It remains remarkable to me that so many individuals make very explicit and passionate appeals to divine providence in their personal experiences at the expense of so many others around them who are devastated. Perhaps there is an analogy with the way having a camera’s aperture wide open results in a very thin focal plane with the foreground/background blurred to the point that the details are no longer discernable. Why do individuals surrounded by devastation to others if not to themselves continue to trust/champion some variation on the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm re divine providence?
- Is it because the paradigm satisfactorily accounts for their personal experiences and their closest acquaintances’ experiences? (In other words, the paradigm works for them enough of the time that they do not test the paradigm by taking into account the wider/deeper realities of human suffering.)
- Is it because their reason/s for adopting the paradigm had nothing to do with testing the paradigm’s credibility against the depth/breadth of human misery?
- Is it because separating from the paradigm would be too painful, too time-consuming, too difficult to explain, . . . ?
- Is it because they are not attempting to be truly present with individuals experiencing the worst of life?
- Is it because the paradigm does not permit or support its being radically (i.e., down into the root) tested? (Those who dare to do so are pressured to ‘repent’. There is something hauntingly akin to spouse abuse -- e.g., “At least he notices me”, “I’m to blame”, “I would not know how to live in any other situation”, “I can’t afford to leave”, . . .)
- Is it because they are not looking for or wanting to struggle with such questions?
- Is it because they place more value on other aspects of membership within the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm?
- Is it because they have made public statements and/or taken public actions of allegiance to the paradigm that would be difficult (embarrassing?) to reverse (analogous to having a ‘lifetime alumnus’ sticker on your car)?
- Is it because of a desire for childlike comfort and liberty from accountability?
- Is it because of texts in Jewish scripture and/or Christian scripture that discourage seriously questioning the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm?
- Is it because of credentialed authorities (e.g., PhDs, faculty members, popular writers, pastors, . . .) who repeatedly reassure the adherents that the paradigm is sound and can be trusted? (These ‘religious’ authorities are analogous to a building inspector requested by a real estate agent because s/he can count on the building inspector’s certification of the property regardless of the items found to need correction. The ‘religious’ T/O paradigm expects to be certified whenever these ‘religious’ authorities examine the paradigm.)
- Is it because they fear being in ‘fog’ (i.e., ‘uncertainty’)?
- Is it because they have taken pivotal actions (e.g., who/whether to marry, what profession to pursue, where to work, . . .) primarily (even solely) on the conviction that ‘God’ specifically willed such actions? (The fabric of these actions would begin to unravel if they step back/away from the paradigm.)
- Is it because they are concerned not to appear disloyal to or critical of individuals they love and respect who remain unwavering in their allegiance to the paradigm?
- Is it . . . ?