In January of 2006, Americans were glued to their televisions, watching the coverage of twelve miners trapped in a mine in Tallmansville, West Virginia. Family and friends of the miners, as well as the national news outlets, all camped out at the Sago Baptist Church to do what many Americans do during crises: pray. The phrase “thoughts and prayers†went out over the airwaves a number of times. Relatives, friends, newsman, mining officials, and government officials could all be heard mentioning prayer. It would be preposterous to think that most people praying weren’t praying for them to be found alive. After all, we all know what happened, and we all know the reaction of loved ones when the truth came out. The shock and disappointment on the faces of the affected were broadcast for all the country to see. People prayed, so what happened?
As an atheist of course, the idea that prayer would work is ludicrous. After all, my wishes can not possibly change the course of events in nature. However, for religious people, prayer is very important. For them, it’s a way to connect to God, to get closer to the answers they desire. And during the time of the Sago mining disaster, it was a way for them to ask God to save the miners. Were their prayers answered?
I recently took the time to talk to a small group of Catholics over IRC to get a better insight into how they perceived prayer. The fundamental question I asked the Catholics, was by what mechanism did they think prayer worked? Did God only act if someone prayed? Did it matter how many people prayed? How much did it matter what the actual prayer was? The answers to my questions only led me to more questions. For example, everyone agreed that God didn’t need a prayer to act, because it was his choice. The word “choice†brings up some interesting connotations. If God needs to make a choice, that implies God doesn’t know everything. If God did, there would be no choice, right?
The very idea that God has to make a choice, also made me wonder if that meant God could be swayed by the number of prayers. In fact, some of the Catholics I talked to even brought up the word “swayâ€. Again, this goes back God being omniscient, which all the Catholics I talked to believe God is. An omniscient God, though, can’t be swayed, because the answers are always already known. The idea of swaying also brings up another very interesting point. The act of swaying God, implies more than one side, more than one thing being prayed for. If God chooses, then he’s choosing against the prayers of someone. Not everyone can have their prayers answered. When I asked the Catholics this question, the only answer they had, was that any outcome means the prayer was answered, that there was no such thing as a wrong outcome. I do not accept this. In a religion, where there are firm distinctions between right and wrong, I believe it’s incompatible to interpret every prayer as the “right†question.
At the end of my discussion with the Catholics, it was clear to me, that none of them really knew the answers to any of my questions. The thought of prayer was too ingrained in their world view for them to even confront the litany of contradictions that prayer brings. I concluded, and told them, that it was clear they didn’t know if prayer worked, but they all felt better thinking it did.
In the end, I believe that the Sago mining disaster puts the whole idea of prayer being effective on its ear. It was one of those events, where the sentiment of the nation was obvious, and the outcome was so tragically the opposite. It’s clear that prayer didn’t save the miners. If you’re an atheist, you know why the prayers didn’t work. If you are religious, then you must wonder if your prayer ever has an effect, or if God does what God does, and if you happen to agree with God, then your prayer might be considered “answeredâ€.
Pingback: Cadmusings » Blog Archive » GOD or NOT - VIII: Faith
Consider prayer in a different light, that perhaps prayer is an exercise for its own sake, rather than intended to produce some effect. For many people-both faithful and not-the challenge of faith is exactly reconciling the desire for a personal relationship with the divine, with a god who is, exactly as you have articulated, beyond the possibility of being swayed or effected in real time. Just as your catholic friends all believed god to be all-knowing, most would agree that his ways are incomprehensible to man: prayer is a personal connection to an otherwise distant god, and its mechanics are beyond our comprehension.
A second response to the problem of god’s unswayability, is with respect to time. Our prayers and pleas cannot effect a decision that is already made. However, this process of decion-making relies on a linear conception of time. We as humans are bound by time: we hear pleas, then we decide, then it is done. God, theoretically, is not subject to these restrictions; for him there is no past, present or future… no time-conception at all. This obstacle eliminated, it is not so difficult to imagine that what we do in the limited context of here and now, forms merely a piece of the single universal understanding which God has unique access to.
There’s an infinite number of explanations of prayer and the human relationship to god. I’ve only mentioned two: the first reflects both one christian perception and an aspect of vedic hinduism (8000 years old…). The second is largely stolen from C.S. Lewis.
Americans are among the most religious people in the world, and among the least informed about their own religious beliefs. It’s a sad state of affairs. Any position at all, atheistic or religious, is a good one as long as it is informed. Any position taken up ignorantly (even, perhaps, the correct one) is towards no great end.