T
Teflon93
Guest
Nope—in fact, St Augustine wrote his own “Confessions”, which compares quite favorably with Gandhi’s example in that my patron saint took a fine-toothed comb to his own autobiography. It may have been the sin of pride which kept Gandhi out of heaven, if indeed he was not saved.
Even the most hypocritical Christian obeys Christ to some small extent—rejecting Christ and his Church means failing to live up to the only example which matters—Christ’s.
I’m not accusing you of anything—just reminding you which example matters and which does not.
Marcus Aurelius was a great man. His example only takes us so far, and when considering salvation, the bulk of Church teaching would tend toward our not encountering the Emperor on the other side, should we make it through the Narrow Gate ourselves. God being God, of course, all things are possible.
What seems apparent and worth keeping in mind that, to use another Augustinian reference, those men exalted within the City of Man may not in fact be residents of the City of God.
Perhaps, although much of Europe has been inured to a much heavier yoke than the Pope’s from time to time. The Catholic Church does not tell you you must erect street signs every so many feet or what the price of chicken is; Brussels bureaucrats do.
My own hypothesis is that Europe’s churches and cathedrals have gone dark because they have turned to the worship of “great men” rather than God, putting their faith where it doesn’t belong.
Not literally, of course (they wouldn’t claim to worship anything, if polls are any indication), but in the true sense of idolatry—taking what is due God and applying it to that which is not God.
This is why Gandhi’s soundbite grates. Sir Charles Napier, in the anecdote I referenced, took action against an objective evil—the murder of women—driven by his Christian faith. Doing so cost him—looking the other way would have made for a smoother ride in India at the time.
British rule in India was steeped in injustice and exploitation—this is a fact, and we rightly celebrate Indian independence as a result. But as with the experience of America, the British did not simply take—they were an enormous civilizing influence, particularly during the Victorian era. Much of the tumult following independence was a result of India treating all things Western as though poisoned, to their harm. Much of that, I would posit, is a result of Gandhi’s own rhetoric and behavior. In that, he resembled Thomas Jefferson more than Christ.
One also must note that Gandhi sought to undermine the struggle against the Axis in World War II by insisting that the British withdraw from India before India would consider supporting the war effort (a reversal of his earlier and more moderate lukewarm support of the effort). It doesn’t speak well for one’s moral barometer that one can’t distinguish between Hitler and Churchill, between Nazi and Tory.
Gandhi had a blind spot, and that was his hatred of the British. We can note that that hatred had justification without condoning it in its own right.
That hatred may also have barred the doors of heaven to him.
Peace.