Problem of suffering

[Christopher Encapera]

Recently, I have read a couple of Orthodox sources (can't find anything on the web at the moment - sorry) that seem to make an identification of suffering with "growth". The idea seems to be a Christianized version of "what does not kill us makes us stronger", and seems to be infused with a large portion of modern pop psychology. My first reaction is that this in some ways trivializes the reality and mystery of evil. Not sure I can say that Job the Righteous experienced "healthy spiritual growth" Can anyone point me to someplace in the Philokilia, or other Orthodox source that speaks directly to the meaning of suffering? Thanks in advance!

[Alex Haig]

Is this not the way of the Christian, that he "deny himself, take up his cross and follow me [Christ]" (Luke 9:23)? Taking up a cross is not an easy thing to do, to follow Christ in this way may incure suffering but it leads to redemption.

With love in Christ

Alex

[George K.]

The problem of suffering, as I see it, is that we do not want to learn patience.

Forgive me.
gk

[Christopher Encapera]

Alex and George,

If I may answer in a way that might seem brash (I don't mean it to be); If what you say is true, why do we call the Evil one evil? Why not (dogmatically speaking) call him "the teacher" in the sense that he teaches us patience, or "the obstacle" in the sense that suffering of evil is not really a suffering of evil - it is the healthy pain of the workout as the muscles get stronger. To put it another way, what was the meaning of Job's suffering? Was he simply "impatient"?

[Owen Jones]

There is a common sense understanding of evil that most everyone has. We are all equal in that we are all capable of and doers of evil.

Then there is the speculative understanding of evil, wherein we struggle for its meaning, for some reason behind it, and try to make distinctions between God and the existence of evil, which can only end up in acceptance of paradox and mystery. There is no explanation for evil. There is no particular or absolute reason why there should be evil. If we knew that, we would be inside God's mind.

If we want to resort to cheap, infantile responses, we simply blame God for evil, or blame other people for the evil that befalls us. One speculation is that Adam suffered from an immature or infantile mind which led him to blame Eve for his disobedience. We can all "relate" to that I'm sure.

The one basic teaching on evil shared by the philosophers and the Church is that it is more just to suffer evil than to commit evil.

[George K.]

Christopher,

Suffering is a remedy for our sins which one can say they are the offspring of base pleasures. If you recall, after Adam's transgression the first "punishment" he received was that of suffering pain in working the earth (of the heart) and eating his bread (virtues) - and hence growing spiritually.

As for Job's suffering, Abba Dorotheos, in his "Practical Teaching on the Christian Life" has a good answer:

In truth, whatever we may suffer, we suffer it because of our sins. If the saints suffered, they suffered for God's name or to demonstrate their virtue for the benefit of many or to gain greater reward from God (the case with Job). As for us wretches, how can we say this? We sin like this daily and in seeking to satisfy our passion, we abandoned the right path, which the Fathers spoke about, that of self-accusation. Each one of us follows the wrong path, tries on every occasion to put the case against his brother and throw the burden of responsibility upon him. Each one of us is negligent and keeps nothing, but demands that our neighbor keeps the commandments.

Forgive me,
gk

[Christopher Encapera]

Thanks for the quote, this is exactly what I am looking for. If anyone else knows of anymore sources, please let me know. I am particularly interested in the Fathers who speak to the distinction between the suffering of evil due to our own sins, and suffering "for" other reasons, such as Job. Thanks!

Thanks!

[Owen Jones]

Note the paradox in the statement by Abba Dorotheos. He distinguishes between himself and the saints, who found their path to holiness by practicing what he says applies to him, not the saints!

[Christopher Encapera]

Owen,

What you say in your last post again reminds me of Job. Did his friends not accuse him of having insufficient self accusation? Also, concerning your previous post, Job insists that God would justify him - even as God inflicts undeserved suffering on him (as opposed to his friends, who insist that Job is being punished for sin). God Justifies Job, not his accusers. Yet, Job demands a response of God. He does not strike me as being overly speculative, at least the question does not arise out of some ill will in his heart. Yet, God answers with "Where were you..." and Job "repents"... "in dust and ashes"...so in a sense it is something that, rather evil is or is not too large for our mind, God has allowed it to remain a mystery. All that being said, I am interested in what has been Revealed to us (by God) about the nature and meaning of Evil, and what the Fathers have to say about it...

[Owen Jones]

I'm sure that various Fathers have something to say about evil, but what is significant is how little, frankly, our tradition says about evil. It rarely addresses the issue of evil per se, other than through exegesis of Biblical texts which provide us various compact images of evil influence. The primary patristic focus and really throughout our tradition is on God's goodness and the acquisition of the virtues so that we can be god-like, while identifying the typical obstacles in our path so that we can be on our guard and anticipate evil suggestion before it takes over our free will. The problem of evil as a kind of theory of evil is more typically a modernist issue. The need for a "theodicy" looms large in post-Enlightenment philosophy. Of course, I can't help it, but Plato describes a Sophist as one who is more consumed by the problem of evil than with the nature of the good. The Church's focus is the same, evil will take care of itself if we focus our attention on the good.

[Byron Jack Gaist]

It seems to me that Owen's emphasis on cultivating the good, rather than being preoccupied with the nature of evil, is probably closer to Christian praxis. In his book, "The Orthodox Way", Bishop Kallistos explains that God and the devil have a "direct relationship", "of which we know nothing at all, and about which it is not wise for us to speculate".

Nevertheless, the problem of suffering has preoccupied many fathers and saints. One thing that puzzles me personally is the nature of predestination and its relationship to the Divine Will. Is everything that happens ultimately a fulfillment of God's will? One Russian prayer says "all eventualities fulfill thy Holy Will". If Satan is ultimately incapable of acting outside of God's plan for creation, then does God indeed, as Rev Thomas Hopko suggests, "send" us our suffering through the operations of the devil? His justice is an impenetrable mystery, a perspective inaccessible to human beings. St Isaak of Syria says (approximately, I can't recall the exact quote so please correct me) that God is unjust, because if he were just, we would not be permitted to continue to sin. This does not seem an easy teaching, and the restless mind remains perplexed as to why.

Yours in Christ,

Byron

[Tom Lovering]

It is a subject which I have been discussing recently. The nature of predestination and Divine Will is a tough one, but I would explain it by saying that God has given us freedom, and given Satan freedom which he has misused. In his love he offers us this respect, since love cannot exist without respect. Also, if they who are saved are to be deified in the next life, surely they cannot be slaves. How can we be "in God's image" if He enslaves us to his will. It is only in surrendering ourselves to His will, in accordance with our own will that deification can take place. However, most of us fail in complete surrender to His will, and many do not even want to achieve this, hence we get suffering in this world.

[Fr Aaron Warwick]

I would recommend checking out the following website and reading chapters 19-21: http://www.orthodox.net/fathers/exactiv.html#BOOK_IV_CHAPTER_XIX

I particularly liked the following quote from St. John Damascene: "But if the very existence of those, who through the goodness of God are in the future to exist, were to be prevented by the fact that they were to become evil of their own choice, evil would have prevailed over the goodness of God."

I also plan to post a relevant section from the Unseen Warfare later today, God willing.

Aaron

[one more from housewife]

My little faith, my fearful soul! Shame you, my friend for that!
Look at Martyrs greatest strength; thank them for all of that!
In all my trials and my fears, let’s say as always that:
You’re not shedding your blood, my friend, not yet, so don’t forget!
All suffers and all crying what you have, not worth a tiny drop of blood…
Blood of the purest souls and lives, which you simply forgot…
The flowing blood of all the wounds, all breaking bones and skin…
My friend how ugly we are here, without all those wounds…
The beauty of their faith is shine, forever and for all!
The more they suffered, more they had a joy! My God, how great their souls!
They’re glorified Your Name for us! They are proclaimed Your Love!
The Love which always in the midst of those who are tide up with God!
Like chain, or rope, or tightest bond, they are connect to You!
And nothing ever in this life can separates, or take away from You!
Not any torture, any pain, no fear or even death, can change their minds,
In order to betrayed You! Learn and obey, my friend!
We have no suffers, we’re so clean, no blood or any pain! Shame!
Shame on you, my friend for that! How dare you cry and fear!
O Martyrs! O my Loving Saints! I kneel before you all! I kiss your wounds,
I praise your souls! I want to learn and learn!
Teach me my God! Fulfilled me with Your Love! Give me a strength for this:
To praise Your Name, right in the midst of pain and be forever one of these:
Who shed their blood, for You with joy! Who praise You during pain!
Who never was complained or feared, who totally obeyed!
Obeyed from Love, they did like You! Because they were the one!
One with the Master and the Life! With You my Loving GOD!

[Owen Jones]

But this does not explain why an innocent child suffers, or why often the holiest of people are subject to inexplicable cruelties while the most evil people get away with their crimes. The mystery of suffering for no good reason is at the heart of the Christian experience. Remember, Christ was confronted by the Pharisees who demanded to know who sinned, the man or his parents, that he was born blind. And Jesus said there was no sin! Suffering per se is not to be equated with evil or sin, which is what makes Christian faith such a challenge for most people who demand certitude and fixed answers to their questions, and a guarentee policy on their purchase.

A very fine commentary on this is to be found in MAtthew the Poor's Communion of Love published by SVS Press.

[oh... a housewife's answer...]

Why innocent one suffering, why holy peole suffering??? Do you forgot WERE we live now...The Royal Door loked....Don't you forget? The sword turning all direction in order to kill those who wants to SNEAK into Paradise...So don't try as many do, to make earthly paradise, without suffering, BECAUSE even unrepented sinner will suffer in Paradise...So i guess it is FEAR to holy one or innocent one suffers here in this wordly hell!!!

[Fr Aaron Warwick]

Please forgive the length. I hope that Christopher and others find these quotes from the Unseen Warfare beneficial:

"Just as it is a pressing duty of every Christian when he loses his peace of heart to do all he can to restore it, so is it no less obligatory for him to allow no accidental happenings of life to disturb this peace; I mean illness, wounds, death of relatives, wars, fires, sudden joys, fears and sorrows, memories of former sins and errors, etc...I do not mean to say you must not admit sorrow, for this is not in our power. What I mean is--do not let sorrow take possession of your heart...Each afflictions has its own peculiarities and each requires its own remedies...having in mind a general remedy: faith in the good Providence, which arranges the course of our life with all its accidental happenings, for the good of each of us...As the Lord wills, so let it be, and be for our good."

"This good is realized and felt differently by different people. One realizes: this goodness of God's leads me to repentance; another feels: it is because of my sins that the Lord has sent me this trial, to purify me of them; I am bearing God's penance; a third thinks: the Lord is testing me, whether I serve Him sincerely. Those who look from outside at a man subjected to afflictions may think the fourth: this is sent him, that the workds of God may be revealed in him. But such a verdict can be in place only when affliction is ended, and when God's help is evident in the soul of the afflicted man. Only the first three feelings should have place. No matter which of them enters the heart, each has the virtue and strength to still the rising storm of sorrow and establish peace and good cheer in the heart."

And in another chapter: "When God sends such circumstances" (i.e. circumstances which seem to us to impede our freedom in doing good, such as illnesses), "He expects nothing more from you than that you should conduct yourself and act as the occasion demands, within the possibilities it offers. Whether you are sick or poor, endure it. God demands of you nothing but to endure. Enduring with a good heart, you will be constantly occupied in good, whereas if a man enjoys good health his good actions are intermittent. So if you wish for a change in your position, you wish to exchange better for worse."

And in another chapter: "When I say that nothing can happen to you except by God's will, I mean the afflictions and privations, which God sends to admonish and teach us or to punish us for our sins, but I do not mean your own or other people's sins themselves, since God does not wish sins. These trials are salutary for us and are rightly called a saving cross, which He often imposes on His best beloved and on those who strive to please Him, and the bearing of which is especially welcome to Him."

"And when I said: do not wish to be rid of afflictions, it must be rightly understood in the sense of submission to God's will. We cannot help wishing to be free of sorrows, for God Himself placed in our nature the desire for well-being, and so included in the prayer He Himself gave us the request: 'Lead us not into temptation,' which we repeat several times a day. In repeating this prayer, mean by it: 'Not as I will, but as thou wilt.'"

Aaron

[Christopher Encapera]

Thanks for the quotes and recommended reading!

I am struck by St John Damascene:

"...is permission, therefore, is usually spoken of in the Holy Scripture as His energy and work. Nay, even when He says that God creates evil things, and that there is no evil in a city that the Lord hath not done, he does not mean by these words(5) that the Lord is the cause of evil, but the word 'evil(6)' is used in two ways, with two meanings. For sometimes it means what is evil by nature, and this is the opposite of virtue and the will of God: and sometimes it means that which is evil and oppressive to our sensation, that is to say, afflictions and calamities. Now these are seemingly evil because they are painful, but in reality are good. For to those who understand they became ambassadors of conversion and salvation. The Scripture says that of these God is the Author.

It is, moreover, to be observed that of these, too, we are the cause: for involuntary evils are the offspring of voluntary ones(7). "

The last sentence again links involuntary suffering to sin. Is St. John here siding with Job's friends? Somewhere, Vladimir Lossky refers to Job as "that curious book", and perhaps for this reason - it seems to stand separate in that it does not seem to say Job deserved his suffering. Do any of the commentaries here recommended directly comment on this seeming tension with the Tradition? Or am I seeing something that is not really there? I am thinking of Byron's quote of St Isaak also.

Owen rightly points out that humility is a pre-requisite to any real faith in Christianity, or any other super-natural "explanation" of our condition. Although, I would not put it exactly as "The mystery of suffering for no good reason is at the heart of the Christian experience." because the "reason" is simply unknowable at the moment, and probably in this age "now we see through a glass darkly". St. Theophan points out that Christianity is of the heart, not of the mind. And yet, we yearn to know. Any one ever read Victor Frankl's "Man's search for Meaning"? Would you say it is an error on Frankls part - or rather it is a result of the Fall that man searches for meaning in his condition, which can be (as it was for Frankl in the death camps of Nazi Germany) unbelievably evil and horrible. Can we really say, as St John does, that the evil is only apparent - that "Now these are seemingly evil because they are painful, but in reality are good." I do not find this answer satisfactory at all. Am I demanding to know what I can not know, "a certitude" as Owen puts it where God wills there to be none. I again think of Job, who does indeed in the end seem to have shown insufficient humility if anything - for what else did he repent of? - and perhaps this was the "good" that came from his sufferings...

[tired housewife]

This IS words of repentance:

I only know, that i don't know anything...

I guess, that what JOB said at the last...

[George K.]

Personally, when tempted by the spirit of inquisitiveness, I find refuge in the following story, quoted by Elder Paisios:

An ascetic was praying to God asking Him to reveal why the righteous and pious people are miserable and suffer unjustly, whereas the unrighteous and sinful ones are rich and contented. While he was asking God to reveal to him this mystery, he heard a voice saying to him:

“Do not ask to comprehend what your mind and power of knowledge cannot grasp and do not examine the mysteries of God, as His judgments are like an endless ocean. However, since you wish to know, go out there in the world and watch carefully the people, and you will be able to understand a small part of God’s judgment. Then, you will know that God’s prudent governing is unexplored and inscrutable.”

When the ascetic heard all this, he left for the world. After walking for a while, he reached a meadow. There was a fountain nearby and an old tree with a large hollow. He hid inside the hollow, in order to watch the street passing by the meadow. After a while, a rich man passed by riding his horse. He stopped by the fountain to drink some water and rest. While he was sitting there, he took a purse out of his pocket containing one hundred golden coins, and started counting them. When he finished counting, he mistakenly left the purse on the grass instead of putting it in his pocket. After he ate, he rested and slept for a while, and then took off without realizing that he had left his purse on the grass.

After some time, another passer-by appeared. He stopped by the fountain, and when he saw the purse with the golden coins, he took it and left running in the fields. A few minutes later, a third man came along. As he was tired, he too went by the fountain to drink some water and sat to eat a piece of bread. As this poor man was eating, the rich man came back to look for his purse. He had an extremely angry look on his face and went straight to him, shouting in a rage and demanding his purse. The poor man, though, who had no idea about the purse and the golden coins, assured him that he had not seen it. Then, the rich man began beating him up so badly that he finally killed him. He searched through his clothes and found nothing. He left feeling very sad.

The ascetic was watching the incident sitting inside the hollow and was astounded. He felt very sad and began to cry, feeling sorry for the unjust death of the poor man and prayed to God:
“Lord, what is the meaning of this will of Yours? Let me know how Your kindness can tolerate such an injustice. Someone lost the coins; another man found them and a third man was unjustly murdered!”

As he was praying and crying, an angel of the Lord appeared and told him:
“Do not feel sorry for the poor man, nor think that this incident is not the will of God. Bear in mind that some things occur, either because God permits them to, or in order to instruct people or because He causes them to happen for our benefit.

Now, listen: The man who lost the golden coins is the next-door neighbor of the one who found them. He owned a farm worth one hundred golden coins. The rich man, who was an avaricious person, forced him to sell his farm to him for only fifty golden coins. The second man, feeling helpless, prayed to God to punish his unjust neighbor on his behalf. And God rewarded him in double. The third man, the tired and poor one, who was unjustly killed, had once committed a murder. He had honestly repented and lived the rest of his life according to God’s will. He constantly prayed to God to forgive him and said to Him: ‘God, let me have the same kind of death as the one I gave.' Of course, our Lord had forgiven him since the first time he expressed his repentance for his sinful act. However, He was moved by the sensitivity and righteousness of this man, who not only tried to live according to His will, but also wished to pay back for his sinful act. So God fulfilled his wish and gave him the chance to experience a violent death, - as he himself had ask for – and took him to heaven by His side, granting him a glorious laurel for his deep and responsive repentance!

The rich man, who lost the golden coins and committed the murder, had fallen in two sins, avarice and stinginess. God permitted a violent murder to be committed, so that he may experience pain, which in turn, would lead him to repentance. The sin of murder turned out to be a cause for his decision to leave the world and become a monk, thus devoting himself to God.

So, where and under what circumstances do you see that God was unjust, merciless and cruel? You should not examine God’s judgments, as He always makes them correctly and according to the ways He knows, whereas you misjudge them and find them unjust. You should also know that many things happen with God’s will for reasons that even we, the angels, do not know. Therefore, the right thing for us to say is: “Righteous art thou, O Lord, and right are thy judgments” (Ps 118:137).

Forgive me,
gk

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Christopher E. wrote above, "it seems to stand separate in that it does not seem to say Job deserved his suffering. Do any of the commentaries here recommended directly comment on this seeming tension with the Tradition?"

The standard patristic interpretation of Job stresses how suffering follows God's providential plan for us. In one way Job is an image of the innocent much-suffering Christ (that is why this book is read during Passion Week). But in another way Job is an image of Christian suffering. Of course there is the suffering which results directly from specific sins- this is the pleasure/pain principle built into creation after the Fall which St Maximos the Confessor refers to. But there are also the various trials we endure in life. The humble man ascribes all to his sinfulness & sees himself as deserving anything allowed by God. But we, looking at the suffering of others can see there is not a one to one relationship between suffering & personal sin. After all, this is exactly the incorrect & tormenting accusation that Job's friends kept hurling at him- "to suffer like this you must have done something terrible!"

Christian suffering shares in the suffering caused by sin & death of the whole world not bound by time or place- & the Christian suffers in Christ so that through this suffering he finds Life- a Life which in turn he shares with the whole world. It is only because we suffer in Christ that this suffering becomes redemptive rather than destructive or masochistic.

You also wrote: "Any one ever read Victor Frankl's "Man's search for Meaning"?" Yes but a very long time ago. But I do remember how much it moved me especially as I grew up among those who had directly suffered from the experience Frankl describes- the Holocaust.

"Would you say it is an error on Frankls part - or rather it is a result of the Fall that man searches for meaning in his condition, which can be (as it was for Frankl in the death camps of Nazi Germany) unbelievably evil and horrible."

This period in our history was an exact image of the depravity of the Fall & of what can happen when we try to set up our own 'paradise' without Christ or God. But the efffort to understand what happened and why is not fallen. The Jews ask the same question we do- why innocent suffering? But I think we can see that without Christ there are many dead ends in the attempt to answer this terrible question. Maybe this is so because their understanding of Holocaust even though it is originally from the Old Testament & thus Scriptural became secularised- it never did end up in a martyric understanding of suffering. Only the martyric is redemptive. So the Jews are left with a legacy of political genocide & this causes them to think that the only defense is a political one.

"Can we really say, as St John does, that the evil is only apparent - that "Now these are seemingly evil because they are painful, but in reality are good." I do not find this answer satisfactory at all."

St. John does not mean that these things are not caused by evil. Rather he is referring to the redemptive power of Christian suffering which transforms evil into good for the one who suffers. The person who does the evil must still however account for his evil action.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Christopher Encapera]

Fr. Raphael,

So we come full circle: the meaning of suffering is a mystery, and only thing that we know about it in this age is that it is ultimately a good for us. The articles that got me thinking about this, putting it in seeming modern psycho babble terms of "growth" are not wrong too far off the mark.

For me, personally, I sometimes too little realize what a sadness it can be to be an Orthodox Christian. I know Frankl is right: That I yearn for real and abiding meaning to my life and the world around me. In this sense, I too am thoroughly "modern". Yet, to be a Christian is too realize that Evil, the Good, the meaning of suffering - all these things are beyond my understanding. This is against my worldly habit of mind. I certainly can not go about my relationships like this - I have to apply my will and understanding if I am to get along with my wife and family. I can't go about at work like this - I am paid to apply my discursive understanding to contain and solve problems. Imagine driving a car, running a household, doing almost anything where the subject was not in some way basically understood. Of course, we are not to live a "worldly" life - and yet, here we are, born into sins. Born into the world, yet called to put it aside. It is eminently rational to realize the limits of rationality. Still, no wonder man finds it so hard to be a Christian, and perhaps modern man most of all.

The Christian should never judge another, not only because he accepts God's will not judge another, but also because in a deep sense he has given up 'judgment' as a modus vivendi all together!!

[Christopher Encapera]

Re-reading my last post, a saw it as interpreting Christianity in a very anti rational and thus anti-humane way. This made me think of the first chapter of Dumitru Staniloae 's "The Experience of God":

"...According to our faith, however, the order of meanings cannot be left out of account. Meanings are real and man cannot live without them. he cannot endure to live without a consciousness of meanings and without pursuing them, for they culminate in a final meaning which man is convinced he will attain beyond death. If man were to dispute the reality of these meanings, his would the unhappiest of existences....Through his consciousness, man is not content to lead an existence the meaning of which is to serve - without realizing it - a higher level of created reality, a level with which man would end his own existence."

Now, Fr. Staniloae is mostly speaking to the opposite direction - to those who argue for a Epicurean "purposeless" universe. But in a sense Christianity does not give any real answers the other way either. It places the "final meaning" to be attained "beyond death". We are to simply, and ultimately endure this life by following the commandments. Real meaning is not to be found here. True, we are not to serve a mindless and purposeless universe which somehow created itself (modern cosmology). On the other hand, we are to serve our God looking for a meaning which is not-yet, and indeed we are assured meaning (and thus true joy) will not be in this world! No wonder some judge this to be hardly any better!!

[Kenneth Mc Rae]

The Teachings of Blessed Seraphim Rose on Suffering Orthodoxy :-

1 - On Being Crucified for Christ

Let us not, who would be Christians, expect anything else from [the world] than to be crucified. For to be Christian is to be crucified, in this time and in any time since Christ came for the first time. His life is the example--and warning--to us all. We must be crucified personally, mystically; for through crucifixion is the only path to resurrection. If we would rise with Chrit, we must first be humbled with Him--even to the ultimate humiliation, being devoured and spit forth by the uncomprehending world.

And we must be crucified outwardly, in the eyes of the world; for Christ's Kingdom is not of this world, and the world cannot bear it, even a single representative of it, even for a single moment. The world can only accept Antichrist, now or at any time.

No wonder, then, that it is hard to be a Christian--it is not hard, it is impossible. No one can knowingly accept a way of life which, the more truly it is lived, leads the more surely to one's own destruction. And that is why we constantly rebel, try to make life easier, try to be half-Christian, try to make the best of both worlds. We must ultimately choose--our felicity lies in one world or the other, not in both.

God give us the strength to pursue the path to crucifixion; there is no other way to be a Christian.

----Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 159

2 - On Pain of Heart I

In the patristic writings, "pain of heart" generally refers to an elemental inward suffering, the bearing of an interior cross while following Jesus Christ, and a spirit broken in contrition. "Suffering," Fr. Seraphim stated, "is the reality of the human condition and the beginning of the true spiritual life." From Archbishop John, who had utterly crucified himself in this life, Fr. Seraphim had learned how to endure this suffering in thankfulness to God, and from him he had learned its fruits. If used in the right way, suffering can purify the heart, and the pure in heart . . . shall see God (Matt. 5:8). "The right approach," wrote Fr. Seraphim, "is found in the heart which tries to humble itself and simply knows that it is suffering, and that there somehow exists a higher truth which can not only help this suffering, but can bring it into a totally different dimension." According to St. Mark the ascetic (fifth century), "Remembrance of God is pain of heart enduring in the spirit of devotion. But he who forgets God becomes self-indulgent and insensitive." And in the words of St. Barsanuphius the Great of Egypt, whose counsels Fr. Seraphim translated into English, "Every gift is received through pain of heart."

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 471

3 - On Pain of Heart II

Besides its general meaning, "pain of heart" has a literal meaning in the writings of the Fathers, for when the heart is concentrated in fervent prayer to Christ, it may actually be pained. As Fr. Seraphim noted, in Patristic terminology, the "heart" does not mean mere
"feeling," but "something much deeper--the organ that knows God." The heart is both spiritual and physical: spiritually, it is the center of man's being, identified with his nous (spirit); physically, it is the organ where the nous finds its secret dwelling place. Concentrated within the physical heart, the nous cries out to the Saviour, and such a heart-cry--born in pain and desperation, yet hoping in God--calls down Divine grace. This is seen especially in the Orthodox practice of the Jesus Prayer. When we approach the Jesus Prayer simply, says Elder Paisios of Mount Athos (†1994), "we will be able to repeat it many times, and our heart will feel a sweet pain and then Christ Himself will shed His sweet consolation inside our heart."

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, pp. 471-472

4 - On Pain of Heart III

"The Patristic teaching on pain of heart," Fr. Seraphim wrote, "is one of the most important teaching for our days when 'head-knowledge' is so over-emphasized at the expense of the proper development of emotional and spiritual life . . . The lack of this essential experience is what above all is responsible for the dilettantism, the triviality, the want of seriousness in the ordinary study of the Holy Fathers today; without it , one cannot apply the teachings of the Holy Fathers to one's own life. One may attain to the very highest level of understanding with the mind of the teaching of the Holy Fathers, may have 'at one's fingertips' quotes from the Holy Fathers on every conceivable subject, may have 'spiritual experiences' which seem to be those described in the Patristic books, may even know perfectly all the pitfalls into which it is possible to fall in spiritual life--and still, without pain of heart, one can be a barren fig tree, a boring 'know-it-all' who is always 'correct,' or an adept in all the present-day 'charismatic' experiences, who does not know and cannot convey the true spirit of the Holy Fathers."

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 472

5 - On Pain of Heart IV

Why do there seem to be so few miracles in our days? It is because, believed Fr. Seraphim, there is so little pain of heart.

In a little handwritten note, hidden away and discovered man years after his death, Fr. Seraphim crystallized into a few words the essence of a great truth for our times:
"Pain of heart is the condition for spiritual growth and the manifestation of God's power. Healings, etc., occur to those in desperation, hearts pained but still trusting and hoping in God's help. This is when God acts. The absence of miracles today (almost) indicates lack of this pain of heart in man and even most Orthodox Christians--bound up with the 'growing cold' of hearts in the last times."

A proof of this statement can be seen in Fr. Seraphim's own experience, out of which it of course came. . . . All the miracles that Fr. Seraphim had witnessed in his own life, including those of the greatest miracle-worker Archbishop John, had resulted from the prayers of hearts which did not shrink from the pain of Golgotha.

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 795

6 - On the Struggle in the Saving of One's Soul

“We are told by the Holy Fathers,” Eugene [Fr. Seraphim] explained elsewhere, “that we are supposed to see in everything something for our salvation. If you can do this, you can be saved.

“In a pedestrian way, you can look at something like a printing press which does not operate. You are standing around and enjoying yourself, watching nice, clean, good pages come out printed, which gives a very nice sense of satisfaction, and you are dreaming of missionary activity, of spreading more copies around to a lot of different countries. But in a while it begins to torture you, to shoot pages right and left. The pages begin to stick and to tear each other on top. You see that all those extra copies you made are vanishing, destroying each other, and in the end you are so tense that all you can do is sort of stand there and say the Jesus Prayer as you try to make everything come out all right. Although that does not fill one with a sense of satisfaction (as would watching the nice, clean copies come out automatically), spiritually it probably does a great deal more, because it makes you tense and gives you the chance to struggle. But if instead of that you just get so discouraged that you smash the machine, then you have lost the battle. The battle is not how many copies per hour come out: the battle is what your soul is doing. If your soul can be saved while producing words that can save others, all the better; but if you are producing words that can save others and are all the time destroying your own soul, it's not so good.”

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 380

7 - On Suffering

Why do men learn through pain and suffering, and not through pleasure and happiness? Very simply, because pleasure and happiness accustom one to satisfaction with the things given in this world, whereas pain and suffering drive one to seek a more profound happiness beyond the limitations of this world. I am at this moment in some pain, and I call on the Name of Jesus--not necessarily to relieve the pain, but that Jesus, in Whom alone we may transcend this world, may be with me during it, and His will be done in me. But in pleasure I do not call on Him; I am content then with what I have, and I think I need no more. And why is a philosophy of pleasure untenable?--because pleasure is impermanent and unreliable, and pain is inevitable. In pain and suffering Christ speaks to us, and thus God is kind to give them to us, yes, and evil too--for in all of these we glimpse something of what must lie beyond, if there really exists what our hearts most deeply desire.

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 163

8 - On Suffering and Growth

We who are trying to acquire basic Christian knowledge and understanding must do so by means of trials; we must be tested and thereby become sober and discerning. At the same time, in the midst of this, seeing all kinds of tragedies around us, we must be joyful, knowing that the end of the contest is the end of this whole corruptibel world. If we prepare ourselves with the knowledge born of spiritual struggle, we will be able to recognize Christ when He comes. But if we do not recognize the signs of the times and the Antichrist, and if we do not have Christ dwelling in our hearts, then when Christ comes we will be with those nations which will be lamenting because they are with Antichrist. They will see Christ coming, and all their Christianity will have been proved false.

--Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works, p. 1054

9 - On the Daily Struggle of Salvation in Christ

[T]he less you think of spiritual life in the abstract and the more you are just struggling in the labors of daily life, praying according to your strength . . . the better for you. Orient yourself towards zealous Orthodoxy, and then just struggle from day to day, and God will give you wisdom.

--Letters from Father Seraphim, p. 133

[Link] (http://www.chattablogs.com/hagioipateres/archives/cat_fr_seraphim_rose_of_platina.html)


(Message edited by admin on 06 January, 2005)

[Kenneth Mc Rae]

While Eckhart is not of the Orthodox Way, I find his teachings on this subject to be very close to it, and thus risk censure in posting them. Forgive me, please, for Christ's sake, if anyone should find them offensive ...

Meister Eckhart on Pain and Suffering :-

1 - To serve God with fear is good; to serve Him out of love is better; but to fear and love Him together is best of all. To have a restful or peaceful life in God is good; to bear a life of pain in patience is better; but to have peace in the midst of pain is the best of all. ( The Nearness of the Kingdom )

2 - Now, how is the soul to arrive at this heavenly state that it recognizes God in itself, and knows that He is near? By copying the heavens, which can receive no impulse from without to mar their tranquility. Thus must the soul, which would know God, be rooted and grounded in Him so steadfastly, as to suffer no perturbation of fear or hope, or joy or sorrow, or love or hate, or anything which may disturb its peace. ( The Nearness of the Kingdom )

3 - The man who abides in the will of God wills nothing else than what God is, and what He wills. If he were ill he would not wish to be well. If he really abides in God's will, all pain is to him a joy, all complication, simple: yea, even the pains of hell would be a joy to him. He is free and gone out from himself, and from all that he receives, he must be free. If my eye is to discern colour, it must itself be free from all colour. The eye with which I see God is the same with which God sees me. My eye and God's eye is one eye, and one sight, and one knowledge, and one love. ( True Hearing )

4 - This is the chief significance of the suffering of Christ for us, that we cast all our grief into the ocean of His suffering. If thou sufferest only regarding thyself, from whatever cause it may be, that suffering causes grief to thee, and is hard to bear. But if thou sufferest regarding God and Him alone, that suffering is not grievous, nor hard to bear, because God bears the load. The love of the Cross must swallow up our personal grief. Whoso does not suffer from love, for him sorrow is sorrow and grievous to bear; but whoso suffers from love he sorrows not, and his suffering is fruitful in God. Therefore is sorrow so noble; he who sorrows most is the noblest. Now no mortal's sorrow was like the sorrow which Christ bore; therefore he is far nobler than any man. Verily were there anything nobler than sorrow, God would have redeemed man thereby. Sorrow is the root of all virtue.

5 - Now, all thoughtful folk, mark me! no one can be truly happy, except he who abides in the strictest sanctification. No bodily and fleshly delight can ever take place without spiritual loss, for the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh. Therefore, the more a man fleeth from the created, the more the Creator hastens to him. And consider this: if the pleasure we take in the outward image of our Lord Jesus Christ diminishes our capacity for receiving the Holy Spirit, how much more must our unbridled desire for earthly comforts diminish it! ( Sanctification )

6 - This passage from nothingness to real being, this quitting of oneself is a birth accompanied by pain, for by it natural love is excluded. All grief except grief for sin comes from love of the world. In God is neither sorrow, nor grief, nor trouble. Wouldst thou be free from all grief and trouble, abide and walk in God, and to God alone. As long as love of the creature is in us, pain cannot cease.

7 - The man who has truly renounced himself and does not once cast a glance on what he has renounced, and thus remains immovable and unalterable, that man alone has really renounced self. ( True Hearing )

[Christopher Encapera]

With the recent tsunami we have an image of random evil set lose in the world. The impersonal powers of nature being the immediate cause of much suffering and grief. David Hart had a short essay published in the Wall Street Journal here:

http://opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110006097

where he agrees with what Owen Jones wrote above: "The Christian understanding of evil has always been more radical and fantastic than that of any theodicist; for it denies from the outset that suffering, death and evil have any ultimate meaning at all...When confronted by the sheer savage immensity of worldly suffering--when we see the entire littoral rim of the Indian Ocean strewn with tens of thousands of corpses, a third of them children's--no Christian is licensed to utter odious banalities about God's inscrutable counsels or blasphemous suggestions that all this mysteriously serves God's good ends. We are permitted only to hate death and waste and the imbecile forces of chance that shatter living souls, to believe that creation is in agony in its bonds, to see this world as divided between two kingdoms--knowing all the while that it is only charity that can sustain us against "fate," and that must do so until the end of days."

My favorite magazine, Touchstone, has a good blog called "Mere Comments". A reader responded to Hart's essay and Hart answered here (under the title 'Luse and Hart on the Meaning of Suffering':

http://merecomments.typepad.com/

Hart expands on his theme:

"...Still, the notion that the suffering of, say, dying babies somehow participates in Christ's suffering and is part of some vast providential calculus whereby God balances accounts is a Stoic parody of Christian orthodoxy, and were it true Christian teaching I should advocate apostasy. There is no biblical or doctrinal warrant for such a view. Yes, the deaths of innocents are indeed meaningless, even if God's providence will indeed bring good from that evil; there is no spiritual fruit to be reaped from the drowning of tens of thousands of infants, for them or for us; the reign of death in all things is not the same as the justice of every particular death in the great scheme of things; that is why Christ came to save us from suffering and death, and why God will raise the dead. This world is fallen, and nowhere does God promise to make the sum total of its suffering add up to some greater spiritual truth. Rather, through taking our suffering upon himself, he rescues us from the meaninglessness of death, and even graciously allows us to offer up our own sufferings in obedience to him.

This is the gospel: it does not announce the perfect rationality of the history of the fallen world, but the perfect love of God who overcomes the powers of this age."

Hart goes on to recommend the chapter "Rebellion" in Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.

For myself, It is difficult to separate 'meaning' from 'power', or 'activity'. Indeed whole modern philosophies are built on the binding of these two ideas (e.g. feminism). It is difficult for us to conceive of something like evil, so obviously real and ever present in our day to day lives, as at the same time both real and powerful on the one hand and on the other "ultimately meaningless" on the other. And I don't mean this in a intellectual sense either. Who on this board can say they really get the teach of the Fathers of evil being "meaningless"? Does your heart not utterly ache and weep at the "meaningless" suffering in the world, demanding a "reason of the heart"? Even if we don't end up in rebellion like Ivan - even if we repent "in dust and ashes' like Job, do we still not carry our complaint to the Lord?

[Daniel Jeandet]

I have a friend who is a proper materialist, not just a consumer or lover of matter. He really thinks there is nothing but matter. Thats what he says anyway. He helped me convert to Christianity. He was a Catholic, now claims to be an atheist. He had some very bad experiences, in and out of psych hospitals. I think he has an unusually intense and lonely cross to bear. We often talk about suffering, about why and how God would let evils go on.

This evening I was telling him about an opinion piece in "The Age" broadsheet newspaper. It was written by a young woman, educated, modern, etc. She had questioned several ministers or whatever of different Christian churches, about why God allowed the tsunami event. They had all assured her that the event of the tsunami was not in God's hands, that the creation followed its own chance/predictable (?) workings quite apart from His personal involvement/will/desire/wrath etc.

I expressed to my friend the idea that such a God, who could be expected to have some say in the matter, but has none, because of the nature of the impersonal laws he had built into His creation, would not be the real God. He asked, why then would a God who is real and powerful and ever present and the good King of everything, not prevent tsunamis?

I started to think instead, why Did God not create a world with creatures entirely sheilded from evil, unable to fall, with laws that ruled out any degree of evil, from mild general personal paranoia right up to planet-spanning catasrophy and prolonged torture of inocents?

For myself, in myself, the answer seems clear, but I cant explain it in words. I pray for my friend to find his faith again.

Also, who can really say whether the tsunami involved more inocent suffering than the child prostitution, pedophile sex holiday situation that existed in the affected areas for many many years preceding the tsunami that has almost certainly put a stop to a large part of it for at least a while and provides an opportunity for that situations resolution?

[Daniel Jeandet]

Asking this question -"why does God allow suffering?", it seems to me, (although Im extremely unsure of the quality of my thinking), that to be in a position to ask this question, the person asking would have to have never harmed anybody, to have never been the cause of any suffering. Is this Gods position? Is His the only defensible position? Clearly we are not in this position (of never having caused evil or suffering), but born ignorent(if we are), as little babies, do we have some defensible position to ask this question from?

When Jesus asked "Why do questionings arise in your hearts?", was he saying "why do you suffer?".
If only the person of the incarnate Son was in a position to question suffering, was his answer the cross?" Or was he the cause of evils because he created the possibility, and so couldnt defend Himself against the cross?". Is evil even possible? It doesnt seem all that real. I dont know about any of these things. God forgive me if these are bad ideas.

[Owen Jones]

Dear Daniel,

Stay away from conspiracy theories. Especially ones on the internet. Don't worry about evil. Simplify. Don't think so much. Leave theology and philosophy alone for a while.

[Daniel Jeandet]

Thankyou Owen, I got that.

[Eugene]

For those who love God and don't love themselves suffering becomes a joy. St. Paul wrote - "Everything brings benefit to those who love God" - everything, including suffering and seemingly evil. This is how martyrs exprerienced their persecution - not as some unfortunate suffernig necessary in order deserve salvation, but as a joy to give up their lives in an act of self-denying love.

This problem of suffering seems to be a paradox when we apply it to others, but somehow becomes very clear when we apply it to ourselves. We suffer when we love ourselves, but we experience joy through suffering when we deny ourselves and love God. So, the answer is - don't apply this question to others, everyone should apply it to himself and ask himself - "How do I experience suffering? As a self-pity, or as a joy of self-denying love?"

[Christopher Encapera]

Evgeny,

I see a way I can read the words "Everything brings benefit...including suffering" as saying that evil has a meaning (and again, when you say "seeming evil", as if to say all, or at least some evil is not really evil). This seems to me to be exactly what Hart (and according to some on this thread, the Fathers) denies:

"Yes, the deaths of innocents are indeed meaningless, even if God's providence will indeed bring good from that evil; there is no spiritual fruit to be reaped from the drowning of tens of thousands of infants, for them or for us; the reign of death in all things is not the same as the justice of every particular death in the great scheme of things"

On the other hand, we are of course to "deny our selves and take up our cross", so yes we do discover God and Joy "through" suffering (and "through" seems the right word - not "because of" because that would make evil a condition of salvation and God).

Still, perhaps you are on the crux of the matter. Perhaps Christianity does not offer any real "meaning" at all, or at least not in this world. Everything is a "process" if I may use that term, thus the inward turn of even objective evil into "am I sinning...am I sinning in looking for meaning of fill_in_the_blank...am I sinning in thinking". If it has not been Revealed, can we know it? No says Christianity. Has Heaven been Revealed? No. Has our True Destiny been Revealed (in it's, or more accurately His) entirety? No. Only a process - but is this not still the Law, if only the Law personified? I think so. Can man live like this?

[Eugene]

I think, Christopher, it would be wrong to call suffering from desease, disaster or death an evil from Christian point of view. Evil is an act of creatures' free will when they turn away from God. So only a person himself can cause evel to himself. But we tend to perceive any suffering in our life as evil, even when it comes from other people or from natural sources. Yes, God lets us suffer, lets us live through the suffering, but it is not evil. Evil is when we don't accept suffering from God's hands like Christ accepted the Cros trom the Fathers hands, when we rebel and accuse God in letting us suffer. May be suffering is a "catalyst" in our spiritual life - it puts our love on test, it intensifies our love when we suffer for the love of God, but it also intencifies our self-pitiness and selfishness when we turn away from God.

I would agree with you - we are living through a process, and don't clearly understand why we have to go through all the hassels of this life. But if we would understand it, if we would be shown our Destiny and all explanations beforehand, we wouldn't need faith and hope. This is why "faith, hope and love" are the foundations of our salvation, this is why Christ expects faith from us first of all. We just have to beleive that when we meet Him, as He said, "you then shall not ask Me anything", in Him all questions will be answered when we see Him face to face, there will be no more confusion, no more questions. But for now, we need faith, hope and endurance.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Mr Hart writes:


"Yes, the deaths of innocents are indeed meaningless, even if God's providence will indeed bring good from that evil; there is no spiritual fruit to be reaped from the drowning of tens of thousands of infants, for them or for us; the reign of death in all things is not the same as the justice of every particular death in the great scheme of things."

For us the reference point is always Christ- He is the Beginning & End of all things. In Him even death (which by itself is meaningless) is trampled down through His death & Life so that what is the worst tragedy is redeemed. So we are not left with just meaninglessness because we are not just left with death.

Since the Fall we have been left with its tragic fruit which is sin & death. All of us face this throughout every moment of our lives & in a sense how we deal with this gives our life meaning or lack thereof. But finally death itself will arrive- how will we meet it? It is difficult to know this except to say with the Fathers, "how you live is how you die." So we all encounter this same force of death that those dear ones who died in the cataclysm of south-east Asia did.

But what is the difference then that we react to so strongly? Is it not the sheer inescapable stark tragedy of death & of how it represents a fundamental brokeness of life? "Man sins, creation groans." So there is I think that aspect to a "natural tragedy" like this- it is so horribly an un-natural ripping of life & loved one's out of one's hands.
As we said however all still face the same mystery of death. It is just that a tragedy like this is like seeing the film speed up & reach its end so dramatically and then meeting death so unexpectedly. And just like a 'regular' death, each meets death according to how they lived.

The Christian tries not to run from the evil that God allows in his life but rather in Christ he redeems it-ie through it he finds the Life that Christ offers. At first this may be a wholly ascetic exercise of refraining from evil & of patiently enduring. But perhaps the time comes when we see that what we endure is a form of love for God & man. And through this love we heal the world of death.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Owen Jones]

It's a bit of a tautology, but one cannot help another in his suffering without first having suffered. It is the transformative power of suffering that is important, if not unique, to Christianity. In the East, as I understand it, suffering is an illusion. In the West, it is all too real. But Christianity turns suffering into the means of our transformation, which is the will of God. Anyone can believe in all of the dogmatic stuff when things are going fine. But in the face of suffering, especially in the face of suffering that is unjust, transformation becomes possible. Dogma alone does not transform. Or, to put it another way, there is no Christian dogmatic truth without suffering.

Therefore, voluntary poverty and virginity are seen as the highest of Christian virtues.

[Christopher Encapera]

The conversation continues at

http://merecomments.typepad.com/

This is a very difficult subject. Fr. Raphael, nothing in your words seems to imply the necessity or ontological reality "beingness" of evil, which is what Hart says is orthodox theology. "privatio boni" as it is traditionally thought of. Yet, when I read Owen's last post, it seems to imply that evil is necessary, or how would we be transformed? Evil in this view seems to be the very tool God uses for or transformation away from sin and (ironically) evil itself. If I am reading Owen right (probably not) this is exactly the kind of "creeping Stoicism" Hart says the Tradition stands against.

I think we are missing a framework to correctly think about suffering, evil, etc. I sense that there are several levels that, for myself at least, are easily conflated...

[Eugene]

Christopher, God allows every person to suffer as much or as little as needed for him to be transformed and saved. Scriptures say that "We shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven through much suffering". Suffering is not evil, it is rather a bitter medicine for our sick and fallen souls. A surgeon's knife brings pain and seems to be a wearpon of evil to a patient, but it cuts the tumors and eventually brings health. Sufferings of this life are painful for us as much as we love ourselves, and if we feel that they are painful, it's exactly because we love ourselves. Those who don't love themselves don't suffer.

In the Orthodox theology there is no "beingness" of evil, evil is a lack, a "vacuum" of life in God, it doesn't exists by itself as an entity. Evil is only a personal choice of individuals that turn away from God and become parasites on the body of creation, denying God while being supported and embraced by Him.

[Owen Jones]

Suffering is not necessarily to be equated with evil. Modernity is based on the presumption that all suffering is evil and must be abolished through concerted state action, etc. But in Christianity, there is only a correlation. For, as we know, man was created to live in harmony and plenty but through rebellion he is destined to suffer. But....and this is a huge but, suffering can be mental torment based on our own separation from God, our feelings that we have not gotten what we deserved, etc. And so to suffer for God's sake is to be at peace regardless of circumstances. Or to give up something precious to us, because we know it is pleasing to God and possibly beneficial to others.

Ironically, natural disasters were traditionally seen as proof of God's existence.

Now it is seen as proof that God doesn't exist! Or has no power. the true Christian knows that suffering is not ultimately a punishment for sin, but still part of God's plan.

[Andrew Williams]

In terms of the relationship between evil and 'natural' events that cause suffering, what about the actions and work of the devil and other spiritual powers?

Evil can be the absence of good, but as I understand it, it is more often the twisting of things which we created to be good. This twisting can be done by people, through their free will and rebellion against God, but can also be done by other spiritual powers working in ways that most of us can neither see nor understand.

Also, there is the general mysterious connection between people and the rest of Creation - our fallenness is reflected in the rest of Creation in ways we cannot fully understand.

The suffering and evil around is surely all part of the groaning of Creation as it waits to be born anew.

[Andrew Williams]

I meant of course, 'which were created to be good', the implication that they were created by us was not intended - it is just another sign of the imperfect world in which we live.

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Is it the devil, or the Lord, ore is it the abuse of our own free will which is responsible for natural disasters? St John Damascene says:

"His permission, therefore, is usually spoken of in the Holy Scripture as His energy and work. Nay, even when He says that God creates evil things, and that there is no evil in a city that the Lord hath not done, he does not mean by these words that the Lord is the cause of evil, but the word 'evil' is used in two ways, with two meanings. For sometimes it means what is evil by nature, and this is the opposite of virtue and the will of God: and sometimes it means that which is evil and oppressive to our sensation, that is to say, afflictions and calamities. Now these are seemingly evil because they are painful, but in reality are good. For to those who understand they became ambassadors of conversion and salvation. The Scripture says that of these God is the Author. It is, moreover, to be observed that of these, too, we are the cause: for involuntary evils are the offspring of voluntary ones."

The above question is a genuine one. Although some very enlightening things have been said by posters so far, the words 'suffering' and 'evil' have been used in rather confused ways in this thread, and it seems to me that this is a result of lack of clarity as to what is accepted Orthodox teaching on suffering and evil, as well as the more general issue of the discernment which is necessary in each individual instance or event.

Certainly the transformative role of suffering, so central to our faith, comes through strongly, and I am grateful to Evgeny for his clarifications of how this works for Christians. But I remain puzzled as to what the role of evil is in all this.

Yours in Christ
Byron

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Regarding the post by Owen Jones,

"no Christian is licensed to utter odious banalities about God's inscrutable counsels or blasphemous suggestions that all this mysteriously serves God's good ends. We are permitted only to hate death and waste and the imbecile forces of chance that shatter living souls, to believe that creation is in agony in its bonds, to see this world as divided between two kingdoms--knowing all the while that it is only charity that can sustain us against "fate," and that must do so until the end of days."

While I agree that complacency is a most un-Christian response to any natural disaster so costly to human life and well-being, is it really blasphemous to believe that everything that happens, no matter how painful, is ultimately part of God's plan? Or am I getting something wrong?

Yours in Christ,
Byron

[Christopher Encapera]

Byron,

If I am reading Hart right (still more being said at: http://merecomments.typepad.com/ ) there is something inherently dangerous in an idea like "God's plan". If one is to say that the wasting of (last # I heard was in excess of 120,000) people by a great tidal wave is a part of "God's plan", then at the same time one has to affirm that this evil/suffering (more on that in a bit) is part of God's toolbox as it were. In other words, suffering and evil are acts of God and are really ultimately good. Now, this either denies/relativizes suffering/evil - something that I am uncomfortable with and my central problem with much of what has been said on this thread, or it makes God the cause of suffering/Evil, which leads to what Ivan rightly protests in Dostoevsky. Ivan asks if the incomprehensible beauty and Love of Heaven to be built on evil and suffering, is it worth it. If that tidal wave, and all the suffering/evil is really part of "God's plan", then I can honestly say I want no part of such a God! Such a God is a monster! Ivan is right. Creation may be fallen, but let's not impute onto the God of Love as somehow using evil as a cornerstone of the good.

Now, as to the difference between "suffering" and "evil", I agree there needs to be some clarity here. However, I sense the same tendency to relativize evil here. It seems a bit disingenuous to say that the sudden destruction of most of your family is a mere "suffering" (which, not only that, it is ultimately for your own good!). I am certain that if it happened to anyone on this list, they would judge it to be something at once more catastrophic, and more deeper, than a ascetical "suffering". They might even call it an "evil" ;)

I am going to say something very bold here but it is something that I think we need to consider. Perhaps the ascetical turn of mind fails us here. When I read Evengy words "Suffering is not evil, it is rather a bitter medicine for our sick and fallen souls", they seem more applicable to our own inward struggle, and hardly applicable at all to the "mystery of Evil". In fact, I stand with Hart - those words are downright blasphemous in this context....

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

If I may- sin & its fruit which is death is unequivocally an evil brokeness of what God created. So in themselves these two can never be seen as part of God's plan.

But God's providence is to transform the experience of death into life through His Life. And it is within this experience that we most often use the word suffering-ie we mean it within the Christian context & in an ascetic sense. From this we can see that evil & death and the suffering we endure in its regard is a willing, an effort of taking up of our cross. So for the Christian manifestations of sin in creation (natural calamities) are not just something that happen to one- on the contrary in Christ rather than mute victims we transform death into life through Christ. So if we speak of 'God's plan' in regards to the terrible recent tragedy (something I don't think the Orthodox would normally do) it would only refer to the possibility offered by God to each person to transform death into life through Him. But each person is still free to reject this gift. Then only death is the result & we could never say this is part of 'God's plan'.

Lastly all of this is in the image of Christ's crucifixion & Resurrection. He encountered real death in all its terrible brokeness. He did not shun the reality of this experience & we know that this is central to our salvation. But in encountering death He destroyed its power (note He has not yet destroyed it completely)through His death & Resurrection offering us the gift of overcoming death also.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[nurse-aid]

Hit our own head: our falls, sins, fallen nature...

Being hit by someone: our connections with others with their sins, like in the prisoners chain...one felt and pulled others with him...

Trying to get a Doctor (with free will) because some one prefer to die, then rather be healed, because sergery is painfull...Our trying to come closer to HIM...With all medicine what Doctor offer for us...

Psyhiatric teorahpy is help of all spirutual advisers...books and peole...

And the purpouse of all of this to go back to NORMAL, become that new man, like before you was hit in the head, by ourselfs or by others...for that NORMAL we have to physiacaly die...untill then we are just a paitients, treated and back to work againg...

[Eugene]

Christopher, you wrote **When I read Evengy words "Suffering is not evil, it is rather a bitter medicine for our sick and fallen souls", they seem more applicable to our own inward struggle, and hardly applicable at all to the "mystery of Evil".**

But that was exactly my point. What's happeing in the outer world is just a scenery, God created the world for us, not us for the world. And the REAL events are happening inside everyone of us. It is not ascetic struggle of some weird monks, its applies to everyone. We are used to look outward, to look at things in general, to think - this tide wave make destrucion in general, so it is evil. But this is a wrong perspective, look what happens inside each of us. However, only God and a suffering person himself can know what happend inside him when he was covered by tide wave. That's why we can not generalize, but everyone should apply this problem to himself. We can't say for those children that it is to cruel to build the Kingdom of Heaven on their suffering. Each of us and each of those children should answer for themselves - "Do I want the Kingdom of Heaven even if it's built on MY suffering?". My personal answer is - YES, I wish to give up myself and to suffer in order to bring the Kingdom of Heaven closer, to be in communion and in love with God. But I can't decide for others, for those children, it's their own choice, it's between each of them and God. You can't tell me - "I think you suffer unfairly, you should'n accept the God's Kingdom if it takes so much suffering from you to get there", it's my own choice, and I choose to suffer. So, there is no personalized or generalized evil in the world (we shouldn't use capital E here in "evil" - there is no "Evil"), the "mystery of evil" is the mystery of out personal relationships with God, the mystery of self-denying love. He denied Himself, suffered and died for us. Do I wand to accept His love and live through it, including all the self-denial and suffering that is invloved? Do you? Anyone answers for himself, not for someone else.

[M. Rallis]

We will all die.

Who has the wisdom to chose when and how?

If death has lost it's "sting", then who cares, anyway, as to when and how, only that we are not caught up in un-repented sin.

As to physical suffering, shouldn't we be thankful that physical pleasure is somehow tied together with physical suffering, otherwise, who would ever look beyong living a life devoted to pleasure-seeking?

[Byron Jack Gaist]

In speaking of "God's plan" and the role of evil, I am sorry if I gave the impression that I think evil is relative, or that what is happening in South East Asia is by any stretch of the imagination a good thing.

Fr Raphael, thank you for reminding me however that the fruit of evil is only death, and that Christ turns death into life.

When human choice is clearly for evil, I can see that a simple case of abuse of God-given freedom is taking place. The suffering which ensues is also clearly salvific to the person who willing endures as victim, transforming suffering into glory through love (though the spiritually much greater harm caused to the perpetrator of the sin is ironically more difficult for the sinner to detect).

However, when there seems to be no human choice directly involved, as with a tsunami, no human perpetrator as such, there I find myself more perplexed. Fr Raphael says: "So if we speak of 'God's plan' in regards to the terrible recent tragedy (something I don't think the Orthodox would normally do) it would only refer to the possibility offered by God to each person to transform death into life through Him. But each person is still free to reject this gift. Then only death is the result & we could never say this is part of 'God's plan'." These words are clear: the Christian's task now is to transform the suffering in SE Asia with God's help. A rejection of this task is sin. But, forgive my insistence, does God not know then what choices all of us are going to make? Has the devil any chance of outwitting the Omniscient? Is it really possible to act outside of Divine providence and foreknowledge? I realise that as Orthodox we believe that man is radically free. I guess what I am asking is - can human sin or metaphysical evil (or "natural" calamities) ever prevent the coming of the Kingdom?

Yours in Christ,
Byron

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Byron asked: "I guess what I am asking is - can human sin or metaphysical evil (or "natural" calamities) ever prevent the coming of the Kingdom?" No, human sin or metaphysical evil as you define it cannot prevent the coming of the Kingdom. At the culmination of time the Kingdom will be all there is. There will be Christ & those who have striven for & delighted in this Kingdom. But there will also be those who have rejected the Kingdom. According to Holy Frs like St Simeon the New Theologian it will not be that this rejection (ie hell) will be a seperate place for this would he says, blasphemously imply that somehow death had triumphed when "God will be all in all." Rather there will be the constant Light of Christ & a new creation- for those who strove for this & delight in it this will be heaven. But for those who rejected this & hated it while in this life this future state of being constantly in the Light of Christ while fearing & hating it will be truly hell. Unlike the fallen Adam, man will not be able to 'hide' from God.
I freely admit that there is a lot to the above that is frankly beyond our (or at least my) understanding. It is very difficult for us to understand how our free will & the choice of evil can co-exist with God's providence without this contradicting His own providence in a real way (eg your question Byron). It's much neater to just see a necessity or even identity between God's will & ours. But doesn't this conundrum really point to the mystery of God's love for us and of how He creates what is something 'other' than Himself?
In Christ - Fr Raphael

[Christopher Encapera]

Evgeny,

Let me clear up something I said that may be misunderstood. I do not deny the place of ascetical struggling in our Christian life. What I do deny, is a certain misunderstanding of asceticism that turns it into a flavor of subjectivism. I sense this possibility when you write:

"So, there is no personalized or generalized evil in the world (we shouldn't use capital E here in "evil" - there is no "Evil"), the "mystery of evil" is the mystery of out personal relationships with God, the mystery of self-denying love."

If this is true, then who exactly is the Evil One we ask God to deliver us from every day as in "...but deliver us from the Evil One". Who is this Satan spoken of in Job, who tempts God to stretch forth his hand and (by God's power- the Evil One has no power in of himself, being a creature) cause so much suffering on Job (if not evil)? No, evil (and Evil) is alive and well in this world. Perhaps Fr. Raphael will correct me, but I see nothing in our Tradition that denies this - and if it does it would be quite a trick to reconcile this to Scripture. However, this does seem to be counter intuitive because on the other hand, as Hart argues, the Tradition does deny the ontological beingness of evil ("privatio boni"). So, if the Evil One is not intrinsically (ontologically) evil as such but only has a "corrupted will", and thus can only do evil to the extant that God "allows" (notice I did not say "cooperate") and by extension we can only experience evil to the extant that we and others (and the fallen world itself - including that most brilliant fallen angel Satan) are "radically free", then we are lead from one mystery into another, and ad infinitum. None of this is "meaning" at all. In this sense, love itself has no more "meaning" than evil. As we all know, both are real, powerful forces in this world.

so, I can not (in this world) find any satisfactory meaning in any of this. Yes, I live by hope, and perhaps I should add (as I perhaps Martin Luther would, or did) that I live by Hope alone - having to crucify the part of me that craves for meaning. But then I come back to Dumitru Staniloae 's "The Experience of God" which I quoted earlier:

"...According to our faith, however, the order of meanings cannot be left out of account. Meanings are real and man cannot live without them. he cannot endure to live without a consciousness of meanings and without pursuing them, for they culminate in a final meaning which man is convinced he will attain beyond death. If man were to dispute the reality of these meanings, his would the unhappiest of existences....Through his consciousness, man is not content to lead an existence the meaning of which is to serve - without realizing it - a higher level of created reality, a level with which man would end his own existence."

SO, which is it, does evil have meaning or no? and if not, does this consign us to a 'servitude', a servitude of God's purposes which are on a level too high for us, and in which in a profound sense we lose our selves in (being as mute beasts in the presence of these realities and meanings which are unattainable)?

[Eugene]

Christopher, I understand you questions, I think. Let me tel you my understanding, and Fr. Raphael will correct me if I'm wrong.

Acually in our parish (OCA) we say "...but deliver us from evil", not "evil one", but I think both vesions are valid. The "evil one" here is Satan and his influence on us (I don't think he deserves capital E though). But Satan is just one of fallen angels whos will turned against God. Evil doesn't have its own nature, its own existence, evil is nothing else but a state of will. Orthodox theology says that there is nature of God, nature of men, nature of angels, but there is no nature of evil. However, if there is no nature of evil, that does not mean it has no meaning. It does have meaning, it does have its own mystery, it is a powerful and attractive forse in each of us, but not in universe. There is no evil as a mysterious force in the universe, but there is evil as a force in each of us, people and angels. This is the force of self-love, extremely powerful and attractive, so attractive that it can even turn us from the Love of God. So our will is always and constantly being attracted by the Love of God and the love to ourselves, and every second of our life we choose, conciously or unconciously. The presence of Satan and his influence on us makes this force even more attractive and hardly resistible. But Satan is not an evil forse in the universe that is equal to God in it's power (as would Maincheism state). Satan is powerless when compared to God, put it has strong influence on us because we all have passion of self-love.

When we go too far from God and became captured and stuck into the state of loving ourself, we don't feel ourselves attracted by the Love of God any more. This is the state of evil. This is where the role of faith comes into play - it's our concious faith that forces our will to turn towards God's love. And God, of course, alvays ready to embrace us and invite us back back, He helps us, heals our passions (which are just bad habils of self-love), enters into our heart and brings there His self-denying love, so at the end we are no longer so powerfully attracted by evil/self-love any more.

There is still a mystery for me here. It seems like no matter how close a person is to God and His Love, there is always some evil seed, a possibility of turning away. Satan turned away when he was one of the highest angels who see the Glory of God's Love. The tree of knowlegde was in the middle of paradise. As long as we have free will, there is always a possibility to excersize it against God's Love, because real love can only be free. Only the Thinity has three wills that are always in accordance to each other. Will there ever be a state of men's will that may never fall again? I hope so, but I don't know.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Further as to Byron's question: "I guess what I am asking is - can human sin or metaphysical evil (or "natural" calamities) ever prevent the coming of the Kingdom?"

Continuing with the point I was trying to make in yesterday's post I have just found some wonderful quotes from St Isaac of Syria- "I also maintain that those who are punished in Gehenna are scourged by the scourge of love..."

"It would be improper to think that sinners in Gehenna are deprived of the love of God. Love... is given to all in common. The power of love works in two ways... Thus I say that this is the torment of Gehenna: bitter regret."

Christopher- Perhaps this also somewhat addresses your question about the meaning of evil. Perhaps it should be seen as a rejection of God's love. This in turn causes creation to 'groan'. We do suffer from this but it is up to us to suffer this in a transformative way in Christ so that we experience how His Life tramples down death. So in the face of death we choose Life. If we do not do this or believe there is no Life to choose from then truly we choose meaningless & destructive natural forces or fate- our perspective is basically dualist, as if death & life are equal forces. But we as Christians know or have faith that Life is the meaning of the universe as coming from & leading to Christ. Certainly we suffer from the effects of sin & death- whether our own sinful humanity or nature 'groaning'. But it is not this sin & death which define our life & give it meaning but rather how(in the image of Christ's death & Resurrection)we find Life through the experience of suffering through this death & sin.

In Christ- Fr Raphael