Robert Whitley
Assistant professor of Psychiatry
May 24, 2007
Let us Pray: ‘Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of all our
hearts, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, our strength and redeemer’ Amen
Last year, I was invited to give a paper on the determinants of health and
illness at a scientific conference. During my presentation, I argued that
studies converged to suggest that prayer, church attendance and general
religious activity was a protective factor that helped people through sickness.
Active Christians were less likely to get ill and more likely to recover than
people who did not pray, who were not religious and who did not regularly
attend Church services. In other words, going to Church is good for your
health. Those of you who do not come here regularly, take heed!
At the end of my presentation, a young woman immediately put her hand up and
asked me whether I was a Christian myself, and if so whether this may have
biased my interpretation. I thought this was a fair question and answered it as
best I could. The answer appeared to satisfy the woman, though she did reply
that she thought I had over-emphasised social aspects of health to the
detriment of genetic aspects. Once the presentation was over, the woman
approached me and asked whether I had a few moments to talk more about my work.
As our discussion had been hitherto friendly and enjoyable, I suggested we
adjourn to a local eatery as it was approaching lunchtime and I was getting
hungry. She agreed and we headed out.
Over lunch, the woman declared to me that she was an atheist and that she
thought my thesis simply masked genetic differences between those who go to
church and those who do not. She held this point quite firmly, so much so as to
even explain my own religious behaviour in such genetic terms. At one point,
she looked up at me very earnestly and stated that ‘the only reason you are
religious is because you have been genetically selected to, through Darwinian
evolution’-‘the only reason you are religious is because you have been
genetically selected to, through Darwinian evolution’. I do not encounter such
views on a regular basis, and I must admit I was at a loss as to how to reply,
so I simply said to her, equally earnestly ‘the only reason you are an atheist
is because you have been genetically selected to through Darwinian evolution’.
I think you see my point.
The conversation continued, and proceeded from discussion of genes and
religiosity to wider metaphysical and moral discourse. At one point, the woman
posed a question which most Christians face on a fairly regular basis: ‘if
there is a God, why is there so much evil in the world?’-‘if there is a God,
why is there so much evil in the world?’. How do we as Christians respond when
such a question is posed to us? How do we respond when we pose such a question
to ourselves?
It is on this question that I will presently labour.
First off, the mere posing of such a question suggests something about the
person posing the question, and I would argue that the fact that this question
is posed so frequently, tells us something about mankind as a whole. It shows
that the questioner, and humanity at large, is profoundly concerned with
questions of good and evil, is profoundly concerned about the existence of
evil, and is profoundly concerned with diminishing its frequency and impact.
The posing of the question ‘if there is a God, why is there so much evil in the
world?’ is what sociologist Peter Berger calls a ‘signal of transcendence’- a
signal that humans are distinct from the rest of the animal kingdom in
questioning these matters, that we are not simply the walking embodiment of
selfish genes whose behaviour is governed by pure self-interest. In other
words, by merely asking such a question, the questioner is on common ground
with Christians who routinely consider the moral matters surrounding good and
evil.
Secondly, the posing of the question ‘if there is a God, why is there so
much evil in the world?’ actually puts the questioner in moral quandary. I will
explain. Implicit to the question, is an acknowledgement from the questioner
that there is good in the world. I don’t think anybody posing such a question
would deny this. Also implicit is that the questioner must adhere to some
heuristic which allows them to demarcate good from evil. If the questioner
acknowledges the existence of good and evil, he or she must have a concomitant
theory of demarcation, must have a faculty to distinguish good and evil, and
the many shades of grey in between. Where does this theory come from for the
atheist questioner? For the Christian, we demarcate good and evil (and the many
shades of grey in-between) by reference to the Mosaic law, to the words of the
prophets, to the teachings of Jesus, to the Pauline exhortations- all
interpreted and reinterpreted in the light of Church tradition, reason and
personal experience.
From where does the non-believer draw such a framework? Bertrand Russell was
one of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century. An agnostic,
even he even struggled with such a question. In his famous debate with Father
Freddie Coplestone he stated that he distinguished good and bad- wait for it-
‘by my feelings’- a three word answer ‘by my feelings’. Father Coplestone
politely remarked to Professor Russell that the Commandant of Belsen probably
had the same theory of demarcation- that for him and Hitler, by reference to
subjective feeling, their actions were good. I hope you see my point. Reference
to feeling as a guide to good and evil, rather than reference to the
accumulated wisdom of Judeo-Christian thought, is much more than a solipsistic
fetish. Reference to feeling as a theory of demarcation can lead to Belsen.
‘If there is a God, why is there so much evil in the world?’. To a
Christian, such a statement implies that there is also so much good in the
world, and God has given us the materials and the faculty to discern good from
evil so we can promulgate the former and diminish the latter. By merely posing
the question, the questioner is showing he or she can be an ally in this
endeavour, though it is our Christian duty to ensure that Christianity, not
feelings, is the pointer to good and evil, nothing more, nothing less.
To close this sermon, I would like to say that the question of evil is one
we can ponder- as the young woman at the conference did, or it is one we can
actually do something about. We can ask ‘why is there so much evil in the
world?’ or we can ask ‘what am I doing in my life to diminish evil and build
the Kingdom here below?’. For guidance in how this can be done, we need look no
further than our Lord Jesus Christ: healing the sick, feeding the hungry,
teaching the people, attending the poor.
Are the millions of people, past and present, who are calibrating their
lives in reference to these teachings of service and self-sacrifice, doing so
as blind victims of genetic selection or as willing partners of God in the
building of his Kingdom? The young woman at the conference thought the former-
I, dear friends, think the latter.
May the Lord help us, bless us and keep us. Amen.
|
