THE recent catastrophic earthquake in Haiti has raised the age-old issue of evil and suffering. It is an issue of fundamental significance for the religiously committed, while at the same time raising unsettling questions about meaning-making for those without any religious affiliation. This has engaged the minds of the greatest philosophical and theological thinkers within the halls of academia and the church. At the same time, it is an issue which impacts the life of the simplest of human minds and has therefore been discussed in very profound and sublime tones throughout the ages.

In a well-articulated reflection on the recent earthquake in Haiti, Kevin O’Brien Chang, a columnist in one of the daily newspapers and one who makes no particular claim to being a philosopher or theologian, raised the issue in a non-technical manner. He writes in part:

“If there is a God, you have to wonder what He has against poor Haiti. Why has the first and only successful slave revolution in history been followed by 200 years of chaos punctuated by starvation, hurricanes and earthquake?

“But, if there is no God, well, what does it matter who lives or who dies when or where or how? No wonder disaster makes people more, and not less, religious, and the helpless Haitians sang hymns of praise into the night. The human brain may not be able to reconcile the idea of a benevolent deity with evil and suffering. But neither can it accept the idea that nothing means anything, and that every birth and every death are equally devoid of significance, since this incomprehensible vale of tears is all there is or ever will be. It seems our feeble minds have been programmed to prefer a desperate longing for an unlikely God, to the calm certainty of absolute meaninglessness. But then pure logic must prefer a hopeful absurdity, no matter how vanishingly small that hope, to an absurdity that dismisses life as a futile accident doomed to end in pointless oblivion.”

Mr Chang is correct in his first premise that the very notion of the existence of God who, in a society of strong Christian persuasion, would have been proclaimed as an omnipotent and benevolent God, becomes problematic when this God seems to stand by and allow all this suffering to befall a vulnerable and poverty-stricken people. Various answers have been given, ranging from the notion that this kind of suffering and evil is not of God but of the devil, the evil one; that the natural order has been so created that it moves by laws which under certain conditions will cause disasters like earthquakes and hurricanes; that evil and suffering are to be attributed to the consequences of human choices and activities; to the view that disasters are a result of climate change, which is caused by the abuse of the environment. There are religious persons who, in their enthusiasm to defend God from any perceived onslaught, come up with the most outrageous explanations of the causative factors of natural disasters. Such explanations are usually offered by those who seek to vindicate themselves as righteous ones who do not have such tragic fate befall them. An example of this would be the recent reprehensible comment by the right-wing American televangelist, Pat Robertson, who, in attributing responsibility for the devastating earthquake at the feet of the Haitian people, declared that:

“They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III, or whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you’ll get us free from the French.’ True story. And so, the devil said, ‘Okay, it’s a deal’.”

That kind of statement not only reflects callousness but also a kind of nationalistic and racial bigotry which is a denial of the very God on whose behalf he claims to speak. The sad thing is that there are many Jamaicans who give credence to his utterances.

Belief in God in the midst of such a catastrophic natural disaster also raises serious questions. One of the mistakes which the religiously committed and those of no religious commitment often make, is to assume that faith is of the nature of scientific truth, which is either true or false by empirical test. Religious faith is founded on various pillars of truth, which rest on revelation by God. For many religious traditions these pillars are Scripture, Tradition, Reason and Experience. Seen in this light, faith is not a static quality, but something which has been likened to a pilgrimage or journey with its various twists and turns. So faith is subject to moments of certainty, moments of disappointment, moments of remaking, moments of celebration, etc, but always with its questions. In this regard, St Paul’s notion in 2 Corinthians 13 that now we see in a mirror dimly embraces what Dr Chang calls “hopeful absurdity”, but goes beyond that. Like Paul, the Christian does not attribute this state to be the best option for overcoming cognitive dissonance, but a stage on the journey of life which is sustained by the three things that now abide: “faith, hope and love”.

Whether we understand or accept it, the people of Haiti have held on to their faith through the midst of the challenges which have been a part of their ongoing history. While the shape and nature of their faith may change in the light of their current experience, there is unlikely to be any significant decline in it. At the same time, the way the world responds to their catastrophe will be an expression of love that is able to sustain faith and hope in these people. As persons of faith they will always maintain a sense of hope that is grounded in the conviction that their present circumstance is neither definitive nor delimiting of their prospects for the future, but that this resides in God.

The current outpouring of charity and relief efforts from all over the world is most encouraging, and notwithstanding the economic difficulties which we now face as a country, the response from our government and our people has been most commendable. This is the expression of love which I believe will sustain the people of Haiti in their faith in God and humanity, and provide the hope that the last chapter of their history and experience has not been written.

I still have concerns, however, about certain aspects of the relief strategy. Unless we believe that there is a “conspiracy theory” at work in this situation, there are disturbing reports in the media concerning the role which the United States is playing in the process. One of the realities of life is that the same hand that reaches out in charity can be the hand that not only creates dependence and control, but also can be smothering in terms of transformation, growth, and independence of the recipients of such generosity.

One media report announcing the convening of a meeting by Canada to address the global relief effort for Haiti is quoted as follows:

“The meeting is expected to be dominated by the efforts to co-ordinate aid to the western hemisphere’s poorest nation, particularly as there is growing criticism of the United States’ decision to take charge of the relief effort.

“French and Brazilian officials complained over the weekend that the United States is favouring its own aeroplanes at the Port-au-Prince airport.

“French Foreign Minister Kouchner claimed that the airport had become ‘an annex of Washington’, according to France’s ambassador to Haiti, Didier Le Bret, after the Americans diverted a French relief flight to the neighbouring Dominican Republic.”

Another caption for a newspaper report tells a story of Caricom’s relief effort being rebuffed and its high-level team of investigators not being allowed to land. We have no doubt about the ability of the United States to mobilise human and material resources to facilitate the relief effort, but it is not desirable that this should become another occasion to upstage the United Nations and to act in unilateral ways rather than in concert with the global community. Neither should it be a platform for advancing a political agenda in determining which country’s relief effort should be deemed acceptable and therefore given the green light.

Finally, a Christian perspective on natural disasters and tragedies affirms that everything that transpires within human experience takes place within the ambit of the economy of God, and can therefore be the occasion and setting for transformation and redemption of human situations. In this light, the situation facing Haiti may not be a terminal tragedy but can be the platform for the nations and institutions that have wronged and exploited the people of Haiti over the centuries to do the right thing now and mobilise their resources and the generosity of the global community to bring about the transformation of Haiti to a society of justice, peace, and prosperity.