Psychological, Feminist, And Black Approaches To Dogma And The Problems Of Evil Essay, Research Paper

Why does evil exist? This is the question theodicy asks. Why would an all-loving,

all-good, and all-powerful God allow suffering to take place? In this class, we’ve tried to

understand varying answers to this question and others from many different perspectives:

psychological, feminist, artistic, and African-American. Throughout this course we’ve

read many authors who have tried to, if at least partially, solve the problem of suffering

for themselves and for all of us as well. The movie Dogma displays many of these points-

of-view in a single piece of artistic expression. It touches on concepts which have been

espoused by psychologists such as Freud, feminists such as Saiving and Noddings, and

African-Americans authors such as Jones and Cone.

The most clearly discernable reference to the argument of Freud in relation to

religion and suffering occurs close to the beginning of the movie in Loki’s conversation

with the nun. After giving his theory that Through the Looking Glass is a critique of

organized religion, he says, “Organized religion destroys who we are or who we can be

by inhibiting our actions and decisions out of fear of an intangible parent-figure who

shakes a finger at us from thousands of years ago and says, ‘No, no!’” She asks him,

upon finishing their conversation and being convinced to leave the Church, what she

should do now. Loki tells her to, “Just get out there and taste life!” Freud would agree

completely that religion is, in fact, detrimental and partially even a cause of human

suffering. Through its work in civilization, it places restrictions upon the actions of the

individual and causes the individual to suffer guilt as a result of a natural desire to

overcome those restrictions. Religion serves on behalf of civilization to inhibit the

individual from acting upon instinct (FOI 47). Freud would add to this, however, that

religion’s primary purpose for humans is to act as protector of the individual against

Nature, Fate, and to “compensate them for the sufferings and privations which a civilized

life in common has imposed upon them” (22). So, while it acts for the purposes of

civilization, it gives the illusory hope of some salvation resulting from the hardships a

civilized life has imposed upon the individual. The use of the phrase “intangible parent-

figure” in Loki’s remark is interesting because Freud uses the exact same type of imagery

for God as being an imaginary “father-figure” who sits in heaven ready to protect the

believer and to make all things better. While the view of the religionist, at least in Freud’s

mind, may seem to be comforting, it is damaging because there is a much better view to

be had which is void of any guilt-feelings. This is the view of reason and science. By

following reason, Freud feels we can greatly reduce our current mental suffering. Loki’s

suggestion to the nun to “Just get out there and taste life” is an indication of what that life

without religion would be based upon-living in the moment and experiencing life

completely for what it’s worth in the here and now. By doing so, according to Freud,

“they [humankind] will probably succeed in achieving a state of things in which life will

become tolerable for everyone and civilization no longer oppressive of anyone” (63). By

ridding ourselves of religion altogether, argues Loki, we would be shedding much of our

suffering. Freud would enjoy the remarks of Loki in the movie.

Some of the ideas of the feminist authors we’ve read on the suffering of women

are also contained in the film. Saiving would like the movie because in it Loki and

Bartleby are kicked out of heaven for committing the sin of self-assertiveness through

disobeying God while Bethany, on the other hand, finds the spiritual fulfillment she has

been seeking only when she accepts her autonomy by undertaking the task she is called to

do and asserts her will over the will of the two male angels and to a lesser extent against

the sexual advances of Jay, the prophet. Saiving argues that one of the reasons women

suffer is because the whole idea of sin should actually be different for each sex. Men

have imposed their own notion of what it is to be sinful upon religion and women-

namely that sin comes from, “pride, will-to-power, self-assertiveness, and the treatment

of others as objects rather than persons” (THS 35). This masculine view of sin is enforced

by the patriarchal religions upon women, causing them to be oppressed and to avoid

doing anything which might assert their independence. Such is inappropriate for women,

argues Saiving, and should be replaced by a concept of sin which includes “selflessness”

and being only for others by neglecting one’s own needs (41). This new concept of sin

would cause women to seek a balance between their focus on themselves and others,

thereby alleviating much of their current suffering, as was the case with Bethany.

Noddings would appreciate the movie because it reveals the exclusion and

scapegoating of women in religion. Even though God is obviously female in form in

Dogma, the male figures refuse to refer to God as Her, even though they know the truth.

Noddings would agree completely with Serendipity when she tells Bethany that God was

made into a male figure by the male writers of the Bible. She would also add that this is

because men wanted to dominate women by having them seek salvation and protection

from an exclusively male deity (TDG 54). Noddings might also note that all of the

women in the movie are associated, at least at some point, with their bodies as sexual

objects. This is evident in Jay’s constant taunts to Bethany and Serendipity’s occupation

as a stripper, both hinting that males see the female body as sinful and evil, thereby

leading to their suffering at the hands of those same men (36). Saiving and other

feminists might also agree with this interpretation of the movie.

The African-American authors we’ve read would find much to talk about in

Dogma as well. Jones sees much of black suffering and oppression to be caused by white

domination of religion. The character of Rufus, the black thirteenth Apostle, serves as

the carrier of this argument in the movie. Because he was black, and the church fathers

were uncomfortable with this, they simply left him out of the Bible. But not only that-

Jesus was black too! White people, he says, would not like the idea of putting their

salvation in the hands of a black man, so they simply changed a few words of scripture to

transform the person of Christ into a white man. This”Whiteanity” is “mis-religion”

according to Jones and should be rejected. He argues that blacks should seek their own

liberation from oppression outside of the confines of Christianity and instead find it in the

humanocentric Black Humanism (IGWR?). Rufus would probably disagree with Jones on

this point, however, as does Cone. Cone would be heartened by the call of Rufus to

Bethany to correct the mistakes of the Church in relation to its misrepresentation of

blacks. He believes Christianity can be completely appropriate for African-Americans

and can be a driving force in helping them to fight for liberation (GO). For them to

recognize Jesus as black could only help in this respect. In the end, though Jones

and Cone may disagree on the relevancy of Christianity in helping their people out of

suffering, they would probably both admit Dogma brings up many important questions

about black oppression in the Church.

All of the different approaches to the problems of evil touched upon in the movie

and in this course-psychological, feminist, artistic, and African-American-fail,

ultimately, in answering the question of why evil exists in the first place. They all

argue, however, that we can reduce the amount of suffering we experience by doing

something, ourselves, to promote the causes of freedom, justice, and equality in the

world. We should continue to ask questions, but we should not neglect the needs of our

fellow man and woman in the process. Freud, Saiving, Noddings, Jones, Cone, the other

authors we’ve covered, and the makers of Dogma would agree.

Bibliography

Dogma. Dir. Kevin Smith. Perf. Linda Fiorentino, Matt Damon, and Ben Affleck. Lion’s

Gate Entertainment, 1999.

Freud, Sigmund. The Future of an Illusion. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1961.

Saiving, Valerie. “The Human Situation: A Feminine View,” in WomanSpirit Rising: A

Feminist Reader in Religion. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1992.

Noddings, Nel. Women and Evil. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989

Jones, William R. Is God a White Racist? A Preamble to Black Theology, 2nd ed. Boston:

Beacon Press, 1998.

Cone, James H. God of the Oppressed, revised ed. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1997.