The Curious Case of Howard Mumma's book about Albert Camus and Christianity

Several days ago I finished reading a book written by an American pastor who claims to have come close to converting Albert Camus to Christianity near the end of his life. While most of what Mumma says is plausible, I think he greatly misunderstood Camus's "pilgrimage" toward delving into religious studies and extrapolates an "end point" for what Camus was doing that doesn't necessarily follow.

Most people might read the book trying to extrapolate whether or not Camus was well on the path of becoming a good new born Christian. Even if what is said in the book is completely true, I don't believe that Camus would be a "Christian" in the sense that most Christians are.

Camus was suffering greatly at the sense of emptiness that pervades a life built upon absurdity. If we have nothing but the world we make in a world filled with horrible evils of suffering (like the Holocaust), even a life where meaning is built upon revolt can be exhausting. Camus was looking for something more to life, more of a connection. His self-described pilgrimage doesn't strike me as an attempt to escape the wearying emptiness of living in constant awareness of the absurdities of life, but rather as a spiritual journey to connect with the existence he had in a different way.

I noticed several things in the conversations Mumma had with Camus. Camus was most engaged with the mythological aspects of the Bible. He liked the stories. Keeping in mind that Camus did his master's thesis on Greek philosophy, engaging in Christian mythology for Camus is similar to the tasks of engaging Greek mythology and stepping into the myths as he had done with Sisyphus, Prometheus, and others.

Camus touches on the problem of theodicy, or how can an omnipotent, benevolent God allow evil in the world? Mumma makes a fairly reasonable argument about God leaving it up to people, but hoping people work toward good and having a stake in it.

Throughout the book, Mumma shows that there are similarities between those who search for the problems of living in an absurd world without God as there are problems for those who live in an absurd world with God. Mumma doesn't make arguments to Camus about the afterlife, which is important when reading this, Camus is not looking for escape or relief in anything outside of his current existence - he is, however, looking for more from his existence outside of himself.

Keeping in mind the despair that Camus was suffering through at this time - his personal and professional meltdown after Sartre's attack on The Rebel, his wife's multiple suicide attempts, his recurring crippled bed-laden spells caused from tuberculosis - it is clear that the starkness of life could be reawakened with a new sort of mythological thinking in his life.

I hope that Mumma was being honest in his work, and I also hope that he didn't portray Camus in a biased way in order to advance an agenda for converting atheists to Christianity. I could sense in his book that he did have a sort of desperation toward converting Camus and he demonstrated a lack of understanding basic facts of Camus's life by calling the car wreck that ended his life an "obvious suicide" when he was travelling with others in the vehicle.

In fact, Mumma basically says that which would be expected: he grew up with a tacit understanding that God existed and the Bible was correct because he was born into it. He grew up "with God" around him, and clearly struggled with the idea that one could live without this basic understanding of life. Camus approached existence experiencing a constant struggle with feeling confident in his understanding of what life was about, despite writing one of the clearest essays about the problems of existence in "An Absurd Reasoning" (about the problem of physical and philosophical suicide if life is absurd) and the accompanying parable "The Myth of Sisyphus." Mumma seemed very confident in his beliefs, but also came across (in my point of view) as almost fake and manipulative in his concessions to Camus about his struggles in life when he seemed to so clearly be against confronting his own faith. His eagerness to convert Camus comes across as a sense of validation for his own faith, which ought to have absolutely no connection between the two.

These meetings supposedly took place in the 1950s (Mumma refused to give dates as per Camus's wishes, but still published this book against Camus's wishes). It strikes me that The Fall was published in 1956 because Mumma the converter comes across with a similar cockiness that Jean-Baptiste Clamence did as he leads a stranger through "lessons" from his life as he shares his truths by revealing the underbelly of his misgivings. It makes me wonder if Camus's meetings with Mumma served more as fodder for his writing than the amazing conversation of an existentialist atheist as Mumma portrays it.

Regardless, this book shows that Camus is ever more complicated and multi-faceted than he is often portrayed as, and I can appreciate that about him. The book creates new problems for me to sort through, but I don't think this book in any way diminishes the works that he has done and his unflinching attempts to always live an authentic existence in good faith. Camus's willingness to engage Christianity at that point in his life is a fine testament to his humility, which is one of his greatest attributes.