Introduction
It has been a fact that is increasingly gaining vigor that the religious lines tend to resist or demise the importance of secular agents like technology and the shifting trends of life among others. The world is so complex with new ideas cropping from the very creations of God that it is much difficult to ascertain which is correct and vice versa. It is equally complex to note which ideas are from God or not and this is true. Which things are considered out of the mind of God and which are within? Moreover, how do we know who says the truth and what gauges the level of that truth? These are among the many questions that have been raised regarding playing God. This paper critically comments on Coady’s passage on accusations of playing God normally focused on the secular agents by the predominant religious leaders and the possibility of the trend shifting back to the religious leaders.
Playing God can refer to someone who takes on duties that are meant for God in human lives. Such roles may include a situation where one has to choose one or more people when all cannot be saved from death. This is a role left to God and when one takes it over, it brings controversy. Various scientific activities have raised eyebrows on the extent to which they go with regards to God’s role and authority in His creations. Such includes, abortion, cloning, death, Human genetic engineering among others. These have plausibly been 3presumed anti-God and have brought the debate on their origin. It is important to note that in most cases it has been the religious leaders teaming to reject such methods. There is also this complex issue of who knows the will of God?
Discussion
Coady sees the possibility of the playing God shifting to the side of religious leaders. The Church accuses the secular world of playing God. The reasons they give are based on their perceptions of what is good and according to the secular world, without clear outlining proofs. New technologies have brought advanced ways of saving lives, in healthcare sectors, faster communication, infrastructures, and many other discoveries. Interestingly, the Church has grown to accept most of these technologies with time. In the dark age when Catholicism was paramount and just at the beginning of such impervious inventions like medicine and electronics, at first never accepted such forms of treatments for patients. But this changed later on as they even established hospitals, leading to much faster growth in the healthcare sector.
Recently, more advanced technologies have been developed; such is their ladder that they even eliminate some hereditary genes during fertilization to filter out those they consider bad for the development of children. This has caused havoc in the Church as they believe that reproduction is God’s purpose and when Human modifies it, and then there is a high probability of endangering the lives of the inhabitants of the world and as well missing the whole point of God’s ideal of creation. On the other hand, they have selectively chosen what technology to adopt and what not to. Does this pose the question, is technology in General God’s will? Why do they select some and not others?
However there are situations where it has been so complex in understanding the will of God in Science if we say that science is good, and is in line with God’s plan then to what extent? We all have to agree with Coady that everyone is subject to temptation including the priests and the other religious leaders. So how do we know that whatever they imply is true? This is a clear controversy that keeps surging and seems without end.
The possibility of this charge changing from its usual suspects to targeting the religious leaders is very high and considerable. The passage talks of the debate on what God’s will is, why the churches think the scientists are wrong and why the scientists do not agree with them. This does not only touch on the scientist, but the secular world as well. The church is slowly adapting to these new techniques, and this poses the question on their real stand, it even makes them liable to accusations of playing God. The fact that everyone tends to ignore any internal constraints that par on human power, benevolence, and understanding is a clear proof of this. The passage goes on to reflect on the past dark acts during the dark ages, the wars associated with beliefs, the false doctrines and the inquisitions. Catholic is given as the main example in most of these as they were the major church at the time.
It makes it difficult to ascertain the truth in Church and what is good for the people. Every church has its doctrine which transcribes their needs, they all claim to be on God’s side but still differ in contentious issues that directly affect lives. Some of these issues include cases of abortion which is taboo in church, when it comes to saving the life of the mother or the child, how do you choose? What is God’s will, in that case, is the church right in refuting this procedure in such circumstances, and are we right to do it in the first place? These are very complex questions in an intricate world that was created by God.
Another example is in cloning, new species of human beings are brought into the world, are these beings safe in and to the world? Is it God’s will that such extensive works are done, If not whose? These are further complex and complicated questions regarding the will of God in the actions of man. What does this mean and which is the way forward? These factors of life constantly reverse accusations of playing God to the Church. The passage seeks to address the fact that it is completely difficult to know God’s will in the complex world that changes every time. This is with regards to the wars witnessed among those who claim to be privy to God and distorts what is preached.
According to Caudy, the righteous tend to simplify things in the interest of those they think are right and good, and more often in search for power which is again raising debate over their ability to incisively give directions based on God’s will. This would not be said of them if they gave genuine information on the decrees of God. But since it is quite evident that they are unsettled amongst themselves, criticizing each other over different doctrines but claiming to assert for the same God, it becomes quite prevalent that the accusations will reverse in their direction. The clerics are accused of reluctance in identifying themselves with the past incidences making them quite dishonest with the public. This further amplifies the possibility of reversal in the accusations for playing God.
The passage talks of modernization which have led to the freedom and liberalization of women from their presumed duties of the past. This has been resisted by the Church further posing the question of where they source their ideas and if they are playing God. They are also linked to conservatives who usually seem unready to effect changes that come with the shifting trends in the world; they never rely on assumptions related to omniscience among others. However, correct teachings are required of the leaders and concise methods of determining what is right and wrong; they should also give the right interpretations of their doctrines. Besides, to show people that they really are privy to God, they should come together in their doctrines as God is one and does not bring different regulations and decrees on the same issues within the same people.
This brings division which is the result that was witnessed in the past, when the religious sections fought causing massive damages and killings. Playing God is now quite prevalent with the ever-increasing diverse ideas on things to do. However, the fact remains that with increased instability and different doctrinal directions, the church is moving towards playing God and of great consideration is the fact that both the accused and the accuser are tending towards one line. In this case who will save the other, and by what means? It is quite imperative to note that at this stage no side would listen to the other and more controversies are more likely to be witnessed.
Conclusion
The passage essentially conveys hypocrisy in the Church’s view of the secular agents when it has had a witnessed history of wars, crusades and even wrong interpretation of the book and doctrines that are mainly aimed at asserting their authority over people without correct guidance. It moves on to give examples of situations where the church was found wanting and their increased exposure to accusations of playing God. Their slow adjustment to the technological change, while at the same time adopting some and not others, for reasons best known to them, is another excellent point that drives this fact home. It is quite evident that the authorities in the religious realm are considerably reluctant to identify with the acts of the past that entailed the wars of the dark ages.
The passage further related this point of view to the conservatives whose stand on innovation is quite worrying as it never gives a chance to assumptions based on omniscience, omnibenevolent among others. It is therefore quite possible that playing God can as well be witnessed in the Church and thus proves the possibility of a reversal accusation from perceived obvious victims to the status quo. This can also be traced to the resistance to modernization which tried to bring forth equality between women and men, they presumed the roles of women, and this was an ill motive as it made some more equal than the others. It is therefore imperative to consider the complexities involved in deciding which technological, secular activities are right. The church needs to live up to its expected position and achieve its goals of teaching genuine doctrines that give the exact decrees of God. This would as well take into consideration the shift and complexities in the world as it drifts to a new dawn.