Beware of Saviours
How some heroes just make things worse
Throughout history (and religion), the saviour figure reemerges.
Such a person promises us deliverance from wicked things. But is it healthy to rely on someone else to such a degree? The expectation that someone else will redeem you may be an obstacle to your own flourishing.
When is the saviour a useful archetype, and when not?
He appears chosen.
The word Messiah comes from the Hebrew mashiach: “anointed one”.
This echoes the modern term: chosen one. He is someone with a special destiny. His talents allow him to rescue others from peril.
In other words, the saviour is the right person at the right time. He is someone especially equipped to confront an existential threat, restore order, and rescue the culture they are a part of.
Whether that is a divine calling or just some remarkable talent might only be a matter of how you look at things.
But it means the saviour, at least as an idea, has a legitimate purpose.
In its benign form, he is a powerful focal point of hope. Good leadership is typically much-needed in any culture. Indeed, some leaders mobilize society in a positive direction by being someone worth following.
That is nothing but productive.
But the saviour figure has a dark side.
Others may project superhuman powers onto him. And even worse, he may be tempted to believe he truly possesses such powers. In this case, the situation changes.
Expectations are no longer summarized by: “help us slay this dragon.” Instead, they become: “save me, although I’m unwilling to save myself.”
The saviour’s followers might look to him to solve the problems they refuse to.
Herein lies a fatal trap.
We see it in religion (Jesus will make me whole), in politics (this leader will solve all my problems), and in romance (this person will complete me). Sadly, such expectations may spring from a lack of internal faith. Believing in a Messiah is not worth much if you do not believe you are capable of following one properly.
The latter indicates a counterproductive approach.
On top of that, it justifies an infantile lifestyle. If you lay all responsibility at the feet of another, you abdicate it entirely. This may provide temporary relief, but in the long term, it will leave you disempowered.
You have implicitly forfeited the ability to make life better.
The consequences of that choice remain yours.
Expecting others to do things for you without offering anything in return is technically entitlement. Saviours can and will redeem society from a collective threat. However, they cannot realistically assume agency over others.
No one can choose to improve your life but you.
The saviour figure may be useful.
But, depending on its context, he may just as well cause catastrophy.
His effect on human flourishing depends on how he chooses to act. He may humbly provide a crucial service at a crucial moment. But he cannot save those who are unwilling to save themselves, and if he tries, he fosters codependence.
Even Messianic figures have their limits.