Christian thought discovered more about the workings of the human mind in 1600 years than a trainload of experimental psychologists has done in 60. Of course, I hear you say, they had all that time. And their paradigm was different. But what should it matter whether you call it pride or ego or self-interest when the result is still a national culture FUBAR? We didn’t want to listen, because we thought we had better ideas and then it turns out that we are assigning new names to old ideas and rejoicing at our superior wisdom.
Relevant Notes from the text:
The Primary Sin is Pride
Calvin consistently holds to the Pauline definition of sin given in Romans I. Sin is pride and not ignorance: “They worship not Him but figments of their own brains instead. This pravity Paul expressly remarks: ‘Professing themselves wise they became fools.’ He had before said ‘they became vain in their imaginations.’” Institutes, Book I, Ch. 4.
There is a pride of power in which the human ego assumes its self-sufficiency and self-mastery and imagines itself secure against all vicissitudes. … This proud pretension is present in an inchoate form in all human life but it rises to greater heights among those individuals and classes who have a more than ordinary degree of social power. “Soul, thou has much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.” But God said to the rich fool, “This night thy soul shall be required of thee” (Luke 12:19-20)
Man is tempted by the basic insecurity of human existence to make himself doubly secure and by the insignificance of his place in the total scheme of life to prove his significance. …The greater his power and glory, the more the common mortality of humankind appears to him in the guise of an incongruous fate.
Moral pride is revealed in all “self-righteous” judgments in which the other is condemned because he fails to conform to the highly arbitrary standards of the self. Since the self judges itself by its own standards and finds itself good.
Luther rightly insisted that the unwillingness of the sinner to be regarded as a sinner was the final form of sin.
The sin of moral pride brings forth spiritual pride. … For this reason religion is not simply … an inherently virtuous human quest for God. It is merely a final battleground between God and man’s self-esteem. … The same man may in one moment regard Christ as his judge and in the next moment seek to prove that the figure, the standards and the righteousness of Christ bear a greater similarity to his own righteousness than to that of his enemy. … What goes by the name of religion in the modern world is to a great extent unbridled human self-assertion in religious guise.
As soon as the [religious person] assumes that his more prophetic statement and interpretation of the Christian gospel guarantees him a superior virtue, he is also lost in the sin of self-righteousness.
The Relation of Dishonesty to Pride
Man loves himself inordinately. Since his determinate existence does not deserve the devotion lavished upon it, it is obviously necessary to practice some deception in order to justify such excessive devotion. … The self must at any rate deceive itself first. Its deception of others is partly an effort to convince itself against itself. The fact that this necessity exits is an important indication of the vestige of truth which abides with the self in all its confusion and which it must placate before it can act. The dishonesty of man is thus an interesting refutation of the doctrine of man’s total depravity.
The Biblical analysis of sin is filled with references to the function of deception in the economy of sin. St. Paul declares that the self-glorification of man is a process of changing “the truth of God into a lie” (Romans 1:25).
Isaiah 47: Sinful man has two claims: “I am and none else beside me” and “None seeth me,” the illusions of the self as the center of the world and of the self transcending the world, in the one case leading to the denial of the existence of other life and in the other case to a denial of a higher court of judgment. These illusions are attributed, on the one hand, to the very greatness of the human mind: “Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee,” and on the other to dishonest: “Thou hast trusted thy wickedness.”
The sinful self needs these deceptions because it cannot pursue its own determinate ends without paying tribute to the truth. This truth, which the self, even in its sin, never wholly obscures, is that the self, as finite and determinate, does not deserve unconditioned devotion.
Inequality of Guilt
Prophetic judgment is leveled at those “which oppress the poor, which crush the needy (Amos 4:1), those who “lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch themselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs out of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the stall (Amos 6:4), who “swallow up the needy, even to make the poor of the land to fail” (Amos 8:4).
“For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up … and the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day” (Is. 2:12, also Is. 26.5)
An inevitable concomitant of pride is injustice.
“For ye have eaten up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses. What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? Saith the Lord God of hosts” (Is. 3:14, 15).
It is a fact that those who hold great economic and political power are more guilty of pride against God and of injustice against the weak than those who lack power and prestige.
“If any man stand, let him take heed lest he fall.” … It is the man who stands, who has achieved, who is honored and approve by his fellowmen who mistakes the relative achievements and approvals of history for a final and ultimate approval.
The attempt to maintain one’s own pride and self-respect by holding others in contempt adds an uneasy conscience to the general insecurity which the attitude of contempt is meant to alleviate. St. Paul: “Their foolish heart was darkened; it was because they professed themselves wise that they became fools.
In Summary:
Pastor Neibuhr relates Jesus’ encounter with a rich young man: The young man had kept all the commandments; but the commandments, the “law” in the more restricted sense, did not satisfy him and his continued uneasiness prompted the question, “What lack I yet?” This question, “What lack I yet?” suggests that what lies in the uneasy conscience of the sinner is not so much a knowledge that the ultimate law of life is the law of love as the more negative realization that obedience to the ordinary rules of justice and equity is not enough. Jesus responds: “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast and give to the poor.” What is demanded is an action in which regard for the self is completely eliminated.