At school we were repeatedly reminded by our proud and civilized teachers of the adage that, “the pen is mightier than the sword”. And it irks me that none considered or even advised us that this does not diminish the pen’s cruelty. The pen has too often stirred the sword and even defended its brutality vehemently. A skillfully wielded sword can win a battle but a pen in a determined halfwit’s hand can rally many swords to extend an empire. It makes me wonder what other “enlightened” methods we employ in our world that cause more harm than good? But then again, the pen was never intended to take the higher ground. If it is placed in context, the saying is born from an injured ego that resorts to the only resource at its disposal to strike back a punishing blow. The statement actually reads, “Beneath the rule of men entirely great, the pen is mightier than the sword”. So here is a man, constrained by the law and his burning anger, who seeks to deal a lethal blow but cannot use conventional means to do so. He harbors malice, has no intention of letting it go and finds an alternative form of retaliation. There is no forgiveness here, no noble higher ground, just malice finding another way to express itself.
Why then take a vengeful thought, hide its vicious intent and impress it on uninformed minds and expect virtuous results? There are many who have good intentions, but whose work bears no good because of the poison that infects it through such teachings. The world’s grief all too often is caused by taking that which is wholly poisonous, reducing or watering down its toxins and transferring it in less lethal doses. Consume enough of it however, and its effects are detrimental. So the pen, which is peddled as the sword’s virtuous alternative, is in fact its complement.
This reminds me of a verse that has always troubled me, "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." - Romans 12:20. This verse is quoted from the church’s propaganda machine – the pulpit – and suggests that performing a good deed for your enemy can bring discomfort to them. Am I the only one who sees the utter spite in this teaching? The heart chord of this verse is revenge. Revenge disguised within good deeds. How can anyone expect a malicious teaching to infuse purity and good values when it intends to injure?
Surely by performing a good deed we should require no reward? Is that not what makes the deed noble? Paul’s teaching impales every believer with a curse that fastens itself to all their endeavors. Purity has no agenda to distort reality. Virtue is not attained through ill gains. Purity and virtue cannot be entrenched using sinister teachings layered with polite, well-bred words that hide the negative force concealed beneath them.
All too often our disjointed lives result from our blemished perceptions of reality stamped upon us through the ignorance of our early guardians. Scrutinize every belief and viewpoint, no matter how cherished and noble, and if it holds even a smidgen of poison – rid yourself of it or at the very least acknowledge the ill effects it imposes on your life.
