By Nate Nehring / Herald Forum
The past few weeks have seen several violent attacks that have rocked our country to its core.
These include but are not limited to the shooting of children and adults attending Mass at Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis, the stabbing of 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte, N.C., train, and the assassination of conservative political commentator Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University.
When tragedy strikes, the instinctive response for many of us is to turn to prayer. The responses to recent events reflected this, with many offering prayers for the victims, families and others affected by these heinous attacks. Prayer as an instinctive response is appropriate, yet there has been a growing trend of pervasive, anti-religious sentiment that mocks prayer as a response to tragedy. In the comment sections of media articles covering these events, you are now just as likely to see “thoughts and prayers” used sarcastically as you are to see that phrase used authentically. A popular T-shirt being worn displays the phrase “thoughts & prayers” which is crossed out and replaced by the phrase “policy & change.”
The provocative nature of this may be great for selling shirts, but it isn’t ideal for those interested in the truth. Anyone committed to intellectual honesty can recognize that these two phrases are not mutually exclusive. Why should someone pursuing policy changes not also offer prayers on behalf of those in need? Likewise, why should the praying person not also pursue changes to policy?
The absurdity of this false dichotomy underlines a more insidious issue: an attack on the legitimacy of prayer. As an elected official whose day job is enacting policy, I contend that there is no policy proposal that could have the same effectiveness as praying for our neighbors in need.
Prayer is, by definition, an appeal to something greater than us. Put differently, it is an encounter with our creator, whereby we have the ability to communicate our sorrows, thanksgiving, petitions, and so on in a personal way with the one who has been and is and always will be. While policy-related action can (though doesn’t always) have a positive impact in this life, our prayers can have an impact in eternity.
It is understandable why some in our increasingly secularized culture may view prayer as something abstract or subjective. But those who understand prayer and the encounter with God know that it is just as real as the feeling of grass underfoot or the sound of music to the ear. Renowned author C.S. Lewis compared his belief to belief in the sun, “not because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.” When we pray for our neighbor, we entrust their care to God whose power has no limitations. I’ll take that over opaque references to policy any day of the week, though as mentioned previously there is no reason prayer and policy action shouldn’t go hand in hand.
Even for those who remain unconvinced on the usefulness of prayer, they would do well to recognize the motive of those who offer it. An offering of prayer is, in addition to what has already been described, an exercise in charity whereby the praying person prioritizes their neighbor’s well-being above their own, even if for a moment. That spirit of love is in itself perhaps more of a remedy to our culture’s problems than any policy change might aim to provide.
The next time tragedy strikes, start by giving prayer a try. Then, let’s roll up our sleeves and work together on policy.
Nate Nehring serves as the chair of the Snohomish County Council and represents District 1. He and his wife live in Arlington, where they are raising their four children.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
