I just read the first reasonable critique against the radical social isolation strategy that has now been embraced globally. Before you sharpen your pitchfork, note that I said “read”, not “found” (implying I was looking for one, “Embraced” or even “agreed with”. I like to read opinions that differs from my own. Sometimes they convince me of the opposite, sometimes they make me understand my own stance better and always they broaden my horizons, which I reckon is a good thing.
If I understand the piece correctly it’s basic argument goes like this: While the preservation of life is commendable even in the light of huge economic costs, the costs of a long term societal shutdown that naturally goes with this are not taken into account and may turn out to be too much. Even during the Spanish flu and World War two what could go on, went on-like schools during world war 2 (often even in the rubble of badly hit cities). If we let too many businesses, institutions, gathering patterns and social interaction whither away for two long, the consequences could be even more catastrophic than allowing vulnerable people to die.
I still must think this stance over many times in my head. Too me it is a sign of hope that people still see life, even that of the most vulnerable and old as valuable enough to sacrifice everything for. I was pleasantly surprised by this and didn’t expect to see it in a world that is, from where I am standing, very money driven with a profit-as-Bottomline general demeanour. To think that in such a world even the poster boys of capitalism could vie for such sacrifices was surprising and inspiring, a hopeful sign that all the good in people hasn’t quite died yet. So, coming from there I am not quite ready to agree with this notion…
But it did make me wonder. Do these seemingly altruistic sacrifices hide something sinister? Is it driven by a fearful clinging to life rather than by a loving response to people more vulnerable than I am? Is what we are seeing more the knee jerk reaction of a generation that has lost the hope of a life after death and are avoiding a death before death, which in their minds are a life without material wealth?
Should this be the case (and I am pretty sure it is the case with at least some people), I hope that the time in lock-down will serve another unintended purpose. I hope that it will teach people that love, rather than wealth and gain is the essence of being truly alive. May their spouses, children and close ones become once more our motivating force, the charge station of further loving engagements with the rest of society.
The term “amateur” is frowned upon nowadays. It is coupled with the notion of incompetency, not having arrived where you should and not being worthy of care and attention. But the word originates from the Latin word “amor” which means “to love”. An amateur is someone that does something out of love more so than being driven by reward as professionals often do. Most professionals started out as amateurs and deep down all of them would like to be one again. Maybe to be fully human means to remain an amateur however competent and sought after you become.
Faith is an incredible resource for people who rediscover the value of living by love. If ever there is an opportunity for the church in this pandemic, it is this. Rekindle the joy of being an amateur at life.
How to die is a question of how to live, but how to live is a question of knowing how to love: how to find a love that isn’t haunted by fear, a love that is stronger than death-figuring out how to love rightly and live lightly with all the mortal beauties of creation without despising or resenting their mortality either.-James K.A. Smith