In the last couple of days I've only been able to think about death and autism. So to take my mind off it, I borrowed a book* from the library. I picked it because of the interesting cover, and then found out it was all about death and feminism. Great.
Well, actually, it was great. It's particular focus was the suffragette movement led by Mrs Pankhurst at the beginning of the last century.
I was moved to think that I can now vote because women who believed strongly enough in their cause had the courage to stand up against society and even go to prison for their beliefs.
Nowadays, it's a no-brainer that women get the vote. Back then, it was shocking, unseemly, even un-Christian.
My mind went off on two tracks: firstly, would I be willing to stand up for my beliefs and even face persecution for them. Sometimes, I'm not so sure.
My second train of thought is around family and causes. In the book, Kitty fought for suffrage, but her daughter and family suffered because of it. It reminds me of Nelson Mandela's biography - his two marriages broke up because of the strain of the apartheid cause. The story of the great missionary William Carey is similar. His work in India was groundbreaking, but his wife went mad.
It seems like many 'great' people have difficult family lives. Their personal relationships get swamped by their cause or their business or their calling. Often, the less powerful in their families suffer as a result of their one-eyed dedication.
The question is: is that ok? Is it just part of life? Does someone always have to suffer in the wake for great and worthy things to be done? Is Nelson Mandela any less great because of his broken relationships? Is William Carey's work still worthwhile, even though his family life was a disaster? Did Emily Pankhurst's suffragettes achieve a greater good for women even though those around them suffered for a while?
*Fallen Angels by Tracey Chevalier. Fabulous.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Interesting question. I wonder what the personal lives of the apostles looked like. What did their wives and (presumably)children feel as their husbands went missioning?
Can you do both family and world impact? It makes me think about those who seem to achieve very little in the world, yet in terms of their family input, have a massive influence. My grandmother is one example: she left school at 13 and worked at jobs such as shop girl and factory hand for the rest of her life. Yet she was a major influence in her sister, husband, mother in law, 3 children, and all 5 grandchildren old enough to remember her well becoming Christians, so brightly did her loving nature witness to the love of Christ.
My grandmother is the same as yours Megan. And yes, baby-brain girl, I've often wondered about the apostle Peter's family. Perhaps they had different expectations from marriage then - or perhaps the setup of life allowed people a lot more support from relatives so burnout/breakdown didn't happen in families so much?
In our individualised culture, we look to one or two people for all our support and if we can't get it, we can't function.
I just can't think of too many people in an individualistic culture who have done both family and world 'greatness'. Perhaps Martin Luther King Jr??
Thanks for your comments!
Post a Comment