Africa is a nation in transition
Brian Hara
Honors Theology 3rd
The Hiding Place and Its Theological Connections
Suffering brings out the best and worst in people, and in the movie The Hiding Place, a pair of sisters named Betsie and Corrie try their hardest to bring goodness to an evil place. The Nazi concentration camps stripped people of everything, including dignity, respect, and freedom, leaving only hope, which was scarce at that. It was easy to abandon hope in the conditions depicted in The Hiding Place, but the discussions that nonbelievers had with believers made for an ideal theological lesson. There is no better time for reflective criticism than in a place that seems void of God’s love.
Faith, Religion, and Theology cites one definition of theology as: “the creative process of interpreting one’s religious tradition.” The beginning of The Hiding Place showed a family that wasn’t even Jewish housing and caring for Jews at great risk. The interpretation of this ongoing act of kindness could only lead to a single conclusion: the Christian faith preaches love and care for all people, not just those of a certain faith. It was clear the Ten Boom family was willing to make sacrifices for others, but the purest moment of devotion to others came when the father of the Ten Boom family was being loaded onto the truck to prison. He was asked by a soldier to behave lawfully so he wouldn’t have to go to prison, but his only reply was, “If anybody knocks on my door, I will answer.”
Theology is constantly developing because it must match changing environments. Betsie was a devout Christian in the comfort of her home, and even as conditions went from bad to worse, she remained unwavering in her faith. In the depths of a cold, damp prison, Betsie was told by a fellow prisoner: “The only way to live here is hate,” to which Betsie replied, “Hate is a worse prison that this.” Betsie’s attitude transcended the walls of the prison. Her surrounding conditions didn’t spark desire in her heart, which is clear when all she asks for is a Bible. Even in a harsh, desolate environment, Betsie never turns her back on God.
The concentration camp presents the most intense theological moments in the movie. Faith, Religion, and Theology cites another definition of theology as: “the process of reflecting critically upon the way people of a particular religious tradition should live out their faith.” While many prisoners felt that God had abandoned them in the camp, Betsie and Corrie fended off criticism with inspiring truths to their religion. When prisoners asked Betsie why God allowed horrible things to happen to good people, she explains that anybody with a true relationship with God didn’t need to ask: “If you know him, you don’t have to know why.” The sisters explain that the horrors of the place bring everyone closer together and closer to God: “otherwise, we have been separated by so much. But here, everything is stripped away.” Many people turn to God only when there is nothing left, and that’s exactly what the concentration camps provided.
The Hiding Place raises important theological questions, with the most important being, “Why do good things happen to bad people?” The movie gives a satisfying but vague answer, trying to send the message that the events of this world are beyond the realm of human comprehension. The best thing to do is put faith in God and trust that He is the truth and His plan is good. Maintaining a theological mindset throughout the course of religious life is good though, because doubt invites investigation which leads to stronger faith. The Hiding Place and theology are closely intertwined, giving people a reason to believe miracles are possible while constantly questioning the reasons they believe.
.
The Truman Doctrine
states that America should, “support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures,” which basically means that America should jump in and help out any group of people that are treated unjustly. This sounds like the morally correct thing to do, but before people jump to support this policy, they have to realize that American soldiers will perish fighting in these foreign conflicts. Even though this belief doesn’t correspond with the teachings of my faith, I value American lives over foreign lives. I would be quicker to protect my neighbor or my brother rather than some person I have never met. Then the question of numbers comes into effect: Should we sacrifice a small number of our own people, let’s say 200, to save 5,000 people in Africa? This decision is difficult to answer, but a solution for a situation like this will be provided later.
The most realistic foreign policy for America
to abide by is Clinton’s Doctrine, which states, “…the involvement of the United States will depend on the weight or American interest in the region.” Why should we risk our own soldier’s lives if we have nothing to gain? The only way I could support our troops going to war is if it helps preserve the state and well-being of what has come to be the greatest nation on earth. If America starts to “play police” to the entire nation of Africa and the rest of the world, we would make many enemies and our military would be stretched very thin, leaving us vulnerable. The number of troops required to keep the whole world in order would far exceed the current size of our army, meaning a draft would be required to keep numbers up. The cold, harsh reality is that America can survive only by intervening in conflicts where our nation’s interests are at stake.
Africa has many problems right now
and in many areas some of the most basic levels in Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs aren’t being met. People are starving, thirsty, and homeless in Africa. Things like democracy and electricity would be appreciated, but mostly Africans just want safety and other basic physical needs. The frustration in these needs not being fulfilled often ends in violence, and the violence just adds to the problems. It’s a simple fact that the pain in Africa needs to end, and the end needs to be set into motion by foreign help. The United Nations have helped some in Africa, but its involvement needs to increase drastically. Instead of wasting time deciding what country will pay for supplies or volunteer troops, a simple solution should eliminate this decision. Every country in the United Nations should donate a small number of troops proportional to the total population of their country. These troops, along with money and supplies also divided up proportionally, would act as the “police force” of the world, helping out in peacekeeping situations in Africa and other parts of the world. Direct combat would be avoided at all costs, and replacing combat would be persuasion through trade boycotts and other means of convincing. A senate would be created with members from each country that vote on how to go about solving global disputes and whose side to take.
Although Africa is a nation in desperate need of help, America can’t shoulder the entire burden of African conflicts. A more decisive, effective United Nations is necessary, a United Nations that discourages violence but gets things done. Clinton’s Doctrine should be the policy of the United States, because it is the only way America will survive. With a better United Nations force, the Clinton Doctrine can be embraced while helping out nations in need. It is the best way to solve the violent problems in Africa without promoting more bloodshed.
Click here to go to page 1.
