Thursday, 28 January 2010

Thinly-veiled fear of 'difference'?

The French government are debating whether to ban veils that cover the face, worn by some Muslim women, in public buildings.  As someone who's both a woman and person of faith (and a faith that isn't innocent when it comes to oppressing women) this is something I feel uncomfortable with.  I know that covering the face (head covering is a different issue, albeit one the French have already dabbled in, and something I suspect they'll go eventually further with if they carry the day on face covering) has roots in culture as much as in religion.  But I don't think that matters.

Women who wear the niquab (veil covering the face but not the eyes) and burka (which covers the whole face and body) in the West tend to do so out of choice.  Perhaps that choice is the result of the culture they grew up in, perhaps it is a genuine religious belief.  I don't feel I've got a right to tell them what to wear.  Especially I don't feel I have a right to tell them they can't wear something they believe they should.  I'm more inclined to defend their right to wear what they like.  Why should covering their face offend someone?

I understand the argument that wearing the veil limits and oppresses women.  But many, or most, women choose to wear it, not forced.  And even if some women are forced, how does banning them from facilities where they can get help help them?  Is it fair that these people are to be unable to claim benefits or get healthcare- doesn't that make them oppressed by the state?  If they feel they can't go outside because they can't cover up, I imagine some women will feel trapped in their homes.  How does that help them?

I don't like the idea that anyone can be deprived of services because of their beliefs (cultural or religious).  Majority may think it's ok, but for those who believe it's not, that's unfair.  I can't think offhand of a specific item of clothing or behaviour that is analogous with the veil or headscarf for Christians.  But if there was something I believed I should wear and the government were going to bring in a law forcing me not to wear it...I think I'd consider breaking the law.  I imagine that will happen with some French women too.

The French recommendations seem to fail to recognise that wearing the veil is for some women (I don't say all) a genuine religious choice, something which they feel they should do.  Perhaps it's partly fear of something different, something the older French generation don't understand.  Another commentator suggests they are lashing out against Muslims- and more generally, immigrants- in fear of terrorism.  If so, they're probably going to find it only makes things worse.

Monday, 25 January 2010

Why, God? Trust.


I wrote earlier about some of my thoughts on suffering and why it happens.  It's such a big topic that even two posts doesn't do it justice.  But here's some more thoughts.

How do you explain natural disasters, things that just 'happen?'  Are they the result of choices too?  How?  Earthquakes and volcanoes, floods and hurricanes are all the result of living on a dynamic world- plate tectonics and weather are essential for life to exist.  But if God is all powerful, why did he design a world like this, with what you might consider a built-in flaw?  Couldn't he have done it some other way?


Then there's the idea that the world has to include bad things and suffering for us to know what is good, to know right and wrong - that there has to be bad for there to be good.  I suppose there is some merit in that, but it doesn't really answer the question.  Why would anyone design a world like that, if they cared about the people in it?  

So the biggest question is still why, if God cares about the world, he allows suffering to happen?  I think possibly the only answer is what we can learn from what God does about suffering.  He, as Jesus, came to Earth as a baby born to a poor family.  He went into the desert to suffer hunger and thirst.  He was criticised by the authorities, betrayed by his friend, beaten and mocked and finally killed in an incredibly cruel manner.  No one can say that God hasn't shared our sufferings.

I don't agree with the view of a God who just makes the world, winds the 'clockwork,'sets it running and sits back to watch.  The God I believe in didn't.  He stepped in to deal with the problem of suffering.  Couldn't he have done it another way, that didn't involve suffering himself?  I don't know.  But he chose to do it that way, to suffer with us, as one of us.


So the real answer to the question is that I don't know exactly why there has to be suffering.  But I trust that if there is suffering in the world, it must be there for a reason, even if it's not one I can understand.  And I don't believe that God is cruel and enjoys watching our suffering.  Otherwise why would he give the life of his own son, who he says he loves, to try to sort the problem out?

The answer I give is that I trust God.  Not blind, unthinking trust, I think about it a lot.  Why do I trust God?  Because I believe he is trustworthy, from my own experience and that of others, and from the Bible.*  So my response to suffering is similar to that of the clergyman mentioned in the BBC article: to pray.  To tell God that I don't understand, and to ask for his reassurance.  And to ask for him to intervene in the world to alleviate the suffering.

As a footnote to this, see this WordLive session on the last plague on the Egyptians.

*To go into further detail on this would be opening up a whole other can of worms.  Later!

Thursday, 21 January 2010

Why, God? Choices.


The terrible, disastrous earthquake in Haiti is much on people's minds at the moment.  And inevitably, when confronted with a situation like this the question of suffering arises again.  Why, people ask Christians, why does this God who you say is all powerful and loving, allow that to happen?  If he's all powerful he could stop it, if he was loving he'd want to stop it, so why doesn't he?  


The short and most honest answer is, we don't know.  We can come up with answers, but they all seem to leave me feeling not completely satisfied.  The BBC published an article where a philosopher addresses the arguments.  I think it's actually a decent summary of the arguments.  While I don't agree with his views on some of them, I think it's a good statement of how many people feel, and useful for the rest of us to understand that.  


I do believe in an all loving, all powerful, all knowing God.  But I do sometimes find that hard to reconcile with the world around us.  As well as the Haitian earthquake, several people I know are having to cope with the illness or death of family members at the moment.  I can understand that idea that suffering is often the result of people's choices- that someone who chooses to smoke might suffer ill health as a result, for example- but what about the people around them who suffer because of their choice, having to deal with their illness and perhaps being ill themselves as a result of passive smoke?  And then how do you explain natural disasters, things that just 'happen?' 


First there's the question of people's choices causing suffering.  It's a very simplistic view, echoed in Old Testament ideas (for example Job's friends assume he's having a bad time because he's sinned) but it's clear that it's not always the reason for suffering (Job hasn't sinned).  Those people who say whole nations are to blame for a natural disaster because of a supposed event in their past are on very dangerous ground and should probably keep their mouths firmly shut.  


That's not to say it's always wrong, though.  As in the example of the smoker above, our choices do have an effect on our lives.  Some actions bring their own consequence- like, for example, choosing to mess around on an icy path in shoes with no grip.  If you fall over and hurt yourself, that's probably your own fault.  If you make someone else fall over, that's your fault too, caused by your choice, even if they don't deserve it.


But, people ask, couldn't God have made people who didn't choose to do the wrong thing sometimes?  Well no, I don't think he could.  God made people to love him.  You can't force someone to love you, you can only invite it.  So they had to have a choice- to love God, to know him, to obey his will, or not.  If not, then they often end up hurting themselves and others, because the world is designed to work God's way.  And the road isn't smooth for those people who do love God and try to obey him- we make mistakes, other people trip us up because they are not going God's way.  Humanity's choice on a daily basis not to follow God means we all suffer.  


People are not good or bad.  They're just people, who sometimes do bad things and sometimes do good things, for many reasons.  I don't think you need to be godly to be a good, moral person.  As a wise old woman* said: "It's which way you face that matters."  It's our ability to choose that makes us human.  Without that we wouldn't be what we were made to be- people who choose to love God.


That's some of my thinking.  More later.




*Granny Weatherwax in Terry Pratchett's Witches Abroad.