September 01, 2009
Is Voodoo, in Your Opinion, Evil?
Whenever the issue of the Haitian zombie is brought up, the question invariably arises: "Is Voodoo, in your opinion, evil?" This question is relevant inasmuch as the production of zombies is intimately linked to the practice of Voodoo. Unfortunately, it is also a loaded question since the query usually comes from a Haitian or someone with Haitian connections who surely has to know that Voodoo is officially recognized as a religion in Haiti. If one were to label Voodoo an evil enterprise or anything less than a dignified religious organization, wouldn't that make Haiti the laughingstock of the world? And what would that say about the state authorities who would have granted official recognition to an organization that is fundamentally evil according to the country's own laws? These are difficult if not painful questions to answer without offending anyone's sensibilities, or patriotic feelings.
That being the case, it might be wiser to address the issue of Voodoo ethics in terms of the ethics of zombification, show how each one implicates the other in the public's mind, and let people draw their own conclusion. The following is my personal take on this issue.
Generally speaking, all churches are organized around a moral-ethical framework. There cannot be a church without a well-defined code oof ethics. Ethics is a core principle of the good. It concerns itself with the values, obligations, rights and duties of individuals, communities or institutions vis à vis each other. The fundamental principle of any code of ethics is that no acts or actions can be considered ethical if they fail to take into account the inviolate character of the human nature and the sanctity of the human dignity. Accordingly, to conform to the dictates of any moral-ethical code of conduct, human interactions must be viewed and carried out on the basis of love of humanity and mutual respect as embedded in the Golden rule: "Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you."
Zombification, on the other hand, is a process in which the soul of an individual is surreptitiously cast out of his body, leaving him without his most essential human faculties. Once deprived of his soul, the individual reportedly loses his sense of self; he has no awareness of the world around him, no will, no emotions. He is transformed into a robot that is then used as someone's slave. How is this zombidicaton process achieved, with or without the devil's help, with a "coup de poudre" or with a supernatural curse, is of course immaterial. One thing is certain: zombification as a practice whose ultimate aim is the actual de-humanization of a human being is utterly vicious and immoral. Thus, regardless of what Wade Davis might think or say of the practice, it is incompatible with our most basic understanding of ethical conduct.
In fact, under the Haitian Penal Code, zombification is a crime equivalent to first degree murder, punishable with life imprisonment. Yet, this same law attributes the practice of zombification to the doings of Voodoo, raising the specter of Satan, Dispater, Lucifer along with images of Baka, Loup Garou, Baron Samedi, Gede Nibo and other notorious icons of the Underworld, as the behind-the-scene operatives, if not the masters, of that organization. What, then, are we supposed to make of Voodoo? A religious organization dedicated to the good of humanity, or a congregation of Luciferians who are up to no good? Just asking!
It seems to me that these issues should have been resolved in anticipation of the proclamation of Voodoo as a state-recognized religion, for certain things are simply not compatible with one another. But then and again, especially in matters of faith, truth is what one chooses to believe in. And, unfortunately, what one believes in is not necessarily guided by Aristotelian logic or even common sense. Next!