordinary individuals are able to inflict severe pain and suffering on other human beings, so long as they have an authority giving them orders. Clearly, the participants who administered the electric shocks were able to set aside their own empathy and consciousness of their connection to those enduring the experiment, in order to follow orders.
Where do we place our consciousness? Do we give our power away to those in authority? Do we give up our consciousness to those we view as more powerful? These are questions we must ask.
Another possible evil occurs when we focus consciousness entirely upon that which is negative for us and lose sight of beauty, truth and goodness in our world. If we focus entirely upon our weaknesses and never look for our strengths and gifts, nor for the wonders life has to offer us in art, nature, or contact with others, we lose the larger picture. If our identity becomes one of victim, to the exclusion of the wonderful experiences we have the power to create, we make evil the only aspect of life we experience. That may be evil as well!
If we cannot tolerate our own imperfection, we probably can’t tolerate it in others as well. We strike an odd deal: I give you all my power and consciousness, then you must read my mind and make my life what I want it to be. Again I ask: Can we learn to accept a world that is not perfect, ourselves who are not perfect, a life process and/or God who is not perfect by our standards?
Where is G-d in all of this? How can a loving G-d let evil happen? Maybe G-d as Source (i.e. energy/consciousness) doesn’t expect perfection the way we imagine it - not in nature, not in us. Maybe what we experience as evil is a challenge to move to greater consciousness, an incentive to learn.
Maybe we are G-d’s image as process, not as finished product, with all the messiness and radical responsibility that comes with that. We become responsible for our choices as part of co-creation - for good or for evil. Our degree of consciousness will significantly affect our choices, enabling us to be more aware of evil, able to name it and better able to respond to it. Perceiving and naming evil works against the silence that allows evil to continue in the world.
Dr. Carol Newsom of Emery University asserts that we can resist and counter evil in ways that are not violent:
. . . The Wisdom tradition [in the Bible] thinks that evil can be resisted by depriving it of its “fuel.” Don’t act in a mirror image way to evil – and then it will be stopped before it can spread. Don’t return evil for evil. That’s what the nonviolence movement by Gandhi and Martin Luther King (Jr.) understood. There are ways in which you can resist violence by performing its opposite. Of course there are some contexts in which that is not effective. There may well be some times in which the only viable opposition to evil is violence. But anyone who engages in such action should not do so in a spirit of self-righteousness. The appropriate emotion is grief. Even in acting against those who do evil, one should love them and feel compassion – how awful that anyone could have fallen from what humans were created to be and do. This is very difficult to do without hypocrisy. But I think this is what it means that Jesus calls his followers to love their enemies. If one realizes how easy it is to fall into evil oneself, then it is easier to have compassion even while resisting evil. (Eugene Weekly, October 16, 2008, p. 13.)

Newsom, like Peck, captures the recognition that we must acknowledge the evil in our selves, even while countering it in others, and not delude our selves that we are always righteous in our actions in countering this force. We must continue to deepen our understanding and widen our love.
As Unitarian Universalists, we believe we can make choices and change our choices with greater understanding, if we find our choices are not working for the greater good for all of our selves and others. To learn is to participate in the best way possible by achieving greater consciousness. We also believe that making choices with the greatest consciousness possible includes using the best values possible, not only for our own interests, but also for the greater good of all of life. This is why we focus upon our Principles, the affirmations that state the values we share.
I believe the essence of a religion for our times must give us awareness, experiences, and values that teach us empathy and remind us of our connections to all of life and to our Source, connections that make us more conscious of the good we may yet do and be and the love we may yet have and share. Jeffrey Burton Russell notes:
Perhaps love can do what the intellect cannot. Perhaps the cloud of unknowing can be pierced with the arrow of love. For if we do evil, we also love, and love is the remedy for evil. We are called to fight evil, but we are also called to know how to fight it. Evil is not effectively resisted with hatred and guns. Evil cannot be defeated with evil, negation with negation, terror with terror, missile with missile. The process of negation must be reversed. Only affirmation can overcome negation; evil can only be integrated by good; hatred can only be laid to rest by love. (p. 276.)

Paradoxically, as we grow in awareness of true creative interchange of loving energies, we also grow in awareness of evil, but it has less power in our lives. As we move into deeper connection with our Source of consciousness, we can name the evil within and without and make better choices in our actions. May we do so with respect, responsibility, and relish for the process.
So Be It! Blessed Be!

Closing Words
May we so live that we become more aware of all that is possible, for good or ill. May we open to love moving in ourselves and bring conscious love out into the larger community to brighten the lives of others, for the greater good of all.
So Be It! Blessed Be!