Suffering is not some kind of currency.
You might be surprised to know that you agree with Joseph Ratzinger, the man who is our current pope. In his book,
Introduction to Christianity he discusses the atonement and Christ’s sacrifice.
He says, “the Cross is not a matter of accumulation of physical pain, as if its redemptive value consisted in its involving the largest possible amount of physical torture.”
“Why,” Ratzinger asks, “should God take pleasure in the sufferings of his creature, indeed his own Son, or see in it the currency with which reconciliation needs to be purchased from him?”
Suffice it to say, Ratzinger utterly rejects such a view! “The fundamental principle of the sacrifice is not destruction but love.” The only currency that gives anything it meaning is love. Remember Paul in 1 Corinthians 13, what matters if I have not love?
He consistently asserts that the Cross was not a work of expiation offered to a wrathful God, but, “that foolish love of God” which, “gives itself away” to, “save man.”
“Love’s free Yes is the only thing for which God must wait—the only worship or “sacrifice” that can have any meaning.” It is thus that, “this element of pain is a secondary one, resulting only from a preceding primary one, from which it draws its meaning”
“It is an unworthy concept of God,” Ratzinger says, “to imagine for oneself a God who demands the slaughter of his Son to pacify his wrath.”
Note Pope Pius XII in
Haurietis aquas, who said,
“the mystery of our divine Redeemer is fundamentally a mystery of love; the mystery, namely, of that love of Christ for his heavenly father by which he offers him the sacrifice of the cross in a spirit of love and obedience and achieves the superabundant and infinite satisfaction”
Jeanette-- it is understandable that if you thought that the worth of the atonement consisted in physical torture that you would find it hollow. But that’s a fiction, the worth of the atonement consists in the infinite love given by a perfectly holy man.
Thomistic theology also makes this sharp distinction and insists on the value of love. In an excellent little book, by Philippe de la Trinite called, “What is Redemption?” this is outlined exceedingly well. Let me give you some quotes:
We must understand that, “it is not punishment but love which makes satisfaction what it is, essentially” (Trinité 75). That is to say, “it is the loving acceptance of punishment for the love of God which gives it whatever value of satisfaction it may possess” (Trinité 75). “The source of merit is not suffering and difficulty but the love of charity” (Trinité 122). Hence we must dissipate the idea that it is, “punishment *qua *punishment” that satisfies for sin, in the sense that penal substitution would have, but, “punishment
qua satisfaction” which has as its basis in an, “infinitely meritorious love” (Trinité 75, 122).
Jeanette-- hopefully this can help you make sense of our infinitely loving God. The idea that the atonement has its worth more in suffering than in love, unfortunately, seems to derive from a caricature of John Calvin’s view of atonement. However, it is not the Catholic view. God is love. Rejoice in that. If you have any questions or comments, please tell me. God bless.
-Rob