September 04, 2005

bruderhoff on katrina

After the Hurricane
Johann Christoph Arnold

In the wake of Katrina, one could say plenty regarding our government's response (or lack thereof), and about how many more lives could have been saved if those in power had been more on the ball. But this is not the time to point fingers: we have been struck, unprepared, by a mammoth refugee crisis, widespread lawlessness, martial law, and a degree of public panic that has never been associated with life in the United States.

Not surprisingly, the news media is obsessed with the economic consequences of Katrina: the skyrocketing cost of gas, the instability of the real estate market, and the weakening of the dollar, to name just a few. As usual, it seems that the financial and material aspects of the disaster are of paramount importance to us. For many people, the biggest question seems to be, "How long will it be before the price of gas goes down again, and I can return to life-as-usual?"

Very few people seem to be asking what sort of a spiritual impact this disaster will have, and whether we are going to let it affect our consciences and our collective soul.


So what sort of question should we be asking?

Posted by tripp at September 4, 2005 06:14 AM
Comments

Thanks for posting this--he poses very good questions.

Posted by: Emily at September 5, 2005 12:14 PM

Well, I've written elsewhere that it is time to point fingers; maybe this is a good place to clarify what I mean to be pointing at. Others have noted that this administration came to power largely by the claim that their opposition could not keep us safe in an emergency. I would add this: the party represented by this administration makes many implicit claims to moral superiority, usually on the gays-and-abortions litmus test. But mustn't we point to the moral vacuousness with which Bush, Cheney, Rice, Chertoff and Brown have, er, "responded" to a catastrophic loss of life? I think the prophetic role of the church might take shape, in this case, with a sharp critique of what passes for moral religiosity in secular leaders claiming spiritual motives. In question form: "How can the churches choose not to "point fingers" at a secular moral leadership that is blind to poverty, and to the dying of the poor?"

Posted by: Brooke at September 6, 2005 09:20 AM