Exploring Of The Christian Dichotomy Of Free Will And Predestination In Satirical Anti-War Novels Catch-22 And Slaughterhouse-Five

Two of the most famous and well-respected anti-war novels in history, Catch-22 and Slaughterhouse-Five, are known for exploring the state of soldiers within war and the mental trauma that they endure. We often see characters battle internally when their own ethical codes are put against those expected in wartime, and this internal battle often leads to external arguments with others in the same mindset. One of the more convoluted internal battles upon wartime is the struggle between religion and nonfaith; Christianity being the most popular in the Western world. Joseph Heller and Kurt Vonnegut don’t shy away from these topics in their novels, and challenge Christian values through the religious characters. The polarity between free will and predestination is explored in-depth by both authors, however the main protagonists take different sides in the novels.

Catch-22’s Yossarian expresses free will by doing everything in his power to keep himself alive; even if it means putting those in his squadron in danger. In contrast, Slaughterhouse-Five’s Billy Pilgrim finds bliss in predestination. He finds it less burdensome when he is able to sit back and let history take its course rather than having to make decisions that could turn on him. This mentality explains much of Billy’s decisions of inaction throughout the novel. Both authors choose to challenge the protagonist’s view of the world through different characters or situations that the character encounters, and in the process the theme of free will is developed. By exploring these ideas, Heller and Vonnegut are able to explore the mental state of those forced to question their own values; while also going through traumatic war experiences.

This essay seeks to uncover and interpret the theme of free will versus predestination in both novels; it also seeks to compare the two protagonists’ view on this topic and how they came to that conclusion through the trauma of war. The authors’ perspective on these issues as well as their own religious beliefs are important to note as well to identify any biases. Vonnegut, for example, did not align himself with any established religion, including atheism. Instead, Vonnegut described himself as a humanist- a person who’s lifestance affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good without expectation of rewards or punishment after death. This puts Vonnegut on the free will side, which is opposite of his protagonist, Billy Pilgrim, who believes in predestination. Heller, however, is a Jewish novelist. In the Jewish faith the differences between predestination and free will is often argued, however, most Jews believe in a blend of the two. They believe that God knows and controls the fate of all, it is simply up to the person to choose Gods plan. Despite this blend, the Jewish belief leans towards the predestination side; the opposite of Yossarian’s outlook. The fact that both protagonists hold beliefs opposite that of their respective authors is important when understanding the methods of which the authors choose to challenge the protagonists’ views; as well as the conclusions that the novels come to on the dichotomy. The argument between predestination and free will is an increasingly active argument in the philosophical world. When religion is added to that argument, the dichotomy only gets more complex. The fact that both authors make their own points on the subject in their satirical anti-war novels through the protagonist’s traumatic experiences makes the question worthy of investigation. Comparing the author’s conclusions to each other and understanding how the argument impacts the soldiers in the war help to add to the philosophical and religious argument in ways that likely were not considered in the time period.

Catch-22 and Slaughterhouse-Five are unique in their compelling ways of exploring the human mind when it is pushed to its limit by external stressors, and it is through this uniqueness that the novels can so eloquently and effectively explore the topic of free will and predestination. Throughout Catch-22, Heller creates a strong sense of free will, not only exhibited by Yossarian, but by all of the soldiers in Yossarian’s squadron. Not only do the soldiers constantly talk of their desires and blame each other for the things that happen in the war, but they also act recklessly at times; putting themselves or another in danger due to their own actions and lack of thought. All of the characters in the story are self-motivated and pursue their own desires no matter the situation or the consequences, some characters even make it clear that they are indifferent of the result. After being put into the war with almost no way out, due primarily to Catch-22, characters begin to seek out their own desires within the war-space rejecting the notion of religion and predestination.

As the novel develops Heller makes it clear that the evils of the world are committed by humanity alone, rather than some external force. Yossarian realizes this later in the novel, however at first instead of blaming it on humanity he believes that evil stems from God, “He’s not working at all. He’s playing. Or else He’s forgotten all about us. That’s the kind of God you people talk about – a country bumpkin, a clumsy, bungling, brainless, conceited, uncouth hayseed”. At this early point in the novel Yossarian claims that God does not care about humans and that he is solely responsible for all of the pain that humans are forced to endure. Yet as the war rages on, we see Yossarian switch his accusations of his woe; instead of blaming God or other outside forces, he begins to pinpoint human nature as the hearth of everything that is wrong with the world. For example, as Yossarian walks down the destroyed streets of a town bombed during the war, "He thought he knew how Christ must have felt as he walked through the world, like a psychiatrist though a ward full of nuts, like a victim though a prison full of thieves". It is here, after some deep contemplation, that Yossarian begins to realize that God is not the problem. It is not He that causes suffering, but humanity which wages pointless wars of destruction all over the world. This ultimately ties into the novel's anti-war message and how humanity is at fault due to their own free will that leaves even God ashamed. Yossarian does not leave this evil use of free will to others; he also sees himself as a contributor to the cruel world. Yossarian is plagued by his former fellow soldier Snowden, because he feels responsible for Snowden’s death. Yossarian often refers to his fallen soldier saying, "Don't you understand? You can't take the life of another human being and get away with it. . . Don't you see? Can't you understand?".

It is clear that Yossarian is asking himself the question, with a tone of desperation because he is reflecting on the fact that he knows he will not get away with the lives he has taken and that they can’t be brought back. All of the elements of war, from the oppressive leaders, to the violence, chip away at Yossarian's sanity until he comes to the conclusion that people cannot take lives and get away with it. This serves to represent a larger message on war: humanity cannot continue to wage wars and yet blatantly disregard lives without taking responsibility. In addition to Yossarian realizing that humans are to blame for all of the world’s misgivings, he also begins to take the reigns in his own life to exercise his own free will. He is tired of the Catch-22 paradox, “which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. ”

After finding out about Catch-22 and the Colonel consistently raising the amount of flights needed to go home, Yossarian quickly realizes that he is trapped. However, instead of fighting, Yossarian finds other ways of surviving the war. He fakes a liver disease that is essentially uncurable, he redraws the line on the battle map to avoid a flight, once sent on the flight he even convinces his crew to turn back and instead spend the day at the beach. Yossarian does everything within his power to not be binded by the standards of the multiple Catch-22s that he encounters throughout the war. Heller designed these obstacles and paradoxes not only to show the insanity of war, but to show that even within these confines man still has choice and we choose to act out in war killing our own people.

By the end of the novel, Yossarian is not the only one acting out of his best interests, so are his fellow subordinates such as, Milo and the Chaplin. Milo establishes a complex network of revenue and becomes a famous international businessman, using the squadrons planes as transportation for his goods. He works within the confines of what is expected of him from his higher ups, and yet still finds the will to do as he pleases to his own benefit. Even the most religious figure in the novel, the Chaplin, refuses to be held down by the boundaries or predeterminism that the Colonels lay out. The chaplain is described as a man with a “lifelong trust he had placed in the wisdom and justice of an immortal, omnipotent, omniscient, humane, universal, anthropomorphic, English-speaking, Anglo-Saxon, pro-American God”. Not only does this define the Chaplin as a devout Christian, but it also infers that the teachings of God have been purposely altered to accommodate the Western World. The fact that humans exercise such power infers free will. The Chaplin goes from being this devout Christian going into the war, to saying that “There were no miracles; prayers went unanswered, and misfortune tramped with equal brutality on the virtuous and the corrupt”.

It is here that the Chaplain loses faith in his God after failing to meet with Major Major to help Yossarian. Even his rival Whitcomb has outdone him; the tragedy here is that the chaplain is a virtuous character yet he is subject to the same cruelty as those not as good-hearted as he. Thus, the Chaplin changes; he begins lying to those around him and fantasizes about violently punching both Captain Black and Whitcomb. This “new” Chaplin is much more diverted from his faith, however he is much more well suited for the free and crazy world in the war. Heller argues for free will of man not only through the characters themselves but through their actions in the war. By the end of the novel almost all of the characters are looking out for themselves, and those that don’t look out for themselves are likely already dead. Even the most religious characters reject God and predestination, instead resorting to exert free will and please themselves. The paradox within this, however is that as people choose to do what is good for themselves they attain power and those in power want to stay in power so they influence their subordinates to do their bidding. This is how wars start, because those in power continue to look out for themselves, even if that is at other’s demise. This is why Heller finds mankind to be so evil and heartless, because we choose for ourselves to start these epidemics that bring so much ruin to the world yet we choose to be blind to it because it benefits us.

In Slaughterhouse-Five, Vonnegut creates Billy Pilgrim’s world simply to destroy it. Billy’s life is completely unstuck in time, so he is constantly thrown back in forth in his between times in his life; all of it being described in the present tense. Through the theme of time, heavily influenced by the Tralfamadorians, Vonnegut builds an argument for the lack of free will in the world, instead it is predetermined because of the continuous flow of time. Starting with the Tralfamadorians, their philosophy teaches that each moment in time is predestined without purpose, totally random and without change. Everything simply exists the way it does for no specific reason besides that’s how it happened. Therefore, Vonnegut uses the Tralfamadorians and their philosophy to illustrate that there is no form of free will. He makes the argument that all people are slaves to predestination, meaning that no choice is truly a choice since the choice is already made. We see Bill embrace the Tralfamadorian faith because of the trauma that he experienced in Dresden. Billy has seen and experienced so much pain and suffering during his time in WWII that he is drawn to the Tralfamadorian theory of him having no power to change how the war ended up ending. Billy also uses the theory of predestination to distance himself from other things as well such as, letting his son leave to go to war and or even trying to remind others about the events that happened in Dresden. Billy had accepted that, "Among the things (he) could not change were the past, the present, and the future. ". This quote demonstrates how Billy chooses not to change anything that will happen in his life no matter the time frame. As a result Billy gives in to many things, such as Lazzaro's promise to kill him, Billy assumes has no free will nor ability to change anything that happens to him. Thus, in the end Billy actually ends up killed by Lazzaro. This again relates to the fact that life will happen as it happens, and there is nothing, not even God, that can change the fact. The Tralfamadorians also did not hold back on direct shots at Christianity, "to learn, if he could, why Christians found it so easy to be cruel. He concluded. . . that the intent of the Gospels was to teach people, among other things, to be merciful, even to the lowest of the low. But the Gospel actually taught this: Before you kill somebody, make absolutely sure he isn't well connected". The Tralfamadorian makes fun of the Christian belief that Christians should always try to be merciful and loving, and even claims that they are not. Vonnegut contrasts this traditional thought with a satirical and mocking comment that refers to Jesus dying on the cross even though he was well connected with God. In this way, religion cannot save the world from suffering or death just as God didn't save his only son from pain and suffering. If he cared about his son, then why didn't he save him? Jesus must have been predestined to die the way he did, and not even God could change that.

Vonnegut brings up this “failure” on God’s part multiple times in the novel. Billy’s Jesus crucifix is described by its multiple wounds and is called “pitiful”. Despite the difference between Christianity and Tralfamadorianism, the two agree on the subject of predestination. If Dresden was destined to be bombed, then humans themselves can do nothing to stop it. If all actions are pre-determined, then no one should worry about their death; just as Billy did. Along with the emphasis on predeterminism Vonnegut challenges the idea of free will again through the Tralfamadorians when one of them tell Billy that, “I’ve visited thirty one inhabited planets in the Universe…and only on Earth is there any talk of free will. ”. Billy seems to have believe otherwise, as he responds by asking if it is “useless to try to prevent war on Earth”.

Billy’s idea of free will can be understood more fully by looking at a prayer that hangs in his office. It contains the serenity prayer: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things that I can, and the wisdom to know the difference”. This seems to satisfy both sides by involving free will to change some things, but supports predestination by acknowledging some things cannot be changed, yet it is not so. The purpose of the serenity prayer is to ask God for the strength of acceptance; and acceptance contradicts everything the makes up Billy. Billy was never able to recover from the war, his memories were kept alive every moment. Christianity teaches that humans have free will to change their destiny and that there is only one mortal death and a possible second death. The second death is dependent on whether a person adheres to God’s commandments stated in the Bible. Using Billy and the Tralfamadorians, Vonnegut conveys the idea that none of that is true and acceptance can only be provided by the person seeking it. To accept the actions that occurred in Dresden would be inhumane, thus it is impossible for Billy to accept what cannot be changed. Billy lacks the courage to change his life, or as the serenity prayer says, “the courage to change the things that can be changed”. Billy is set on the day and time of his death, because the Tralfamadorians told him the information. He knows that at that point he will continue to exist in the fourth dimension, making it unnecessary to try to change anything to prevent his death.

Vonnegut shows in a subtle way that religious prayers are worthless. He portrays Billy having the serenity prayer framed in his office wall, and many patients saying that it had help them to keep going. However, Billy is never shown in the novel attempting to pray, showing that he does not have faith in the prayer. The Tralfamadorians aren’t the only canvas that Vonnegut uses to establish predeterminism; he also uses diction throughout the novel to make a point as well. Phrases such as "supposed to be" and "had to be" are consciously used by Vonnegut to back up his concept of predeterminism. The infamous quote “So it goes”, which is used over 100 times in the novel, also symbolizes the predeterministic outlook on life and death. It hints at predeterminism by downplaying the power of God and religion as a whole as no matter what happens when someone dies it was meant to be that way while life for others will continue. Towards the end of the novel, it finally seems that Vonnegut is content with his rejection of free will and religion.

Yet, in the final chapters, we see the irony and foolishness of Billy’s actions. Once Billy decides to save the world with his gospel, he becomes a travelling preacher, telling everyone about Tralfamadore. The irony is that Billy ignores the Vietnam War that is currently going on, claiming he can do nothing, while teaching that what happened at Dresden is not as terrible as it first seemed because time is spatial, and those who lost their lives now live in the fourth dimension. The irony lies in the fact that Billy is preaching about Dresden, something that cannot be changed; all the while the Vietnam War is still going on, and can still be stopped, but Billy accepts it as something he can’t change. This once again brings the importance of the serenity prayer to, “grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things that I can, and the wisdom to know the difference”. Humans are unable to tell the difference between the two so they seek God for guidance without realizing that he too his powerless, therefore time takes its course without interference.

Heller and Vonnegut both make concrete arguments for predestination and free will that fit their own view of the world in their novels. Catch-22 argues that even within the confines that God gives us, humans have free will and choose to bring chaos to the world. Slaughterhouse-Five, on the other hand, argues that the lack of action within predestination brings bliss and a life without worry or stress, as what is going to happen will happen. Both rely on controlling characters, the Tralfamadorians in Slaughterhouse-Five and the commanding officers in Catch-22, to symbolize the boundaries set by the universe. The main characters, Yossarian and Billy, are then put into extreme mental distress while these boundaries are forcing them to make a decision that most people are able to avoid or simply ignore throughout life. That decision is to either give in, or to fight against it and make your own freedom. Going past the main character we can see the opposite choice that one main character makes in one book, mirrored by side characters in the opposing novel. Billy’s acceptance of predestination is shown by Catch-22 characters, Snowden and Major Major, who accept how their lives has gone and don’t go out of their way to change it. Major Major accepts his bewildering resemblance to Henry Fonda and doesn’t seek to change the ridiculous name that his father gave him. Snowden is one of the only soldiers who accepts his role in the way, and he is eventually killed because of it. Yossarian’s passion and drive for free will is exhibited in Slaughterhouse-Five by those who walk into Billy’s office and read his serenity prayer. The people believe that they have the option of making choices and praise Billy for the prayer saying it changed their lives and gave them a new perspective, inferring their belief in free will.

Both novels explore both sides of the argument, yet they heavily lean to one side with their main character to expose their own beliefs through the trauma of war. The authors chose to explore the dichotomy of free will and predestination because of the man-versus-self battle that occurs in many soldier’s heads when they are exposed to such extreme circumstances.