Pardon the verbosity: writing is "getting to the bottom of things," and it's hard to do that without exploring various adjectives.
There's something very unsettling about "natural disasters." If you've ever experienced a large earthquake, a fierce hurricane, a violent tornado, a torrential flood, or a raging fire, you know the feeling. Feelings of fear, helplessness, and despair tend to take over. Part of the difficulty in dealing with such situations is the fact that it's hard to point a finger, or find an object for our rage. In a bombing we can direct our vengeful gaze against the scoundrel who perpetrated it, but when nature at its worst hits home, I sense the question "why?" is near its most penetrating and unanswerable state. The sheer arbitrariness of it all is what is most inscrutable. Invoking the word "providence" doesn't erase the pain, the damage, the deep wrongness of the matter. In the end, faith gives us the hope that there is a better view than one "under the sun." But I wish that somehow it would make nature's edge a little more blunt.
Posted by ken-san at October 27, 2003 09:49 PMYes, Ken, that's a tough one.
But I have to mention that I don't really appreciate the way we sometimes write off the best answers we have because they sound trite when stated briefly. No, "invoking the word 'providence'" won't help any more than invoking any other word. But a genuine understanding of the nature of God's providence and his purposes in everything that happens is our only hope of reconciling our feelings about such disasters with the kind of contentment we are called to. It is of course a life-long lesson, and a hard one all the way, so there is certainly the point to be made that there are no easy answers: only let's not dismiss the answer we do have just because it seems to come all too easily. And while you have me reminded of it, we should certainly continue to be in prayer for those who are suffering from the fires in southern California.