First off, I do not consider prayer a cry of weakness or anything negative. I'm sure it's possible that prayer may be negative for some people, but overall I assume prayer is a net positive.
Zora Neale Hurston has a chapter on religion in her autobiography Dust Tracks on a Road. She explains herself in greater detail in the 15th chapter titled "Religion." I recommend reading the whole chapter here if you're interested.
Hurston, the daughter of a baptist preacher, grew up in church. But she was skeptical. When she learned of the world religions, she saw similar patterns. I didn't grow up with any religion nor church. And still, somehow, I didn't know belief in God was optional. God was so matter a factually spoken about, even by my biology teacher in high school, that I never considered questioning the existence of a God. But like Hurston, I was always skeptical of religions. When I learned of the world religions, the veil was pulled away.
"I do not pretend to read God's mind. If He has a plan of the universe worked out to the smallest detail, it would be folly for me to presume to get down on my knees and attempt to revise it. That, to me, seems the highest form of sacrilege. So I do not pray. I accept the means at my disposal for working out my destiny. It seems to me that I have been given a mind and will-power for that very purpose. I do not expect God to single me out and grant me advantages over my fellow men. Prayer is for those who need it. Prayer seems to me a cry of weakness, and an attempt to avoid, by trickery, the rules of the game as laid down. I do not choose to admit weakness. I accept the challenge of responsibility. Life, as it is, does not frighten me, since I have made my peace with the universe as I find it, and bow to its laws. The ever-sleepless sea in its bed, crying out "How long?" to Time; million-formed and never motionless flame; the contemplation of these two aspects alone, affords me sufficient food for ten spans of my expected lifetime. It seems to me that organized creeds are collections of words around a wish. I feel no need for such. However, I would not, by word or deed, attempt to deprive another of the consolation it affords. It is simply not for me. Somebody else may have my rapturous glance at the archangels. The springing of the yellow line of morning out of the misty deep of dawn, is glory enough for me. I know that nothing is destructible; things merely change forms. When the consciousness we know as life ceases, I know that I shall still be part and parcel of the world. I was a part before the sun rolled into shape and burst forth in the glory of change. I was, when the earth was hurled out from its fiery rim. I shall return with the earth to Father Sun, and still exist in substance when the sun has lost its fire, and disintegrated in infinity to perhaps become a part of the whirling rubble in space. Why fear? The stuff of my being is matter, ever changing, ever moving, but never lost; so what need of denominations and creeds to deny myself the comfort of all my fellow men? The wide belt of the universe has no need for finger-rings. I am one with the infinite and need no other assurance."
This sentiment is captured elsewhere in other places by other writers and thinkers. It's a wise and reasonable approach to one's finite place in the big universe. She both over-privileges the special-ness and majesty of her small self in the grand scheme ... and under-privileges the questions of "How long?" and "Why?" She's decided the "why" isn't interesting, I think.
ReplyDeleteI see her as confident in her faith. The tone of the sentiment shifts during the paragraph. I don't think prayer is weakness; maybe I should have clearly stated that. Isn't she also letting go to a high/greater power/being? She finds a personal connection without the need of organized religion.
DeleteWould you agree that followers of a specific religion have to have more strict and rigid (underprivileged?) mindsets?
I haven't gotten around to a response to your personal essay yet. I have a draft started. I'll probably have a Hurston-ish approach.
She's a pagan ... or a scientist. That's not a bad thing to be. "The world is gigantic and beyond me! I am secure that I am part of it! Why limit myself to one belief system?" I dunno. Why limit yourself to anything? Maybe there's discipline or wisdom or deeper learning in going deeper in one thread in the great big tapestry of human civilization.
DeleteI would not agree that followers of a specific religion have be more strict or rigid. I know many believers who are loose, accommodating and nuanced in their view of their religion. Others without religion are more strict and rigid in their moral pronouncements than any Bible-beating Southern Baptist preacher ever was.
Also, I would argue that as with many who seem not to have delved deep into all the things prayer does, she doesn't understand the richness and wide variety of themes inside organizer prayer. This, in particular, is particularly reductionist: "I do not expect God to single me out and grant me advantages over my fellow men. Prayer is for those who need it. Prayer seems to me a cry of weakness, and an attempt to avoid, by trickery, the rules of the game as laid down. I do not choose to admit weakness."
DeleteHer view is closer, it seems, to Buddhist or Hindu karma ... the universe has rules, we follow those rules, and she's happy to be in this big, wild universe following those rules. Not sure what responsibility she's claiming. The responsibility to do ... what?