Finding faith amid disaster
By Jessica Ravitz, CNN
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/20/finding-faith-amid-disaster/
Around the world, people are still struggling to come to terms with the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, which have left more than 8,000 dead, thousands more missing and hundreds of thousand others homeless. The threat of a nuclear crisis only adds to the uncertainty.
In times like these, many people find comfort in their faith. But disasters can also challenge long-held beliefs. The CNN Belief Blog asked some prominent voices with different views on religion how they make sense of such suffering, where they see inspiration amid destruction and how they respond to people who wonder, “How could God let this happen?”
Sam Harris’ contribution…
Either God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like this, or he doesn’t care to, or he doesn’t exist. God is either impotent, evil, or imaginary. Take your pick, and choose wisely.
The only sense to make of tragedies like this is that terrible things can happen to perfectly innocent people. This understanding inspires compassion.
Religious faith, on the other hand, erodes compassion. Thoughts like, “this might be all part of God’s plan,” or “there are no accidents in life,” or “everyone on some level gets what he or she deserves” - these ideas are not only stupid, they are extraordinarily callous. They are nothing more than a childish refusal to connect with the suffering of other human beings. It is time to grow up and let our hearts break at moments like this.
Is Harris being harsh? Let’s explore each element…
Either God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like this, or he doesn’t care to, or he doesn’t exist. God is either impotent, evil, or imaginary. Take your pick, and choose wisely.
This is just stating the classic “problem of evil” argument, which is fair enough.
The only sense to make of tragedies like this is that terrible things can happen to perfectly innocent people. This understanding inspires compassion.
This makes sense to me. But at this point we need to clarify the definition of “Compassion”
From the OED… “Sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others.”
From my personal point of view, my initial reactions to disasters such as this is to imagine how I’d feel if I was a victim, and also to think about ways to help.
Harris continues…
Religious faith, on the other hand, erodes compassion.
…and he gives examples:
“this might be all part of God’s plan”
There is certainly nothing in that thought which matches the definition of compassion. If I’ve just witnessed my children drowning, there’s no pity or concern coming from someone who is telling me the events were pre-ordained somehow.
“everyone on some level gets what he or she deserves”
Again, nothing in that thought which matches the definition of compassion. Worse than that, it implies the victims had it coming!
“there are no accidents in life,”
And again, nothing there which matches the definition of compassion. This is similar to the first example, implying the events were not an accident and were therefore planned and deliberate.
Harris concludes:
these ideas are not only stupid, they are extraordinarily callous.
Well yes, that’s true, they are indeed callous because they are not compassionate although perhaps “misguided” would be fairer than “stupid”.
They are nothing more than a childish refusal to connect with the suffering of other human beings.
Personally I think children are more likely to connect with suffering than the adults who express these misguided sentiments. But yes, the lack of connection is a good observation. All three sentiments detach the observer from the situation by implying some kind of cosmic agent is responsible or somehow in control.
It is time to grow up and let our hearts break at moments like this.
That would be the most honest and natural reaction, but it’s also a source of fear. Many people do not want to believe that they could be wiped into oblivion with no warning by a natural disaster for no reason other than natural processes beyond our control. Religion provides an alternative which brings comfort to the observers but not necessarily the victims.
