Night

[rfulks]

I recently read Night, a well-known memoir by Elie Wiesel, written in the early 1960s and describing his experience as a young Romanian Jew sent to Auschwitz in WW2 and subsequently Buchenwald. His mother and sister were gassed at Auschwitz, and his father eventually succumbed to disease. He was a devout Jew before his time in the camps, and he seems to lose his faith during his suffering. I don’t know if he ever regained that faith. This book made me question my own faith as a Catholic, for more than one reason. I would appreciate any comments.

1. First, the book describes in good detail the devout Jewish faith that Wiesel (and others) held before, and to some extent during, their time in the concentration camps. These Jews seemed to be very good and humble people. They did not follow Christianity. How should we, as Catholics, interpret the presence in our world of very good people of different religious beliefs? This seems like a silly question, but it really is not. If Christianity is the One True Religion, and it must be if Christ really was God Incarnate, and He died for our sins (whatever that means), rose from the dead, etc, then everyone else in the world adhering to some other religious belief must be, basically, wrong. Are these devout Jews (or Hindus, Muslims, animists, Buddhists…) wasting their time? If acceptance of Christ as our Savior is a requisite for eternal salvation, then should we expect that these non-Christians will not be admitted to Heaven if they persist in their errant beliefs? After dying the most horrific of deaths in the gas chamber at Auschwitz, are we to believe that Wiesel’s mother, say, was not sent to eternal reward and peace but rather to Hell or Purgatory to continue her suffering, simply because she was born into a Jewish family? I can’t accept that idea, but to reject it seems to reject whatever special grace that we are taught to believe comes with being a faithful Christian. Extending the idea further, what about otherwise good people who are born into agnostic or atheistic families, and live their lives adhering to those beliefs; should they be blamed and punished because they never felt the compulsion to pray or attend church, etc?
2. Of course, the more obvious faith-challenging aspect of the book is the simple fact of Auschwitz and the fact that six million people could be exterminated in the most horrific way possible. What kind of God would allow such horrendous suffering to occur? Why should anyone be expected to endure such torture in life and others, such as myself, be given a life of plenty? The most agonizing thing that I have had to recently endure was indecision about the size of the HDTV that I wanted to buy. To be a Jew in Romania in 1944, or a street urchin in Haiti in 2010, or a 10 year old with incurable bone cancer anytime, is to live a life of incomparable suffering when contrasted with the lives of most of the rest of us. This isn’t fair. Why should some suffer and some be blessed?
3. I know that the answer to the “why did Auschwitz happen” question has something to do with free will and the presence of evil in the world, and that the horrible Nazis chose to do evil things, with the implication that the rest of us, good people, would have chosen to do the good and right thing. Reading Night, I imagined myself as the good Nazi camp guard, giving extra soup to the Jews, maybe helping them escape, etc. In reality though, if I had been born in Bavaria in 1918 - probably as a Catholic- and influenced growing up by the anti-semitism and Nazi propraganda rampant at the time, I can imagine myself enlisting with pride in the SS and being sent to guard at Auschwitz and doing my very best to be the top guard there, entirely indifferent to the suffering of the Jews underfoot. If I was a little unhinged because of psychopathology or maybe abuse as a child, I can imagine myself being an especially cruel SS camp guard. My point is that free choice or free will seems to depend very heavily on circumstance, to the point that I am not even sure where choice enters the equation. The American version of me born in 1970 views the Holocaust with complete and utter revulsion; the imaginary Bavarian version of me born in 1918 could have been a willing participant. How should we view moral culpability, then?

 

[mfj]

You are asking for volumes of information.

You should study the Catholic faith and reconcile your misgivings about Gd.
A good understanding of Gd, His nature, attributes, and salvation history will uphold your faith.

I have found the saying true, (if you ask you will recieve, if you draw close the Lord will draw close to you). If you truely and energetically seek answers from Gd, He will answer by way of CA or some one or these forums.

Do you really want the long version here?
There are some great people here and some of those will write volumes.

 

[Julian0404]

I recently read Night, a well-known memoir by Elie Wiesel, written in the early 1960s and describing his experience as a young Romanian Jew sent to Auschwitz in WW2 and subsequently Buchenwald. His mother and sister were gassed at Auschwitz, and his father eventually succumbed to disease. He was a devout Jew before his time in the camps, and he seems to lose his faith during his suffering. I don’t know if he ever regained that faith. This book made me question my own faith as a Catholic, for more than one reason. I would appreciate any comments.

Read the story of FATIMA. Mary the Mother of God came and warned the world that if we did not stop offending GOD, a great punishment would befall the world. The oldest girl, Lucia was given a sign for the advent of WWII as punishment for man’s sins if we did not stop - history shows the results. Lucia became a sister and died just recently on Feb 13, 2005.

1. First, the book describes in good detail the devout Jewish faith that Wiesel (and others) held before, and to some extent during, their time in the concentration camps. These Jews seemed to be very good and humble people. They did not follow Christianity. How should we, as Catholics, interpret the presence in our world of very good people of different religious beliefs? This seems like a silly question, but it really is not.

If Christianity is the One True Religion, and it must be if Christ really was God Incarnate, and He died for our sins (whatever that means), rose from the dead, etc, The underscore I have inserted in your words, paints an ignorance of the faith of which you claim. You cannot lose, what you have not gained.As the earlier post advised, you need to study the Catholic faith instead of holding it up to the candle of an angry person who has been terribly wronged and looking for holes

then everyone else in the world adhering to some other religious belief must be, basically, wrong. Are these devout Jews (or Hindus, Muslims, animists, Buddhists…) wasting their time? If acceptance of Christ as our Savior is a requisite for eternal salvation, then should we expect that these non-Christians will not be admitted to Heaven if they persist in their errant beliefs? After dying the most horrific of deaths in the gas chamber at Auschwitz, are we to believe that Wiesel’s mother, say, was not sent to eternal reward and peace but rather to Hell or Purgatory to continue her suffering, simply because she was born into a Jewish family? I can’t accept that idea, but to reject it seems to reject whatever special grace that we are taught to believe comes with being a faithful Christian. Extending the idea further, what about otherwise good people who are born into agnostic or atheistic families, and live their lives adhering to those beliefs; should they be blamed and punished because they never felt the compulsion to pray or attend church, etc?

1. Of course, the more obvious faith-challenging aspect of the book is the simple fact of Auschwitz and the fact that six million people could be exterminated in the most horrific way possible. What kind of God would allow such horrendous suffering to occur? Why should anyone be expected to endure such torture in life and others, such as myself, be given a life of plenty? The most agonizing thing that I have had to recently endure was indecision about the size of the HDTV that I wanted to buy. To be a Jew in Romania in 1944, or a street urchin in Haiti in 2010, or a 10 year old with incurable bone cancer anytime, is to live a life of incomparable suffering when contrasted with the lives of most of the rest of us. This isn’t fair. Why should some suffer and some be blessed?
2. I know that the answer to the “why did Auschwitz happen” question has something to do with free will and the presence of evil in the world, and that the horrible Nazis chose to do evil things, with the implication that the rest of us, good people, would have chosen to do the good and right thing. Reading Night, I imagined myself as the good Nazi camp guard, giving extra soup to the Jews, maybe helping them escape, etc. In reality though, if I had been born in Bavaria in 1918 - probably as a Catholic- and influenced growing up by the anti-semitism and Nazi propraganda rampant at the time, I can imagine myself enlisting with pride in the SS and being sent to guard at Auschwitz and doing my very best to be the top guard there, entirely indifferent to the suffering of the Jews underfoot. If I was a little unhinged because of psychopathology or maybe abuse as a child, I can imagine myself being an especially cruel SS camp guard. My point is that free choice or free will seems to depend very heavily on circumstance, to the point that I am not even sure where choice enters the equation. The American version of me born in 1970 views the Holocaust with complete and utter revulsion; the imaginary Bavarian version of me born in 1918 could have been a willing participant. How should we view moral culpability, then?

 

[tonyrey]

After dying the most horrific of deaths in the gas chamber at Auschwitz, are we to believe that Wiesel’s mother, say, was not sent to eternal reward and peace but rather to Hell or Purgatory to continue her suffering, simply because she was born into a Jewish family?

No! That is not a Catholic doctrine.

I can’t accept that idea, but to reject it seems to reject whatever special grace that we are taught to believe comes with being a faithful Christian.

We are not taught that only faithful Christians go to heaven…

Extending the idea further, what about otherwise good people who are born into agnostic or atheistic families, and live their lives adhering to those beliefs; should they be blamed and punished because they never felt the compulsion to pray or attend church, etc?

No! Why should they?

Of course, the more obvious faith-challenging aspect of the book is the simple fact of Auschwitz and the fact that six million people could be exterminated in the most horrific way possible. What kind of God would allow such horrendous suffering to occur?

A God who shares His power with us so that we can shape our own destiny and even reject Him for all eternity. Would you prefer to be a robot incapable of love?

Why should anyone be expected to endure such torture in life and others, such as myself, be given a life of plenty? The most agonizing thing that I have had to recently endure was indecision about the size of the HDTV that I wanted to buy. To be a Jew in Romania in 1944, or a street urchin in Haiti in 2010, or a 10 year old with incurable bone cancer anytime, is to live a life of incomparable suffering when contrasted with the lives of most of the rest of us. This isn’t fair. Why should some suffer and some be blessed?

How could everyone be born in at exactly the same time in the same place with the same opportunities and the same experiences? That is obviously impossible. So how could life be arranged so that there is less inequality? It is a Utopian dream that cannot be fulfilled in a physical world in which we are prey to the “heart-ache and thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to”…

I know that the answer to the “why did Auschwitz happen” question has something to do with free will and the presence of evil in the world, and that the horrible Nazis chose to do evil things, with the implication that the rest of us, good people, would have chosen to do the good and right thing.

It has **everything **to do with free will and evil! There is constant warfare between good and evil throughout the world and throughout our lives… Even if we do not choose evil we can be guilty of neglect, of failing to help others in need…

Reading Night, I imagined myself as the good Nazi camp guard, giving extra soup to the Jews, maybe helping them escape, etc. In reality though, if I had been born in Bavaria in 1918 - probably as a Catholic- and influenced growing up by the anti-semitism and Nazi propraganda rampant at the time, I can imagine myself enlisting with pride in the SS and being sent to guard at Auschwitz and doing my very best to be the top guard there, entirely indifferent to the suffering of the Jews underfoot. If I was a little unhinged because of psychopathology or maybe abuse as a child, I can imagine myself being an especially cruel SS camp guard. My point is that free choice or free will seems to depend very heavily on circumstance, to the point that I am not even sure where choice enters the equation. The American version of me born in 1970 views the Holocaust with complete and utter revulsion; the imaginary Bavarian version of me born in 1918 could have been a willing participant. How should we view moral culpability, then?

We are morally responsible but it is impossible to know to what extent we are morally culpable in any given situation. God knows us far better than we know ourselves. It is not for us to judge anyone… even the stranger with whom we live…

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I recently read Night, a well-known memoir by Elie Wiesel, written in the early 1960s and describing his experience as a young Romanian Jew sent to Auschwitz in WW2 and subsequently Buchenwald. His mother and sister were gassed at Auschwitz, and his father eventually succumbed to disease. He was a devout Jew before his time in the camps, and he seems to lose his faith during his suffering. I don’t know if he ever regained that faith. This book made me question my own faith as a Catholic, for more than one reason. I would appreciate any comments.

We kill hundreds of thousands of equally innocent humans today in the abortion clinics. Are you doing anything about that blatant evil?

Christ’s comment about those who didn’t believe in Him was that they were already judged. But He didn’t say they were immediately condemned. The sentence is up to the judge, not us. There are Christians who seem to think that anyone who is not a Christian is automatically condemned. But I think they’re wrong.

However the commission Christ charged us with was to "go into all the world and make disciples of all men.’ At the same time though we have to recognise there is a spiritual war on. The Third Reich got its power and brilliance from the devil, when it’s all said and done, and it took millions of combat deaths, and civilian deaths also, to stop it. Which says something about the devil’s power. His boast to Christ was that the kingdoms of the world were all his, and he could give them to anyone he chose.

We are told that there will come a time when the One who restrains evil will be removed. I can only wonder what the earth will be like then. Personally I think the dual images of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on one hand, and the survivors of the Holocaust on the other, will be the sort of world that would comprise. The Jews, as “The Chosen Race” often seem to be the ones used as an example. Claiming the status of “God’s favourites” comes at a high price. The man closest to God was the one most forsaken.

Whether we like it or not, God does allow such suffering to occur, and usually it is people who cause it.

I don’t particularly like Him at times, as I think He can be pretty tough. We talk about “God’s Love” and then say nothing when earthquakes an tsunamis kill thousands, often a great majority of poor people about whom He professes to care so much, or the design which necessitates carnivores killing gentler species in everyday nature. My wife gets upset and angry when the cat kills a bird - I don’t like it either, but God’s the one who built in her instinct. Mind you we eat meat - someone else does the killing out of sight and out of mind.

And you’re right about attitudes - where we’re born, our training, our family, our culture, the prevailing religion, all have a bearing on our attitudes. None of us operate in a vacuum.

Our job, as far as we can, is to try to ensure Christian values get the upper hand in the particular situation we live in. One thing we can be sure about is that we will never achieve heaven on earth. How you can establish heaven in a war zone and in enemy occupied territory to boot?

When you’ve figured God out, come and tell me, and we’ll both know. I know this much - God exists, so does judgment and so does the devil. When you’ve had your own father screaming his head off no more than eight feet away on the night he died, then promptly disappearing, you know judgement is real. When you’ve seen demonic countenances and felt oppressive pressures at night, you know the demonic is real. When you’ve had “double whammies” and other very occasional encouragements, you know the angelic or divine is real. When you’ve felt like you were going to disintegrate because God was angry with presumed condescenstion towards Him, you know He’s real.

I’ve experienced all that. You may not have. But rest assured, God is real. So is the Devil. And there’s a war on between them, and we’re caught in the middle.

I’m sure we won’t find absolute evil attractive if we ever become his victim. But I also think we might find absolute goodness intimidating if He makes Himself known to us in some unmistakeable fashion.

 

[rfulks]

No! That is not a Catholic doctrine.

I thought that belief in Christ is necessary to have eternal life. If it is not necessary, then why be Catholic?

We are not taught that only faithful Christians go to heaven…

I was taught that. I was taught that good Jews, etc go to Purgatory until they can accept the reality of Christ as Messiah. Not true?

A God who shares His power with us so that we can shape our own destiny and even reject Him for all eternity. Would you prefer to be a robot incapable of love?

So, should I be thankful that God allowed the Holocaust to happen? I am not. Also, I am not sure what being able to shape my destiny has to do with love. My dog seems happily in love with me, but she has never done anything to shape her destiny.

.

So how could life be arranged so that there is less inequality? It is a Utopian dream that cannot be fulfilled in a physical world in which we are prey to the “heart-ache and thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to”…

God is God. It should not be a dream, if God is loving and omnipotent, that the world be created fairly and equally. Ignoring the suffering of the Holocaust, which may have been due to the free choice of man, consider still the victims of the earthquake in Haiti or the tsunami in Indonesia, or young victims of incurable disease; why should such ****** things randomly happen to people in the world? As Catholics, we believe that God can intervene in the world, right? If we pray hard enough, maybe a miracle will occur and Grandma’s brain tumor will disappear. If God has such power, then why does he not do more?

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I thought that belief in Christ is necessary to have eternal life. If it is not necessary, then why be Catholic?

I was taught that. I was taught that good Jews, etc go to Purgatory until they can accept the reality of Christ as Messiah. Not true?

So, should I be thankful that God allowed the Holocaust to happen? I am not. Also, I am not sure what being able to shape my destiny has to do with love. My dog seems happily in love with me, but she has never done anything to shape her destiny.

.

God is God. It should not be a dream, if God is loving and omnipotent, that the world be created fairly and equally. Ignoring the suffering of the Holocaust, which may have been due to the free choice of man, consider still the victims of the earthquake in Haiti or the tsunami in Indonesia, or young victims of incurable disease; why should such ****** things randomly happen to people in the world? As Catholics, we believe that God can intervene in the world, right? If we pray hard enough, maybe a miracle will occur and Grandma’s brain tumor will disappear. If God has such power, then why does he not do more?

He doesn’t do more because He prefers to delegate. You have an unjust economic system? Then YOU do something about it, rather than just accepting the status quo suitable for big business and the banks. There is a dictatorial tyrant oppressing his people? Then YOU do something about it (Hitler could have been stopped much earlier, had Christian principles prevailed in countries powerful enough to intervene. The cause of Hitler getting so much power could also have been prevented by wise decision making earlier on). Is there an oppressive disease? Then YOU do something about it.

Your country is in debt to the hilt? Then YOU do something about it.

However, when the judgment for community failures comes due, by the very fact we are social animals, the innocent will suffer with the guilty.

At the end of the day though, nobody has ever satisfactorily answered all the questions about suffering. And on this side of Glory, nobody ever will. Buddhism for example, is a religion that exists precisely *because *of suffering. The Buddha witnessed suffering, and it upset him. So he set out to find why, and what he thought the answer was.

 

[R_Daneel]

And there’s a war on between them, and we’re caught in the middle.

Well, my friend, by the looks of it, God is a pretty inept or uncaring general. The Christian teaching is that God cannot tolerate evil. Looks like he can tolerate the Devil just fine. I can just visualize them sipping a good cognac, smoking a nice fat cigar, and having a grand old time at our expense. Maybe they play some card came, where the winner of each trick can go grab a human “soul” and bring him into heaven or hell, depending on the winner. And it looks like that the Devil has a very strong hand. Hmmm? If God is so powerful, if he could smite the Devil just by “willing” it, why does he wait?

You said that the problem of suffering and evil will never be explained in this existence. You got that right - because it cannot be explained, neither here, nor in the hereafter. Rfulks is right, his objections carry a lot of weight. And there are no answers. I see that in your answer above you carefully avoided the problem of natural disasters, which cannot be attributed to human actions, good or evil. You said that God “delegates” his actions. The new word is “outsourcing”, which is usually used in a pejorative manner.

 

[Betterave]

I recently read Night, a well-known memoir by Elie Wiesel, written in the early 1960s and describing his experience as a young Romanian Jew sent to Auschwitz in WW2 and subsequently Buchenwald. His mother and sister were gassed at Auschwitz, and his father eventually succumbed to disease. He was a devout Jew before his time in the camps, and he seems to lose his faith during his suffering. I don’t know if he ever regained that faith. This book made me question my own faith as a Catholic, for more than one reason. I would appreciate any comments.

1. First, the book describes in good detail the devout Jewish faith that Wiesel (and others) held before, and to some extent during, their time in the concentration camps. These Jews seemed to be very good and humble people. They did not follow Christianity. How should we, as Catholics, interpret the presence in our world of very good people of different religious beliefs? This seems like a silly question, but it really is not. If Christianity is the One True Religion, and it must be if Christ really was God Incarnate, and He died for our sins (whatever that means), rose from the dead, etc, then everyone else in the world adhering to some other religious belief must be, basically, wrong. Are these devout Jews (or Hindus, Muslims, animists, Buddhists…) wasting their time? If acceptance of Christ as our Savior is a requisite for eternal salvation, then should we expect that these non-Christians will not be admitted to Heaven if they persist in their errant beliefs? After dying the most horrific of deaths in the gas chamber at Auschwitz, are we to believe that Wiesel’s mother, say, was not sent to eternal reward and peace but rather to Hell or Purgatory to continue her suffering, simply because she was born into a Jewish family? I can’t accept that idea, but to reject it seems to reject whatever special grace that we are taught to believe comes with being a faithful Christian. Extending the idea further, what about otherwise good people who are born into agnostic or atheistic families, and live their lives adhering to those beliefs; should they be blamed and punished because they never felt the compulsion to pray or attend church, etc?
2. Of course, the more obvious faith-challenging aspect of the book is the simple fact of Auschwitz and the fact that six million people could be exterminated in the most horrific way possible. What kind of God would allow such horrendous suffering to occur? Why should anyone be expected to endure such torture in life and others, such as myself, be given a life of plenty? The most agonizing thing that I have had to recently endure was indecision about the size of the HDTV that I wanted to buy. To be a Jew in Romania in 1944, or a street urchin in Haiti in 2010, or a 10 year old with incurable bone cancer anytime, is to live a life of incomparable suffering when contrasted with the lives of most of the rest of us. This isn’t fair. Why should some suffer and some be blessed?
3. I know that the answer to the “why did Auschwitz happen” question has something to do with free will and the presence of evil in the world, and that the horrible Nazis chose to do evil things, with the implication that the rest of us, good people, would have chosen to do the good and right thing. Reading Night, I imagined myself as the good Nazi camp guard, giving extra soup to the Jews, maybe helping them escape, etc. In reality though, if I had been born in Bavaria in 1918 - probably as a Catholic- and influenced growing up by the anti-semitism and Nazi propraganda rampant at the time, I can imagine myself enlisting with pride in the SS and being sent to guard at Auschwitz and doing my very best to be the top guard there, entirely indifferent to the suffering of the Jews underfoot. If I was a little unhinged because of psychopathology or maybe abuse as a child, I can imagine myself being an especially cruel SS camp guard. My point is that free choice or free will seems to depend very heavily on circumstance, to the point that I am not even sure where choice enters the equation. The American version of me born in 1970 views the Holocaust with complete and utter revulsion; the imaginary Bavarian version of me born in 1918 could have been a willing participant. How should we view moral culpability, then?

Hi,

It does sound like you need to study some of the basics of the Catholic faith. Remember though, according to our faith you are created in the image of God. You bear God’s imprint within you. Thus your noticing that the world is truly not as it should be is the voice of conscience calling out against the injustice and evil you perceive.

But what is this injustice we face? That a child gets a painful disease and dies young? That an earthquake kills thousands of people? These are not ‘unjust’ if God does not exist. They are just unfortunate things that happen. We all undergo things we would prefer not to undergo and we all die; and that is not unjust, especially if God does not exist. It’s just what happens…

But we think it is unjust. And we think God exists. And God must exist if injustice is not to be the final word. That’s what you can learn from looking at the holocaust. It doesn’t matter what we do to honor the memory of the dead - they’re just dead and they were unjustly brutalized and that’s the final word… unless God exists. You need to look at things more realistically instead of dwelling in abstractions like RD. Evil is an insoluble problem only if God does not exist.

 

[Betterave]

I recommend you read “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl, another holocaust survivor. It will help you to understand that suffering is primarily a practical problem rather than a theoretical one. Treating it as primarily a theoretical problem pretty much guarantees you will have a hopeless and shallow view of one of the most important phenomena of human life.

You could also read about Maximilian Kolbe or any of the many heroes of the holocaust or any such tragedy, demonic or natural (including the crucifixion of our Lord). God’s light can shine in the midst of the very worst suffering - doesn’t that tell you something? Maybe you should spend some time dwelling on that, seeing that hopelessness is not inevitable.

 

[Chris1112]

Hmmm… I’m not sure how to use the quote feature yet… in reference to the below copy & paste thought:

** “My point is that free choice or free will seems to depend very heavily on circumstance, to the point that I am not even sure where choice enters the equation. The American version of me born in 1970 views the Holocaust with complete and utter revulsion; the imaginary Bavarian version of me born in 1918 could have been a willing participant. How should we view moral culpability, then?”**

Greetings! I have also read ‘Night’ and it challenged me in similar ways. The part in the story where the protagonist loses his faith is really the part that I always remember as the most vivid and heart wrenching. It always struck as so much worse than the other horrors that occurred to this man.

I’m fairly new to Catholic teachings, but your question 3 reminded me of a book by CS Lewis called ‘Mere Christianity,’ specifically the first 20 or so pages where he makes an argument for the human natural law and the existence of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ outside of circumstance. This might give you more information to work from in resolving your hypothetical situation (you give if you were born in 1970… ). In brief, Lewis argues that an individual’s choices are also greatly influenced by the existence of the natural human law in addition to circumstance and further how this law is related to God’s influence.

I’m not suggesting reading this as a source for Catholic beliefs or even as fact in and of itself – this is just an argument for the case so question and be critical! However, I found this specific reading to be very beneficial to me in answering similar questions you have for your third paragraph. If you’re open to reading another 20 pages, like ‘Night,’ it is a book that has had a very positive impact on my life and I would recommend.

 

[tonyrey]

I thought that belief in Christ is necessary to have eternal life. If it is not necessary, then why be Catholic?

Jesus did not come into the sake of the world for the sake of a select few. He came for everyone but not everyone has the opportunity to hear His message or to be brought up with an open mind. Many people are brainwashed by the society in which they live. But anyone who sincerely loves others and follows His teaching - even unknowingly - will be with Him in heaven.

So, should I be thankful that God allowed the Holocaust to happen? I am not.

So you believe **no one **should have free will because a minority abuse it?
Doesn’t that strike you as unjust?

Also, I am not sure what being able to shape my destiny has to do with love. My dog seems happily in love with me, but she has never done anything to shape her destiny.

J.S.Mill noted that it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied rather than a pig satisfied…. If you equate your dog’s love with a person’s love your reasoning is defective. Your destiny has everything to do with love - as you will find out if you choose to love yourself at the expense of others… But perhaps you believe you have no control over your destiny…

So how could life be arranged so that there is less inequality? It is a Utopian dream that cannot be fulfilled in a physical world in which we are prey to the “heart-ache and thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to”…

God is God. It should not be a dream, if God is loving and omnipotent, that the world be created fairly and equally.

It would be fascinating to know how the world could be created so that everyone is treated fairly and equally. Please let us know how you would design such a world?

Ignoring the suffering of the Holocaust, which may have been due to the free choice of man, consider still the victims of the earthquake in Haiti or the tsunami in Indonesia, or young victims of incurable disease; why should such ****** things randomly happen to people in the world?

You have answered your own question! Design does not exclude an element of chance.
Tragic coincidences are inevitable in any complex physical system. How would you arrange for no one ever to be killed in an earthquake? BTW When the next earthquake occurs in a highly populated city** who **do you think will be to blame?

As Catholics, we believe that God can intervene in the world, right?

You don’t seem to be a Catholic from the way you write…

If we pray hard enough, maybe a miracle will occur and Grandma’s brain tumor will disappear. If God has such power, then why does he not do more?

It seems obvious that no matter how many miracles occur you can always ask for more. When would you be satisfied?Why not ask why anyone has a brain tumour? Or a disease? Or a deformity? Or an accident? Why not a world totally free from frustration, failure, interference, conflict, violence, pain, suffering, destruction and death? All we need is a blueprint…

 

[rfulks]

I recommend you read “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl, another holocaust survivor. It will help you to understand that suffering is primarily a practical problem rather than a theoretical one. Treating it as primarily a theoretical problem pretty much guarantees you will have a hopeless and shallow view of one of the most important phenomena of human life.

You could also read about Maximilian Kolbe or any of the many heroes of the holocaust or any such tragedy, demonic or natural (including the crucifixion of our Lord). God’s light can shine in the midst of the very worst suffering - doesn’t that tell you something? Maybe you should spend some time dwelling on that, seeing that hopelessness is not inevitable.

Thanks. I have heard of this book and will look into it. I would point out, though, that of Jews and others who were able to maintain their faith in the concentration camps, there were at least as many who did not. Primo Levi, for instance, is a well-known author who lost whatever faith he had in the camps.

 

[rfulks]

Hmmm… I’m not sure how to use the quote feature yet… in reference to the below copy & paste thought:

** “My point is that free choice or free will seems to depend very heavily on circumstance, to the point that I am not even sure where choice enters the equation. The American version of me born in 1970 views the Holocaust with complete and utter revulsion; the imaginary Bavarian version of me born in 1918 could have been a willing participant. How should we view moral culpability, then?”**

Greetings! I have also read ‘Night’ and it challenged me in similar ways. The part in the story where the protagonist loses his faith is really the part that I always remember as the most vivid and heart wrenching. It always struck as so much worse than the other horrors that occurred to this man.

I’m fairly new to Catholic teachings, but your question 3 reminded me of a book by CS Lewis called ‘Mere Christianity,’ specifically the first 20 or so pages where he makes an argument for the human natural law and the existence of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ outside of circumstance. This might give you more information to work from in resolving your hypothetical situation (you give if you were born in 1970… ). In brief, Lewis argues that an individual’s choices are also greatly influenced by the existence of the natural human law in addition to circumstance and further how this law is related to God’s influence.

I’m not suggesting reading this as a source for Catholic beliefs or even as fact in and of itself – this is just an argument for the case so question and be critical! However, I found this specific reading to be very beneficial to me in answering similar questions you have for your third paragraph. If you’re open to reading another 20 pages, like ‘Night,’ it is a book that has had a very positive impact on my life and I would recommend.

Thanks. I think I read Mere Christianity in college, but I will definitely look into it again.

 

[rfulks]

Jesus did not come into the sake of the world for the sake of a select few. He came for everyone but not everyone has the opportunity to hear His message or to be brought up with an open mind. Many people are brainwashed by the society in which they live. But anyone who sincerely loves others and follows His teaching - even unknowingly - will be with Him in heaven.

Again, are the devout believers of non-Christian faiths just hopelessly deluded? The devout Muslims and Jews that I know are at least as devout in their faith as any Catholic. If Christ gives us all redemption and eternal life, no matter our beliefs, then why should any of us be Catholic? What was gained by, say, the Spanish missionaries of 500 years ago, if the otherwise good Indians of the new world were living otherwise good lives - they were saved even if they didn’t know it, right? I have doubts about my Catholic faith, but if it doesn’t matter what I believe, why should I worry?

So you believe **no one **should have free will because a minority abuse it?
Doesn’t that strike you as unjust?

My point was that, to understand the Holocaust as an example of bad choices freely willed by men, is to oversimplify the issue and to ignore the very large role of circumstance in every action good or bad that we take. I have never had the slightest inkling of a temptation to participate in genocide. The imaginary Nazi version of me, though, could very well have willingly participated, even eagerly. Is the difference simply based on willed choice? I don’t think so; I think the difference is based wholly on circumstance. Circumstance plays such a large role in our lives that I am not even sure where or if a notion of free will - and its corollary of moral culpability - even fits.

It would be fascinating to know how the world could be created so that everyone is treated fairly and equally. Please let us know how you would design such a world?

It would look a lot like Communist Russia, I am sure. Just kidding.
A good place to start would be the elimination of random horrific natural disasters and catastrophic/incurable medical illnesses that afflict the young and vulnerable. I would also like to see the elimination of the gap between rich and poor. There are lots of other things.

BTW When the next earthquake occurs in a highly populated city** who **do you think will be to blame?

Who are you getting at, God? That is probably who I will question the next time something horrific happens.

You don’t seem to be a Catholic from the way you write…

I am certainly Catholic, born and raised, but I am not without doubts.

It seems obvious that no matter how many miracles occur you can always ask for more. When would you be satisfied?Why not ask why anyone has a brain tumour? Or a disease? Or a deformity? Or an accident? Why not a world totally free from frustration, failure, interference, conflict, violence, pain, suffering, destruction and death?

Yes, why not? If God is loving and omnipotent, why not? I love my children more than anything, and if I could prevent either of them from ever suffering in the slightest, I would do so. If God loves us and He can intervene in the world, then why did He not take action to prevent the unnecessary suffering of 100s of thousands of poor people in Haiti? What is gained by allowing that to happen? If miracles really do occur in the world, and God can make the sun dance around the sky of Fatima, or occasionally cure someone of disease in the interest of advancing someone’s canonization to sainthood, then why doesn’t He use his omnipotence more often?

 

[Schn]

There have been interesting tests by psychologists on the response of humans under the influence of authority, such as the Milgram experiment. It is probable that the entire German army could have been replaced with modern lay people with little difference in the eventual outcome.

 

[tonyrey]

Again, are the devout believers of non-Christian faiths just hopelessly deluded? The devout Muslims and Jews that I know are at least as devout in their faith as any Catholic. If Christ gives us all redemption and eternal life, no matter our beliefs, then why should any of us be Catholic?

Devout believers or even non-believers who live according to the teaching of Christ are more likely to be redeemed than nominal Christians. All the great religions of the world teach the same basic moral and spiritual truths but Jesus is the only person who told us to love our enemies and be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. He is the only person who fulfilled His teaching to the letter by** living** and** dying **for us. Goodness and sanctity are not confined to Christians but Christ is the most direct path to perfection. “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”. What defects can you find is his precepts?

What was gained by, say, the Spanish missionaries of 500 years ago, if the otherwise good Indians of the new world were living otherwise good lives - they were saved even if they didn’t know it, right? I have doubts about my Catholic faith, but if it doesn’t matter what I believe, why should I worry?

It matters what we believe because good people can commit crimes through moral ignorance - like the millions of unnecessary abortions carried out in recent years.

My point was that, to understand the Holocaust as an example of bad choices freely willed by men, is to oversimplify the issue and to ignore the very large role of circumstance in every action good or bad that we take. I have never had the slightest inkling of a temptation to participate in genocide. The imaginary Nazi version of me, though, could very well have willingly participated, even eagerly. Is the difference simply based on willed choice? I don’t think so; I think the difference is based **wholly **on circumstance. Circumstance plays such a large role in our lives that I am not even sure where or if a notion of free will - and its corollary of moral culpability - even fits.

If free will does not exist there is no such thing as evil. So you can do what you like and to hell with everybody else! After all, you’re not responsible, are you?

It would look a lot like Communist Russia, I am sure. Just kidding.

You can see the consequences of amorality… but it would be far worse than that. We would be biological machines incapable of thinking for ourselves. Every thought we have would be caused by physical processes. Your objections to all the suffering in the world would be meaningless. Why? Because everything happens in the only way it can happen.
We have no control whatsoever over the course of events (if you reject free will)…

A good place to start would be the elimination of random horrific natural disasters and catastrophic/incurable medical illnesses that afflict the young and vulnerable. I would also like to see the elimination of the gap between rich and poor. There are lots of other things.

You still haven’t explained precisely how these results would be achieved…

Who are you getting at, God? That is probably who I will question the next time something horrific happens.

You think human beings are unaware of the consequences of building large cities in earthquake zones?

I am certainly Catholic, born and raised, but I am not without doubts.

Good! An unexamined faith is not worth having…

I love my children more than anything, and if I could prevent either of them from ever suffering in the slightest, I would do so.

Are you going to do that for the rest of their lives? Keep them at home and shelter them from all the risks and dangers of life in the world? Force them to avoid doing what you know will harm them? In short, become a control freak? How do you think they would feel? They would probably run away from home and hate you for your suppression of their freedom…

If God loves us and He can intervene in the world, then why did He not take action to prevent the unnecessary suffering of 100s of thousands of poor people in Haiti? What is gained by allowing that to happen? If miracles really do occur in the world, and God can make the sun dance around the sky of Fatima, or occasionally cure someone of disease in the interest of advancing someone’s canonization to sainthood, then why doesn’t He use his omnipotence more often?

If God intervened every time there is going to be a natural disaster it would be obvious that a benevolent supernatural power is at work. We would no longer be free to choose what to believe and how to live. It would be a case of Big Father watching us all the time… The entire world would be worse than Communist Russia!

We take our freedom for granted until we lose it… but then if we don’t have free will freedom is an illusion anyway… So why complain about anything? There is no such thing as good, evil, justice, innocence, guilt, responsibility, integrity, corruption, selfishness or love… We just happen to exist for no reason or purpose…

 

[Schn]

If God intervened every time there is going to be a natural disaster it would be obvious that a benevolent supernatural power is at work. We would no longer be free to choose what to believe and how to live. It would be a case of Big Father watching us all the time… The entire world would be worse than Communist Russia!

Translating…
…
…

The less evidence for God there is, the more evidence for God there is!

This is not logical.

 

[tonyrey]

Translating…
…
…

This is not logical.

Explain why…

 

[Chris1112]

I’ve been thinking since the original post on how different people lead different lives and how that could be just from God’s perspective. That thought really got under my skin as a fellow questioner and I have come up with two theories I would appreciate feedback on.

Theory One: Is it possible that if Subject A has a hard life that their specific time in purgatory may be less than that of Subject B who commits the same amount of sins, but did not have as many hurdles to overcome? In this theory, God is just because he considers circumstance and balances things at the very end to ensure fairness. I see this happen in American courts where people are given lighter sentences based off circumstances. Even thought two people commit the same crime against the law, their punishment is adjusted for the sake of justice.

Theory Two: Is it possible that over the course of a life people all experience the same ratio (not amount) of difficult circumstance and blessings? The child dying in the womb has a ratio of 0:0, experiencing the same ratio of difficult circumstance to blessings. The Holocaust survivor living to age 90 has a ratio of 120:120 of difficult circumstances to blessing over the course of an entire lifetime. One example would be the author of ‘Night’: he had a terrible childhood in a concentration camp, but went on to become a Nobel Laureate, potentially balancing the scales. Even though God does not create a world where we all have the same quantitative experiences, is it possible we each have the same qualitative experience?

Just theories… they may not be true, but from a Catholic doctrine point of view, are either of these possible? If so, do they make sense logically? If I’m off base, please let me know how and why so I can continue to grow. Cheers!