In June of 2001, while her husband was away at work, a mother of five drowned her five children in a bathtub. The woman in question had a history of mental illness, was not supposed to have been left alone with her children.
How exactly one wonders can a woman who cannot be trusted to be alone with her children ever really be a mother?
Suppose we invoke existence of a benevolent God who loves His creation, humans especially, a God who always has our best interests at heart. If we consider normative goodness of motherhood as objective of life, motherhood is desirable. Most women have natural desire to be mothers. Absent scientific progress, women having desire for motherhood is critical for maintenance of human populations.
But suppose a woman’s specific special circumstances render her ill suited to motherhood. Though she does not now realize it, having children to take care of simply will drive her bananas. In view of normative goodness inherent in motherhood, however, this woman is not sensitized to her inherent unsuitability for motherhood. Could be genetic perturbations in her ancestry, could be a traumatic childhood encased deep in her recessed mind, but there exists some imperfection which renders this woman unsuitable for motherhood.
Enter a benevolent God who steers this woman away from motherhood to marry a man who is comfortable with not having children, a man who has capacity for cherishing her just for who she is to him — a wife, companion, and friend.
In presence of a benevolent God who understands this woman better than she is self aware, we either find that this woman is accepting of her situation, loves her husband, finds contentment in not having any children; or does not sense God at work in her situation, as such resents lack of capacity for bearing of children. We have that this woman may spend her entire lifetime kicking against God, hating God, be filled with unhappiness, and spend odes of time pleading with God in prayer for a child. All of this because she refuses to take the time to appreciate what she has standing right beside or in front of her — a man who loves her as much as she ever could be loved. In the demonstration of unwillingness to live in the moment, unwillingness to trust that God knows best, she may force herself into taking care of children, may end up killing them all someday because child care drove her bananas.
So is living cognizant of concept of ‘God’s will’ for the lily hearted, the wilted in heart, those looking for a cop out in life? Actually not. Trusting in God’s will is no different from learning to live in and be appreciative of the current moment. A Christian who lives in contentment with his or her situation because he or she trusts in ‘God’s will’ acts no differently from an atheist who stoicly makes his or her way through life with the self awareness that it is best to make the most of the moment that already is, than spend every current moment pining for a desired moment that has yet to arrive. Trusting in God’s will is no different from choosing to live with contentment in the current moment not because all that is needed has arrived, but because spending of the time pining for tomorrow robs today of all of its beauty and opportunities.
Trusting in God’s will belies the well received possibility that a normatively good outcome may lack contextual goodness for any one particular person at some particular point in time. A man may desire to marry for instance, yet God may know he stands the best chance of developing himself, and proving himself a rich blessing to society via singleness until he is say 55. But a person gifted with capacity for singleness, a person who has capacity for enjoyment of aloneness with God has perhaps best preparation for marriage because being comfortable with aloneness is one of the most important yet unemphasized preparations for success in marital life. If such a person were to seek marriage, yet remain open to being single and enjoy every moment he or she remains single, this is openness to God’s will. But then again, this is no different from an atheist choosing everyday to live in the moment, as opposed to spending of the time pining for what is desired that has yet to arrive.
We conclude then that while ‘God’s Will’ sounds religious, it in reality is no different from stoic contentment with life and rational desire for maximization of current opportunities and beauty of life, as opposed to wasting of the present waiting for a specific future that never may arrive.
To believe in ‘God’s Will’ is not to be weak, wilting, vacillating, and religious. On the contrary, it takes strength of character, willingness to seize the moment, pragmatism that is secular in its very essence, and an excellent work ethic to trust in ‘Will of God’.
If anyone is using the notion of seeking of ‘God’s Will’ to sit around doing nothing, they do not understand the concept, they misuse the concept. Belief in ‘God’s Will’ is not about spending all of the time kneeling in prayer, rather it is about having the strength to continue to make the most of a moment, a moment which, in presence of unmet desire, remains eminently imperfect.
Belief in ‘God’s Will’ is not a cop out, it is essence of those who learn to make the most of each moment of an always imperfect life — even billionaires have needs, financial or non-financial as yet unmet, live imperfect lives. In an always imperfect life, living by ‘God’s will’ is paradigm of those who learn to channel their strength in the most positive, beneficial manner for their well being and well being of society. While an atheist may be non-cognizant, non-accepting of the possibility, in the decision to live right, and live in the moment without giving in to evil that may be brought into play by others in society there is cognizance of importance of ‘God’s Will’.