The Problem of Evil and Suffering

...

In the Biblical stories about suffering, the Scripture teaches us how to carry our own cross. Jesus carried the cross painfully, but He accepted it with joy.[16] In the same way, we must carry our own cross. Jesus teaches us: “For whoever would save his life, will lose it. But whoever will have lost his life for my sake, shall find it” (Mt 16:25). The way we carry it is our response to Christ. Let us take Christ’s apostles as an example. They were arrested and beaten for preaching the Good News, yet they rejoiced for being privileged to share in Jesus’ cross (Acts 5:41).[17]

The Philosophy on the Problem of Evil

St. Augustine defines evil as the privation of good. For example, physically speaking, a wound or a sickness is a form of evil and is a privation of health. Once this is cured, this evil ceases to exist. The evil is not a substance that goes somewhere else once it is cured. Instead, the wound or sickness is considered a defect of a bodily substance, which is the good. Since God the Creator is infinitely good, all of nature, which He created, is also good. He created the world for a good purpose with a good intention. But nature is not infinitely good since this can be defected and diminished; a diminished good results to the presence evil. Evil is dependent on the good and not the other way around. Thus, there can be good without evil, but there cannot be evil without good.[18] It is the good – the substance, that exists; it comes in different varieties – higher and lower, greater and lesser goods. And everything that has substance is created by God and is good, except in so far as it may have become defected.[19]

Philosopher and theologian John Hick further adds to St. Augustine’s explanation on the existence of evil. Hick divides his discussion into two: moral evil and non-moral evil. Moral evil is always connected to man’s freedom and responsibility. Human freedom means that man has the responsibility in choosing his own decisions. With this, he is free to choose whether he will choose the right or wrong action. Thus, with the gift of freewill, it is not guaranteed that he will never choose the wrong action. Human error is part of man’s finite being. Saying that God should have not created people who might sin is the same as saying that He should not have created human beings at all.[20]

It is important to note that “free action” means that the act should not be caused externally. Instead, the action must flow from the agent’s nature as he reacts to the situation he is in. It is wrong to say that our actions are predestined, as there will be a contradiction when we state that God created us as free beings. If man’s actions are predestined and planned by God, then man is not morally responsible for the choices we made. Hick compares this to a patient under the influence of hypnosis, where the patient is under the illusion of being free. In this situation, the hypnotist has already predetermined the patient’s actions, consequently making the hypnotist the external cause controlling the patient’s actions.[21]

Hick also counters the argument against God’s omnipotence and inability to create a free being who is free from evil caused by personal freedom. The argument is impossible based on logic. God can create all kinds of creatures, and not creating something logically impossible does not limit His omnipotence. Also, creatures who lack moral freedom are not real human beings. God created human beings capable of creating a personal relationship with God by choice. He created human beings to be His children, free to respond to His love. If all of these beings were compelled to respond to His love, then the relationship is not real and personal.[22]

Hick concludes his explanation of moral evil by stating that sufferings such as war, oppression, poverty and, injustice are caused by man’s cruelty. These remind us of human sin, which constitute the major part of the existence of suffering.[23]

On the other hand, non-moral evil such as earthquakes, typhoons, and drought is the smaller source of suffering. It is part of the structure of how the world was created. This raises the question of why did not God create a hedonistic paradise. Skeptics argue that man completes God’s creation; God’s purpose of creating the world is to provide an abode for man. And since God is all-good and loving, He should have created a pleasant and comfortable world for man to live in. However, based on Christianity, Hick argues that the world is not really meant to be a paradise. The world was created as a place of “soul-making”. As children of God created in His image, human beings are to be molded as heirs of eternal life, capable of enduring the challenges in life. This world is the second stage of the creation process for man.[24]

Hick supports this through negative theodicy, showing that without evil, there would be no divine purpose for man. Suppose that suffering did not exist at all. There would be no accidents; a child who fell off the ground will not be hurt. A bank will miraculously receive the amount of the lost money each time it is robbed. In this kind of world, there would be no such thing as science and laws of nature as each situation adjusts. An object would sometimes be hard or soft, depending on which characteristic will not cause pain in the situation. In this kind of world, there would be no need for man to exert effort to work. There would be no such thing as concern for others in times of need. Thus, the concept of ethics and values such as love, courage, perseverance, and the like will lose meaning.[25] We must understand that evil has to exist and theodicy points to life after death. Hick explains that challenges in life evoke courage, strength, and other values, but they can also lead to anger, fear, selfishness, and the like. Therefore, he says:

“It would seem that any divine purpose of soul-making which is at work in earthly history must continue beyond this life if it is ever to achieve more than a very partial and fragmentary success”[26]

Hick also explains that if we ask ourselves if all the suffering is worth the soul-making process, then the Christian answer must refer to the future good which greatly justifies everything experienced in the process.[27]

Conclusion

Evil and suffering are not evidence against God but are actually evidence of His existence. God is all-loving and all-powerful, and He wants us to turn to Him in times of suffering. He did not create evil but He did create the good and created us with the responsibility of freewill. As Timothy O’ Connell explains in Principles of Catholic Morality, our actions reveal the “fundamental