Everyman: for God or for himself

To be honest with you, I’ve almost forgotten about this blog. Since the start of uni, I’ve just been running around doing everything possible. Thing is, for me, if I ever give myself time to stop and think while I’m in a new environment, destruction of the mind follows. I tend to overthink and overanalyze everything, so it’s good to let my mind run wild for a few weeks before settling down.

Anyways I decided to write this post because a drunk friend who I got to know during Freshers came up to me tonight and said, “Hey man, I read your blog. It’s pretty cool.” While it sounds a bit creepy, it’s also quite nice to know that people stalk your Facebook feed.

So I was reading this article today about the morality play Everyman that we are studying currently in my Drama module. Everyman basically conveys a Catholic doctrine to the people of the 15th century. While on the surface you can some it up as “You will be judged by God, so do good deeds”, it actually tackles a more complex message by the orthodox Catholic church.

Two problems are placed on the table regarding the message of the church: firstly, while we are basically all sinners after the fall of Adam, and can only be saved by God’s grace, we are ultimately judged by the good deeds we do in our lives. Secondly, Jesus died to redeem our sins so that we are able to achieve salvation, but only members of the Church can receive such a reward, which means it is absolutely necessary to follow the orders of the church and the sacramental rituals.

Moreover, in Everyman, family and friends are seen as ephemeral ties and unfaithful dependants who will turn their backs on you as soon as you get into trouble regarding mortality. And the fact that material wealth is an illusion that overpowers even the love for our family is shown by how much Everyman cares about his Goods. Does that still apply nowadays? Don’t we stress enough on the significance of love in movies, TV and books to know that material wealth is superficial? I think values have changed with time. Also, isn’t it a bit harsh to say that your family will not go through anything with you? Everyman was lonely until he learned the true meaning of life, at least life according to the Catholic doctrine.

No matter what, I still find it bleak to know that we should live our lives in the service of God, that virtue without a religious purpose is still meaningless, and that we must repent by flagellating ourselves in order to be seen as truly repentant in the eyes of God.

I still can’t get my head past the idea that Everyman was truly repentant. I still think he did it to save his arse. The writer of the article was right: as modern audience, we are unable to put ourselves in the shoes of the audience back then, audience whose lives are ruled and governed by religious authority. I am unable to see it as a legitimate doctrine; the value it endorses is ridiculously rigid. Even the virtuous Christian might be falsely led into believing that his life is sanctified in itself and not by the grace of God! In this age we live for ourselves, and the prospect of living life righteously for someone, something else, is just too much for me to comprehend.