The pandemic of loneliness: A theological explanation and a missiological opportunity

I was listening to Albert Mohler today. And in 'The Briefing', a podcast where he analyses news from a Christian perspective, he mentioned the words that form the title of this post.

The New York Times ran an article on 9th April which mentions the fact that more and more Americans have been using the phone to call people and talk to them. This was in opposition to trends in recent years where texting was becoming the predominant form of communication. Mohler mentions the fact that the Coronavirus pandemic has brought to focus another huge problem - the pandemic of loneliness.

The phenomena is not unique to the American population. A quick Google search brought me results where Telecompaper ran an article on 23rd April about a rise in phone calls in the UK. And Euronews ran one on 25th which mentioned the same phenomena across Europe.

Though I couldn't find one particular to India, I found a couple of news items along similar lines. Reliance Jio, Airtel, and Idea-Vodafone, or in other words, all the big telecom companies in India, have extended their incoming calls validity in view of the lockdown. The Economic Times ran an article on 19th April, showing how many young professionals are dealing with increased anxiety due to loneliness. The article goes on to mention how these youngsters are finding ways to deal with the loneliness, which include spending lots of time on social media, staying connected with people through video calls, dating, or picking up various hobbies or projects.

All this goes on to show how people are craving the human touch, the human voice, or in other words, they are craving companionship. Mohler in his podcast, says that we as Christians, have a theological explanation for this. God made man in His image, and this craving for connection is certainly a part of our design. God said, "it is not good for man to be alone." Though written in the immediate context of the marital relationship, it can be applied to a larger theme.

But we don't just have a theological explanation, but also, according to Mohler, we can see a missiological opportunity in this. People are longing for human companionship. People want to talk. People are anxious. And they want to talk. As someone who generally avoids being in contact with people through the phone, it is particularly a wake up call for me. And perhaps all of us Christians need to reach out to people around us.

I am in no way discounting the work of trained counselors and psychiatrists. We definitely need such support. However, we can also do our part. We could call a friend whom we haven't spoken to in a long time. Or maybe a family relative whom we have drifted away from. There is a mission here for us. To love and serve our neighbour. It could be to just lend a listening ear. Or to offer comfort to people. To be a friend.

Ultimately, however, we realise that it is only God who can offer comfort to a lonely heart. And as we comfort people, we point people towards the ultimate comforter, Jesus Christ, who promised to be with his disciples "always, to the end of the ages." (Mathew 28:20)

The religious (Christian) alternative: An apology for faith

The world is going through, what can possibly be called, the most difficult time faced by this generation. A number of people are really suffering and there is a lot of hopelessness. Any attempt to present a religious answer during such times could be condemned as opportunistic or as exploiting the situation and not being sensitive. In spite of that risk, I would still like to present the religious alternative because I believe it offers hope and real answers, something that we all need now more than ever.

The Individual and the Community

A lot of my friends believe in the Marxist ideal of a classless society. And some of them shared posts on social media which talk about how capitalism is a huge problem. That is what got me writing this post. (Interestingly, the political left's preaching would not draw as much flak from the liberals as religious preaching though I digress.)

I personally support leftist policies to an extent. This is because I do agree with Marx that true human freedom can be found positively in our relations with other people; it can be found in community not in isolation. Though this flies in the face of the Western, especially American, liberal ideas of personal property and personal rights, Americans themselves would take pride in precisely those very moments when they sacrificed personal property and personal rights 'for the greater good of the community'. The Second World War is fondly remembered as a time when the nation came together for a noble cause. The soldiers are almost venerated. Sacrifice of personal life for the sake of the community was celebrated.

And so, I think we can agree that the community often brings out the best in us. We humans are, if I may use the expression, 'designed' to live for persons or ideas outside of ourselves. That is what brings out the best in us, and leads to 'the greater good.'

The Pursuit of Happiness

That leads me to my second point. Almost all political or religious philosophies deal in some way with man's pursuit of happiness. Whether it be Bentham's utilitarianism that seeks to maximize the happiness of the maximum number of people. Or Marx who wrote, "If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people." [1835, Reflections of a young man]

Every human desires happiness. We seek happiness in many things. There are many philosophies that offer happiness. Some philosophies talk about finding happiness within oneself, while some talk about locating it outside of oneself. For instance, the quote by Marx shows that he believed happiness to be found in community and not in isolation. Here again, I tend to agree with him.

Many of us experience happiness (or some form of it) while watching a movie, playing a game, watching a game, listening to music, spending time with a loved one, and so on and so forth. I believe that at the heart of happiness is losing oneself. We experience happiness in movies when we lose ourselves in the story, or in a game, when we become so invested in the game that we forget ourselves, or in a loved one when we give up our very lives for the beloved (Bruno Mars starts singing, I'd catch a grenade for you...)

The Problem of Self

Here is a problem though. From experience I find that the losing of self is not easy. It's eventual end is sacrifice. That is one area where Marxist ideals fail to translate to everyday life. As beautifully brought out by Orwell in Animal Farm, man eventually sacrifices the needs of the community for the needs of self. It becomes a loop. Sacrificing the community for the self creates problems for the self. To deal with the problems, man further sacrifices the community to deal with self.

The root of the problem is man's nature. Rivalry and competition are hindrances to the realization of a classless society. But rivalry can be seen in man even when he is very young. The moment a younger sibling is born, the older sibling sees the sibling as a rival for the attention of the adults. If the very nature of man tries to put self over others, imposing the foreign ideal of community will be resisted by the nature. This causes the problem where the two points we spoke about are in conflict: the pursuit of happiness impeded by the need to put community over self and the need of the community taking a hit due to the pursuit of happiness. If the nature of man seeks to put self over others, it can find happiness only in doing so.

The ideal scenario

The ideal scenario would be one where the pursuit of happiness and the idea of sacrifice (or letting oneself go) for the community converge. Here is where I believe Christianity can offer a solution.

Christianity sees man as inherently flawed as a result of original sin. This sinful nature is what is responsible for the rivalry and competition. The nature causes one to see oneself as God, and thereby deserving of being above others. For the ideal scenario, education is not what is needed, but rather reformation of the very nature. And that is what, according to Christianity, God offers.

Jeremiah 31: 33 says, "But this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me..." Not education, but rather reformation of character. And 1st John 4:8 says, "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love." Note the idea of knowing God in the two mentioned verses and the logical inference is this. Knowing God leads one to love others. And knowing God is what God himself promises to do. Reformation of the very nature, or as the Bible puts it, 'being born again.'

Christianity, much like Marxism, believes in a classless society, albeit one ruled by God. Galatians 3:28 says, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." And yet, Christianity does not actively pursue a classless society but rather pursues man's ultimate joy, which is found in God. Allow me to demonstrate.

Imagine a wheel. The spokes of the wheel get closer to each other the more they get closer to the hub. Or imagine an orchestra. In an orchestra, the instruments are all in sync only when each of them is tuned to the standard tuning (external) and not merely to each other.

Christian belief sees God as that hub, or the tuning fork. When man draws closer to God, he is able to live in harmony within a society. The classless society thus becomes a by product when man pursues the ultimate joy that is found in God.

But what about sacrifice? We already saw that it is not easy. However, we have many examples through history of people dying for something or someone other than themselves. These are people who valued that something or someone a lot. One could not die for a stranger. But dying for the person who gives me the greatest joy is possible. (People do die for strangers but usually there is always an underlying strong belief in the idea of 'country' or something like that and love for that idea.) And so, if as the Bible says, God gives the greatest joy, sacrifice would not just be possible because it is worth it, but would be something to be desired because it would take one closer to God (Philippians 1: 23)

To conclude

This convergence of (i) the sacrifice of self for the community and (ii) the pursuit of happiness is found in Christianity. And this convergence is what drove the early Christians to have "all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.... they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people." [Acts 2: 44 - 47]

If the Christian message is true, and I believe it is, then I believe it to be a far better alternative.

P.S. I do not claim to be an expert on Marxism or any form of political studies. I am sorry if I have misrepresented any of the ideas.