Sermons by Mark A. Hanna

Sunday, April 17, 2005

The Power of Faith by Charles Krauthammer

The Power of Faith by Charles Krauthammer

It was Stalin who gave us the most famous formulation of that cynical (and today quite fashionable) philosophy known as "realism" -- the idea that all that ultimately matters in the relations among nations is power: "The pope? How many divisions does he have?"

Stalin could have said that only because he never met John Paul II. We have just lost the man whose life was the ultimate refutation of "realism." Within 10 years of his elevation to the papacy, John Paul II had given his answer to Stalin and to the ages: More than you have. More than you can imagine.

History will remember many of the achievements of John Paul II, particularly his zealous guarding of the church's traditional belief in the sanctity of life, not permitting it to be unmoored by the fashionable currents of thought about abortion, euthanasia and "quality of life." But above all, he will be remembered for having sparked, tended and fanned the flames of freedom in Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe, leading ultimately and astonishingly to the total collapse of the Soviet empire.

I am not much of a believer, but I find it hard not to suspect some providential hand at play when the white smoke went up at the Vatican 27 years ago and the Polish cardinal was chosen to lead the Catholic Church. Precisely at the moment that the West most desperately needed it, we were sent a champion. It is hard to remember now how dark those days were. The 15 months following the pope's elevation marked the high tide of Soviet communism and the nadir of the free world's post-Vietnam collapse.

It was a time of one defeat after another. Vietnam invaded Cambodia, consolidating Soviet hegemony over all of Indochina. The Khomeini revolution swept away America's strategic anchor in the Middle East. Nicaragua fell to the Sandinistas, the first Soviet-allied regime on the mainland of the Western Hemisphere. (As an unnoticed but ironic coda, Marxists came to power in Grenada too.) Then, finally, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

And yet precisely at the time of this free-world retreat and disarray, a miracle happens. The Catholic Church, breaking nearly 500 years of tradition, puts itself in the hands of an obscure non-Italian -- a Pole who, deeply understanding the East European predicament, rose to become, along with Roosevelt, Churchill and Reagan, one of the great liberators of the 20th century.

John Paul II's first great mission was to reclaim his native Eastern Europe for civilization. It began with his visit to Poland in 1979, symbolizing and embodying a spiritual humanism that was the antithesis of the soulless materialism and decay of late Marxist-Leninism. As millions gathered to hear him and worship with him, they began to feel their own power and to find the institutional structure -- the vibrant Polish church -- around which to mobilize.

And mobilize they did. It is no accident that Solidarity, the leading edge of the East European revolution, was born just a year after the pope's first visit. Deploying a brilliantly subtle diplomacy that never openly challenged the Soviet system but nurtured and justified every oppositional trend, often within the bosom of the local church, John Paul II became the pivotal figure of the people power revolutions of Eastern Europe.

While the success of these popular movements demonstrated the power of ideas and proved realism wrong, let us have no idealist illusions either: People power can succeed only against oppression that has lost confidence in itself. When Soviet communism still had enough sense of its own historical inevitability to send tanks against people in the street -- Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968 -- people power was useless.

By the 1980s, however, the Soviet sphere was both large and decadent. And a new pope brought not only hope but political cunning to the captive nations yearning to be free. He demonstrated what Europe had forgotten and Stalin never knew: the power of faith as an instrument of political mobilization.

Under the benign and deeply humane vision of this pope, the power of faith led to the liberation of half a continent. Under the barbaric and nihilistic vision of Islam's jihadists, the power of faith has produced terror and chaos. That contrast alone, which has dawned upon us unmistakably ever since Sept. 11, should be reason enough to be grateful for John Paul II. But we mourn him for more than that. We mourn him for restoring strength to the Western idea of the free human spirit at a moment of deepest doubt and despair. And for seeing us through to today's great moment of possibility for both faith and freedom.

letters@charleskrauthammer.com

Would you like to send this article to a friend? Go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/emailfriend?contentId=A23876-2005Apr3&sent=no&referrer=emailarticle

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

|

The Problem with Faith by Sam Harris

THE PROBLEM WITH FAITH, Why Religious Moderates Have It Wrong
by Sam Harris

People of faith fall on a continuum: Some draw solace and inspiration from a spiritual tradition yet remain fully committed to tolerance and diversity, while others would burn the earth to cinders if it would put an end to heresy. There are, in other words, religious moderates and religious extremists, and their various passions and projects should not be confused.

That said, religious moderates are themselves the bearers of a terrible dogma: They imagine that the path to peace will be paved once each of us has learned to respect the unjustified beliefs of others. But the very ideal of religious tolerance-born of the notion that all human beings should be free to believe whatever they want about God-is one of the principal forces driving us toward the abyss.

One problem is that religious moderation does not permit anything very critical to be said about religious literalism. What's more, in trying to hold on to what is still serviceable in orthodox religion, religious moderates close the door to more sophisticated approaches to spirituality, ethics, and the building of strong communities. They seem to believe that what we need is not radical insight and innovation in these areas, but merely a dilution of Iron Age philosophy. Moderates ask that we relax our standards of adherence to ancient superstitions and taboos while otherwise maintaining a belief system that was passed down to us from men and women whose lives were simply ravaged by their basic ignorance about the world. In what other sphere of life is such subservience to tradition acceptable?

Imagine that we could revive a well-educated Christian of the14th century. He would prove to be a total ignoramus, except on matters of faith. His beliefs about geography, astronomy, and medicine would embarrass even a child, but he would know everything there is to know about God. We could explain this in two ways:

Either we perfected our religious understanding a millennium ago-while our knowledge on other fronts was still hopelessly inchoate-or religion, being the mere maintenance of dogma, is one area of discourse that does not admit of progress. The fact is, with each passing year religious dogma conserves less of the data of human experience. By this measure, the entire project of religion seems perfectly backward.

Moderates do not want to kill anyone in the name of God, of course, but they want us to keep using the word God as though we knew what were talking about. And they do not want anything too critical said about people who really believe in the God of their fathers, because tolerance, perhaps above all else, is sacred. To speak plainly and truthfully about the state of the world--to say, for instance, that the Bible and the Quran both contain mountains of life--destroying gibberish-is antithetical to tolerance as moderates currently conceive it. But we can no longer afford the luxury of such political correctness. We must finally recognize the price we are paying to maintain the iconography of ignorance. If religious war is ever to become as unthinkable to us as slavery and cannibalism, we will first have to dispense with the dogma of faith.


Sam Harris is completing a doctorate in neuroscience, studying the neural basis of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRl). Adapted from his book The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (Norton, 2004).

|

God is Big These Days by Michael Valpy

God is Big These Days

by Michael Valpy

God is Big These Days—suddenly very big—and thus there is no rest for Karen Anderson Armstrong.

It is mid-August. The sixty-one-year-old British ex-nun and author, arguably the world’s most lucid, authoritative and valuable living commentator on religion, leaves an international forum on religious fundamentalism in New York to fly to Canada for the Couchiching Conference north of Toronto. The subject is: “God’s Back with a Vengeance: Religion, Pluralism and the Secular State.” Before the forum in New York, she addressed the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Barcelona, and after Couchiching, she will go back across the border to the Chautauqua Institution’s annual symposium on religion in upstate New York, where she will speak on the Abrahamic vision for building a global neighborhood.

Somehow woven into this relentless global travel is the endless stream of essays she writes for the English-speaking world’s leading newspapers and magazines, her regular column for the British Guardian, her radio and television appearances, public and academic lectures, consultations with politicians (she has addressed members of Congress, the State Department, the U.S. intelligence services, and the United Nations), a promotion tour for her fifteenth book—an autobiography entitled The Spiral Staircase: My Climb Out of Darkness—and continuing research on her sixteenth book, which will be about what historians term the Axial Age, the period in the first millennium bce when all the world’s great religions got their start.

She arrives midmorning at Couchiching ill, feverish and losing her voice. She wants quiet and sleep before her evening keynote speech. But, told that a journalist—me—has made the ninety-minute drive from Toronto for an interview prearranged by the conference organizers, she ends a too-brief nap to come resolutely to the conference center’s dining room to talk, a small, wan, tired woman speaking hoarsely and above a whisper.

She forgoes rest because Armstrong is a woman on a mission, a messenger bearing warnings for Americans and the world: Beware. Beware. Misbegotten U.S. foreign policy is pushing Islamic fundamentalists closer and closer to the use of weapons of mass destruction. Time is running out. The American administration and its allies have ignited a conflict that will last a generation.

It is, she says, just the beginning, and Pollyannish optimism about its outcome she labels a sin. “It is just the beginning. Even to call it a war on terrorism is a mistake,” she says. It is war, a religious war, launched in an era of mushrooming worldwide religious fundamentalist revolt against modernity and secularism. Fundamentalism, she says, is an enormous socio-political problem that must be addressed—it is splitting countries like Egypt, Israel and America into two camps—and the lessons from history are unequivocal: religious fundamentalists always, always become more violent under attack, whether in the Middle East, Iraq or in the United States itself.
Armstrong warns that this is a conflict frighteningly aggravated by the rising domestic political might of American conservative Christian evangelicals and traditional Roman Catholics. Whenever religion is allowed to enter political debate, positions become more absolute and the middle ground of compromise and flexibility erodes. Because religious behavior mirrors the culture in which it exists, she says, the Christian right in the U.S. has absorbed the endemic violence of U.S. society and taken on the vengeful Armageddon fantasies of the New Testament book of Revelation. She proclaims George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden to be parodies of each other with their talk of black and white, good and evil. “They’d probably get on pretty well if they could meet,” she says.

Our conversation, scheduled for a few minutes, lasts more than an hour, becoming a journey into the history and meaning of religion—and the nature of the sacred. Brushing aside solicitudes for her voice, Armstrong delves enthusiastically into institutional religion’s antagonism to women, Christianity’s twisted problems with sex, and secular society’s cataclysmic error in consigning religion and spirituality to the trash cans of history. From her wealth of religious knowledge, she flings out nuggets on the Biblical origins of scapegoating, the hysteria of the early church fathers on sex—“St. Jerome and St. Augustine were scarcely sane on the subject”—and a delicious anecdote about an Anglican bishop of London who proclaimed that he could not see a woman priest at the altar without wanting to embrace her.

“How he could even think of making that statement in public just astonishes me,” she says. “Men have hijacked religion. It is rubbish, who can be ordained and what kind of contraception can be used. The churches are doing a marvelous job of putting themselves out of business. The last time I went to church in Britain there were five of us and a dog.”

Listening to Armstrong, the image unavoidably creeps into one’s mind of the cartoon figure of a bearded, ragged man standing ignored on a Wall Street sidewalk, holding up a sign saying, “Repent!” But there is a much better image for Armstrong, that of the cerebral, literary, Old Testament prophet Amos who exercised his ministry in Israel between 760 and 750 BCE, in that Axial Age, when the world’s great faiths were born. Amos wags his finger outside the tents of the mighty; he denounces all levels of society for their spiritual apostasy, adherence to false and alien rituals, absence of compassion, oppression of the marginalized, and breach of elementary and unwritten laws of natural humanity. He writes in excellent Hebrew. He has a scholarly knowledge of historical traditions and Israelite and regional cult practices. He uses vivid imagery drawn from nature. He is an intelligent observer capable of articulating his insights and experiences in powerful, literary language. Armstrong is post-Axial Amos.

She is asked, often, “How did you come to this?” Karen Armstrong’s journey into religion began in 1962 when, as a bright, idealistic seventeen-year-old, she entered the Roman Catholic convent of the Society of the Holy Child Jesus in Britain “to lose my adolescent self in this great fulfilling religious experience and be transformed by God and filled with joy and serenity.”

Instead she found herself forced into obedience and senseless rules and taught, above all, never to question. When her order sent her to Oxford to study to become a teacher, she suddenly encountered professors who insisted she do quite the opposite: criticize and challenge everything around her. In the convent, she had been shut off from the world, removed from newspapers and television and outside friendships. At Oxford, she heard for the first time about Vietnam and the Beatles. She saw long hair, short skirts.

She found Oxford life impossible to reconcile with the rules of the convent when she returned home. One day she collapsed, weeping uncontrollably. She also had been experiencing blackouts and hallucinations—caused by epilepsy not diagnosed until a decade later—leading her to question her sanity. She quit the order in 1969, depressed and suffering from anorexia. It took her six years to readjust to secular society. She returned to studies in English literature and had her doctoral dissertation rejected. She taught for a while in a high school but ill-health forced her to quit. Halfhearted attempts at churchgoing soon turned to anger and atheism.

She began making television documentaries on religion that were award-winning but highly controversial, and TV executives pulled the plug on her broadcasting career. So she started writing books: first about her experience in the convent and the trauma of leaving it, then about the crusades, English mystics, religion’s treatment of women, Mohammed, and (in 1993) her History of God, the work that brought her to international attention with its thesis that God has been invented and reinvented through the centuries by the three monotheistic, Abrahamic religions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. More books have followed: histories of Jerusalem and Islam, a critically acclaimed study of fundamentalism, a life of the Buddha, and another autobiography.

“I never would have thought when I started all this,” she told an interviewer, “that it would have brought me so much to the center of public life. I do feel that if people are asking at this ghastly time in our history for elucidation, then this is something I must do.”

The idea that she would find peace and fulfillment in studying religion—and indeed, rediscover God—took Armstrong by surprise. Human beings, she resolutely believes, are naturally religious. “We are creatures who seek transcendence. We’re meaning-seeking creatures, we fall easily into despair.”

Always her thoughts lead to the essence of religion, its meaning to humankind, and its indomitable significance in human affairs. While Western Europe and a handful of other odd countries like Japan, Canada and Argentina remain in a religious cold belt—“locked,” as Armstrong puts it, “in the good old world of the mid-twentieth century when it was assumed that secularism was the commanding ideology and religion would never again play a major role in world events—aha! we got that wrong”—the rest of the world increasingly demands the presence of religion in public life.

It is a statement echoed by one of America’s most respected public research organizations, the Washington-based Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Its forty-four-nation survey shows that no fewer than eight in ten Africans see religion as very important personally, and that similar or greater majorities exist in the Middle East, most of Asia and in every Latin American country except Argentina. And that, significantly, the importance of religion to Americans mirrors far more closely the developing than the developed world. Indeed, the United States stands virtually alone among the world’s wealthiest nations in the value its people place on religion in both their private lives and the public square.

What becomes clear in conversation with Armstrong is that she is embarked not on one mission but two. The second is to proclaim that human religiosity is not dead but that good religion is in danger of being engulfed by bad. It is this second mission, as much as the first—her warning that fundamentalism must be acknowledged and addressed—that underscores Armstrong’s importance. She quotes Jung’s observation that so much religious practice seems designed precisely to prevent people from having a truly religious experience. One of the disorders of our time, she says, is the breakdown of the sacred. She quotes the Buddha: “Existence has gone awry.” She says, “Religion is like any other human activity. Like cooking, it can be disgusting.” Bad religion, she says, is the suffocation of the sacred by dogma, by man-made rules, by the arrogant idolatry of investing human values in an ineffable deity. “Idolatry,” she has written, “is not simply the worship of a false god; it occurs whenever a purely human value becomes the chief focus of religious aspiration.”

Bad religion, Armstrong says, is the stifling of the individual’s anarchistic search for transcendent meaning and absolute truth beyond ego. Good religion is the embrace of compassion and confrontation with the “other,” which are the matrix teachings of all the great spiritual movements.

“Compassion is the key to religion, the key to spirituality. It is the litmus test of religiosity in all the major world religions. It is the key to the experience of what we call God—that when you dethrone yourself from the center of your world and put another there, you achieve extasis, you go beyond yourself.” She quotes the Buddha again: “First, live in a compassionate way, and then you will know.” The Buddha, she says, like Mohammed, Jesus, Socrates and the Hebrew prophets, taught humankind how to reach beyond pettiness to absolute value. Enlightenment was the discovery of a sacred realm of peace in the depths of one’s own self and thus the finding of strength to live creatively in this world of pain and sorrow.

She has written, “One of the reasons why people have problems with religion today is that they assess it rationally, and expect to comprehend its insights immediately. But theology is—or should be—poetry, an attempt to express the inexpressible.” Logos—reason, the belief in obligatory doctrine as the word of God—has replaced mythos, the mythical consciousness that informed pre-modern Christianity and the world’s other great religions, the belief that God cannot be known but thatnthe enduring effort to find God is the essence of spirituality. “Yet it seems,” says Armstrong, “that we find it almost impossible to think symbolically. An object has no meaning unless we can prove that it once existed physically. We need to recover a sense of the importance of the creative imagination in the religious quest.”

In a post-Auschwitz, post-September-11 world, a new spiritual quest is “the only thing that will save our world,” she says. The quest begins with an honest understanding of religion in the world today.

Fundamentalism, she says, is the natural byproduct that follows establishment of a secular, liberal society. “So to every [secular advance] in society, there is a fundamentalist riposte. We have to be grown-up about it. All major social change is contested. It always has been, and whenever you try to suppress a fundamentalist movement, you drive it to extremity.”

It happened first in America, she says, where religious fundamentalism was born (she acknowledges she doesn’t like the word, but it has become the shorthand symbol for what is transpiring in so much of global religious life). She cites the 1925 Scopes trial that pitted Biblical creationism against Darwinian evolution as the prime example of what happens when fundamentalism is attacked.

“Before the Scopes ‘monkey’ trial—when the secular press ridiculed the fundamentalists and said they had no place in the modern agenda—fundamentalist Christians had been literal in their interpretation of scripture but creation science was the preserve of a few eccentrics. After the Scopes trial, they became militantly literal and creation science became the flagship of their movement. Before the Scopes trial, fundamentalists had often been on the left of the political spectrum and had been willing to work alongside socialists and liberal Christians in the new slums of the industrializing North American cities. After the Scopes trial, they swung to the far right, where they remained. They felt humiliated by the media attack. It was very nasty. There was a sense of loss of prestige, and, above all, a sense of fear.”

The form of Islamic fundamentalism today espoused by Osama bin Laden, she says, was formed in Egyptian concentration camps in the middle of the last century when Nassar interned members of the Muslim Brotherhood for doing nothing more incriminating than handing out a few leaflets. They were imprisoned without trial, submitted to physical and mental torture, executed. Islamic fundamentalism took root in modern Turkey when the Sufi mystic orders were abolished. It took root in Iran when the Shah ordered soldiers to tear the veils off women and had people shot in the street for protesting against the obligatory wearing of Western clothes at Muslim shrines.

The common thread? Tyrannical Islamic leaders, who were supported and too often kept in place by Western governments, bent on playing catch-up with the West and bringing their countries into the same secular modernity, but trying to do in a few brief decades what in the West had taken three centuries. “With the way some of the Muslim rulers have tried to secularize,” she points out, “Islamic fundamentalists are not wrong to experience it as a dreadful assault, supported by the West.”

With Jewish—and also Islamic—fundamentalism, she says, the crux is the State of Israel and the Palestinian question. “That is the focus. It is the same syndrome: fear of secular modernity.” And the perceived puppet-master’s hand of the United States: “Osama bin Laden was not particularly interested in Palestine when he started on this. His main focus was Saudi Arabia. But he knew his audience. He knew that if he wanted to call on large numbers of supporters, he need only draw attention to the plight of the Palestinians.

“And now Iraq is going to become like this. Those pictures from the U.S. military prison will become iconic in the same way as the pictures every night on Al-Jazeera of Israeli tanks bulldozing Palestinian homes.
“If warfare and violence becomes endemic in a society, religion gets sucked into that. Religion comes from where our dreams come from, and if our dreams become disturbed, everything about us becomes disturbed in times of war and violence.”

This is a world, says Armstrong, where more and more small groups are nearing the capability—if they haven’t already achieved it—of mass destruction that was formerly the prerogative of the nation-state. “When I say we don’t have much time, I mean that the chance of an extremely alienated group getting hold of some appalling weapon and using it is increasing every day.”

Religion in America, she says, is “in the balance.” Fundamentalists in the U.S. are following the pattern of fundamentalists elsewhere in the world, absorbing the violence from the culture in which they exist. Says Armstrong, “They want a male religion where Jesus ain’t no sissy. The gun lobby is important to them.” She says American fundamentalists, like fundamentalists elsewhere, see themselves as fighting a war—a war against secularness, against a liberal modernity that is perceived as bent on erasing religion from U.S. public discourse.

Armstrong’s concerns are echoed by Luis Lugo, director of the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, who spoke at the same Couchiching Conference as Armstrong. He says religion has become a systemic, hard-wired feature of U.S. presidential elections, driven by a new coalition of conservative Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants and fuelled by fear that American culture is being taken over by militant secularism. He characterizes the emerging alliance between more traditional Catholics and evangelical Christian Protestants as “one of the huge stories in U.S. politics—it’s a political realignment of major proportions.” When the religious mix is adjusted to include conservative, observant Catholics, who are divided between the two parties, the total reaches about forty per cent of the electorate.

To illustrate, Lugo says that the key electoral constituencies of both major parties are now the two most highly religious segments of the U.S. public—black Americans on the Democratic side and white evangelical Protestants on the Republican side, together representing more than a quarter of the electorate. “The views of the two communities on religion and public life are virtually identical,” he says. “They differ on economic policy, they differ on foreign policy. But in talking about religion in public life, about taking religion into account in public policy and the use of religion in political campaigns, these are the two communities from which we get the highest favorables in the country.”

Lugo contrasts the 1960 presidential election, when John F. Kennedy had to travel into the Deep South’s Protestant Bible Belt to promise that his Catholicism would have no influence on his public life, to the 2004 campaign, when Catholic bishops cheered on by evangelical Protestant leaders told Democratic candidate John Kerry to pay attention to Vatican teachings on abortion. “The tussle between Kerry and the bishops” took on huge significance because conservative Catholics are divided between the two parties and because many of them are concentrated in important swing states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania. “It’s a fascinating reconfiguring and reshuffling of religion and political events in the U.S. What has caused it? My whole sense is that it’s a fear that a very militant secularism is driving religion from public life and increasingly besieging faithful believers.”

In overwhelming numbers, Americans approve of politicians talking publicly about their religious beliefs and welcome the presence of religious discourse in public policy debate. Three-quarters of Americans think there’s nothing wrong with George W. Bush saying he relies on his religious beliefs to make decisions. Half of Americans say they would not vote for an atheist. Nearly sixty per cent believe journalists should question politicians about how their religious beliefs might affect their decisions.

And, as Armstrong says, whenever religion is allowed to enter political debate, positions become more absolute and the middle ground of compromise and flexibility erodes. To fundamentalists, she says, tolerance of the “other” is a sin. “This goes to feminism, which is seen as a visceral threat. Fundamentalism is a revolt against modernity and one of the characteristics of modernity has been the emancipation of women. Fundamentalists in every religion tend to overplay the traditional role of women as part of their countercultural riposte. They talk in frank ways of feminism’s castrating effect. This goes to the absolute hysteria about the gay syndrome. This goes to abortion, which has become a symbol of everything that is wrong about modernity.”

Her two prescriptions?

America—and Britain is just as culpable, she says—is alienating Muslims, who were initially horrified by September 11. It is strengthening Al-Qaeda by the Iraq war and its awful aftermath. The U.S. and Britain must change their foreign policies, the first step being to find a just solution to the Palestinian conflict and the second being to stop supporting “appalling rulers in the region like the Saudis, like Saddam himself, who was supported by the West for a long time. Iraqis aren’t stupid. They remember this. To quote Thomas Friedman, we’ve used these people like so many gas stations. As long as they give us cheap oil and support Israel, we don’t mind what happens in their country.”

Secondly, she says, “We need to reclaim religion from the religious politicians who run it, who are just like other politicians—they speak for their own party and they can’t be sufficiently pluralistic.”

Recently, she told a Scottish interviewer, “Religion is not about belief; we’ve got hung up on that concept since the Enlightenment in the West. Religion is about doing things that change you. I think a lot of people just want to rinse their minds of all this rotten theology they’ve been force-fed that’s been bad and thoughtless and careless and heartless. Here’s the world crying out for religion to be reclaimed from the terrorists—that needs a message of compassion. And instead there’s a lot of very facile, lazy, inadequate theology, making people learn catechisms, coming out with glib remarks, like ‘God knows what he’s doing.’ Or just arguing on abstruse points of doctrine. It’s nuts. It’s not surprising people are sick of it. I’m sick of it myself!”

What will come of the spiritual quest she prescribes? “I don’t think it will be a belief in a conventional God, but that’s of no interest or importance.”©

Michael Valpy writes frequently on religion and ethics for The Globe and Mail newspaper in Toronto.

God is Big These Days by Karen Armstrong, Shambhala Sun, January 2005.

To order this copy of the Shambhala Sun, please click here.

Home Feedback Distributors Contact Us

Send mail to sunwebmanager@shambhalasun.com with questions or comments about this site.
Copyright © 2004 Shambhala Sun Magazine Last modified: 08/18/04

Shambhala Sun Online: Buddhism, Culture, Meditation, Life
The Shambhala Sun is the magazine about waking up, bringing a Buddhist view
to all the important issues in modern life.

|

Sunday, April 03, 2005

When Grace Arrives Unannounced by Andrew Sullivan

When Grace Arrives Unannounced
By Andrew Sullivan

Tied up by a violent fugitive, Ashley Smith found a way to let the light in

She went out for cigarettes. That's my favorite detail of the story told by Ashley Smith. It was not a noble calling; it wasn't even a noble errand. But the craving for nicotine at 2 o'clock in the morning apparently led Smith into the loaded gun of one Brian Nichols, a man who was wanted for raping one woman and murdering another woman and three men. According to Smith, Nichols forced her into her apartment, tied her up, put her in the bathtub and told her, "I'm not going to hurt you if you just do what I say."

What would you do under those circumstances? Scream? Panic? Beg? But at that point, something else intervened. Smith actually communicated with her captor. She says she saw him not as a monster but as a human being. She talked with him. She told her story--how her husband had been stabbed in a dispute and had died in her arms, how she then had developed a drug habit, had been caught for speeding and drunken driving, had been arrested for assault (the charges were dropped), had ceded custody of her young daughter to her aunt. She showed him her wounds as a human being. And she saw in that man his own wounded soul.

It would be politically correct to describe that encounter as a spiritual one. But it seems to me it was more than that. It was, in the minds and souls of both human beings, an encounter with God. Smith's weapon, it appears, was a hugely popular book, The Purpose Driven Life, by Rick Warren, an unabashedly Christian guide to making it through life's highs and lows by constantly asking what God has intended for you. The book is indeed a powerful one--precisely because it insists on the notion that God knows all of us intimately, especially sinners. Smith says she read from chapter 33, which centers on the role of Christian service, on the idea that in every moment there is a chance to serve others. "You can tell what they are by what they do" is one of the chapter's inscriptions from Matthew's Gospel.

Smith, blessed by what can only be called grace, saw that terrifying early morning in suburban Atlanta as one of those opportunities. Warren writes in that chapter, "Great opportunities to serve never last long. They pass quickly, sometimes never to return again. You may only get one chance to serve that person, so take advantage of that moment." Smith did. By her account, she talked to him, made breakfast, told him her story, listened. And as she revealed her openness to grace, so, apparently, did he. "He said he thought I was an angel sent from God and that I was his sister and he was my brother in Christ and that he was lost, and God led him right to me," Smith said. Maybe he was right.

We latch onto this story not just because it's a riveting end to a high-stakes manhunt. We find ourselves transfixed and uplifted by the sordid ordinariness of it all. He was an alleged rapist and murderer. She was tied up in a bathtub, clinging to the wreckage of a life that was barely afloat. One was a monster, the other a woman unable to care for her 5-year-old, looking for cigarettes in the dark. And out of that came something, well, beautiful. He saw his purpose: to serve God in prison, to turn his life around, even as it may have been saturated in the blood and pain of others. She saw hers: to make that happen. These people weren't saints. Grace arrives, unannounced, in lives that least expect or deserve it.

I say that as a believer. The crimes Nichols is suspected of are inexcusable. The serenity of Smith is close to inexplicable. But the message of the Gospels is that God works with the crooked timber of human failure. That was an exceptional moment of redemption. But every day we have smaller, calmer chances to turn another's life around, to serve, to listen. How often do we simply not see what is in front of us? How often do we believe that the world's evils--from terrorism to crime to emotional cruelty--are beyond our capacity to change? Or that there is no one in front of us whom we can serve? Smith and Nichols' story is a chastening reminder that we may be wrong.

There's a line in a Leonard Cohen song that has always stayed with me. It kept me going in a bleak moment in my life, when I thought, as we all sometimes do, that I couldn't see how good could come out of the dreck I had turned my life into. "Forget your perfect offering," Cohen advises. "There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." Happy Easter. •

--TIME March 28, 2005

|