We are living what is perhaps the greatest tragedy in human history. Science fiction has come to haunt us with harsh reality. But we are not being attacked by aliens but by an unintended or intended consequence of human actions. We are justifiably scared because COVID-19 knows no borders, no nations, no ethnic or religious groups. This global disaster is affecting hundreds of thousands blindly, without distinction of class, status or power.
Tragic facts show we are still scientifically inadequate, economically fragile and socially weak. COVID-19 is challenging the arrogance of power, the knowledge of science and the egoism of individuals.
Hopefully, humanity, without knowing when or how, will win this battle… as a believer, I add, with the help of a loving God. However, many are claiming that society will be different after COVID-19. Those who are arguing in this manner might be living The Future of an Illusion, once mistakenly attributed to religion.
In Genesis we find a description of a deluge which resulted from man’s wickedness. After the deluge, putting aside the story’s exegetical theological aspects, Genesis may be interpreted by believers and non-believers alike as the birth of a new generation living at peace with God and with itself. However, history has shown us that culture is very slow to change; there is a sort of inertia that keeps it away from conversion, that is, a radical change.
Both as citizen and as a member of the Church, may I ask: have we learnt from history? Cain murdered his brother Abel… has humanity ever desisted from such heinous crimes? Isn’t history filled with alternations between peace and war?
Did we change our culture after the Seveso industrial disaster in 1976, or the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986? In the latter year Ulrich Beck published his book Risk Society in which he argued about the collateral damage of man-made side effects of modernity, which produce societal uncertainties. He predicted a “second modernity”, where what we need is not the distribution of power and wealth, but ways to handle risks, including ecological ones, because these are not allocated according to wealth, social milieu and strata but affect the whole of humanity.
I am not fond of conspiracy theories. But it is widely known that the only Chinese National Biosafety Laboratory for research and for dealing with deadly and emerging infectious diseases is found in Wuhan. As far back as 2017, scientists had expressed worries about the possibility of microorganisms escaping from the lab and causing negative biological effects.
Pope Francis had tackled such problems in Laudato Si’. During this lockdown, the state and the Church have concentrated more on their role of service to ‘humanity’; the former as regards power, the latter as regards diakonia. But as regards other issues that will rear their head very soon, imagination has moved at a snail’s pace. For both institutions, the medium has become the main message. It is illusionary to think that social interaction can be substituted by digital interaction. The lockdown has thought this a lesson at our expense.
An essential lesson we ought to learn from this deadly virus is that our personal and institutional potential have their limits. Will this prod politicians and Church leaders to accept the need a paradigm shift in our culture?
Fr Joe Inguanez, priest and sociologist