Problem of Evil [2]: The Justice Defense

[Magnanimity]

Praise God that mankind has with His grace reduced the number of great sufferings through advances in weather forecasting

The Boxing Day tsunami occurred in 2004 and killed 227,898 people. The only praising that may have occurred by those affected on that day would have been for the survivors. The numbers of “why me?” questions on that day that went up to Heaven must have numbered in the millions, I suppose. And what could the church have answered in reply? What could you have answered? “Oh, it’s ok because this type of suffering is just par for the human course” ?? I sure hope that wouldn’t have been an answer.

sufferings such as premature death

Of course premature death could not be said to be “normal.” The very qualifier of “premature” evidences its abnormality.

From the perspective of all human history, the normal range of human suffering includes these great sufferings as far more commonplace.

The Holocaust, the Boxing Day tsunami, your child dying young, you dying young, I’m sorry but there is just no evidence to suggest that these things are commonplace. They are very rare interruptions to the norm of smaller, everyday sufferings like the car breaking down, your child getting sick, you forgot to pay a bill on time, the sins you habitually struggle with…we tolerate these because of their universality and frequency. We do not tolerate extreme and rare suffering. We ask “why me?”

 

[o_mlly]

The Boxing Day tsunami occurred in 2004 and killed 227,898 people. The only praising that may have occurred by those affected on that day would have been for the survivors. The numbers of “why me?” questions on that day that went up to Heaven must have numbered in the millions, I suppose. And what could the church have answered in reply? What could you have answered? “Oh, it’s ok because this type of suffering is just par for the human course” ?? I sure hope that wouldn’t have been an answer.

I think this you may have this backwards. As to those In heaven, don’t they rejoice? Instead of asking, “Why me, Lord?” I think their utterance would be, “Thank you, Lord!”

As to survivors of loved ones who died, do they rejoice at their fate? No, I think it more likely they suffer the loss of loved ones. The grief of a loved one’s death is their loss of the love one’s presence, a self-centered loss. In time, the grieving process gives way to the truths of our faith and they come to recognize that love always wills the good of the other, not of self.

… there is just no evidence to suggest that these things are commonplace.

Yes, that these events were, and in some places, still are commonplace, there is plenty of evidence.

 

[Neithan]

My contention is that the theist (of which I am one!) has no great answer, no answer at all really, as far as I can tell.

The theist does not have an answer qua theism, and neither does the atheist; but the Christian does.

From Salvifici Doloris

1. But in order to perceive the true answer to the “why” of suffering, we must look to the revelation of divine love, the ultimate source of the meaning of everything that exists. Love is also the richest source of the meaning of suffering, which always remains a mystery: we are conscious of the insufficiency and inadequacy of our explanations. Christ causes us to enter into the mystery and to discover the “why” of suffering, as far as we are capable of grasping the sublimity of divine love.

In order to discover the profound meaning of suffering, following the revealed word of God, we must open ourselves wide to the human subject in his manifold potentiality. We must above all accept the light of Revelation not only insofar as it expresses the transcendent order of justice but also insofar as it illuminates this order with Love, as the definitive source of everything that exists. Love is: also the fullest source of the answer to the question of the meaning of suffering. This answer has been given by God to man in the Cross of Jesus Christ.

 

[Magnanimity]

how there is no contradiction to God’s perfect goodness

I think that is correct, but only if God actually does achieve this everlasting Sabbath for his creation, in the end. That is, I think the “to bring about a greater good “argument only works if the greater good is actually fulfilled for the entirety of creation. So, certain issues like eternal hell arise quite naturally for the Catholic Church, since our greatest theologians of the middle ages followed Saint Augustine in his belief of the eternity of hell. What would be the greater good for Jane as she persists in a state of unending torment and suffering in the afterlife, especially given that Jane was created for beatitude, as Aquinas affirms? Certain Catholic authors when writing on the problem of evil at times affirm that since God is not a moral agent, like you and me, he is therefore under no obligation to affect my final good. I think that is very bizarre reasoning. When I hear arguments like that I think to myself that the person is moving the concept of goodness as applicable to God away from analogy and more towards equivocation. What do you think?

 

[Neithan]

God bless

God bless you too. It seems that you’re pointing out the catechism’s teaching of the “greater good” of permitting evil; but is all suffering just and deserved?

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

diction to God’s perfect goodness

I think that is correct, but only if God actually does achieve this everlasting Sabbath for his creation, in the end. That is, I think the “to bring about a greater good “argument only works if the greater good is actually fulfilled for the entirety of creation. So, certain issues like eternal hell arise quite naturally for the Catholic Church, since our greatest theologians of the middle ages followed Saint Augustine in his belief of the eternity of hell. What would be the greater good for Jane as she persists in a state of unending torment and suffering in the afterlife, especially given that Jane was created for beatitude, as Aquinas affirms? Certain Catholic authors when writing on the problem of evil at times affirm that since God is not a moral agent, like you and me, he is therefore under no obligation to affect my final good. I think that is very bizarre reasoning. When I hear arguments like that I think to myself that the person is moving the concept of goodness as applicable to God away from analogy and more towards equivocation. What do you think?

God is not under an obligation to effect anyone’s final good and he is not a moral agent like you and me, and we’re still able to have a consistent and analyzable conception of goodness without equivocating. I reviewed this in detail in the other topic, I think starting around Post# 78.

I have some other thoughts on justice and such, but I’ll leave those for later.

 

[Magnanimity]

The theist does not have an answer qua theism , and neither does the atheist; but the Christian does.

Fair enough. When I first engaged with the first part of your number one in the OP, I brought up the argument given by the atheist philosopher Mohanty. As I say, I do grant that theists and Christians can give general and somewhat vague answers to overall suffering within the world, The universal suffering of every day life. But when we find out about these rare and extreme types of suffering, the answers do not seem to address the questioner’s very particular reaction to her suffering.

Yes, that these events were, and in some places, still are commonplace, there is plenty of evidence.

So, where are the places where wars never end, and men constantly contract terminal diseases at age 40, and natural disasters never cease? It is not reasonable to suggest that extreme suffering is common place. War itself is an uncommon interruption to the norm Of peace. Disease is an uncommon interruption to the norm of health. Natural disasters are uncommon interruptions to the norm of regular weather patterns. We gain nothing in this conversation by trying to pretend that all of us routinely experience extreme suffering.

 

[Wesrock]

We don’t need to be vague in answering how God’s perfect goodness is not in contradiction with a world in which there is evil.

 

[Neithan]

Agree. That’s what I appreciate about our Roman and Latin tradition. We see and acknowledge the unfathomable divine mystery, and rest in it — but we also go as far as we possibly can with the reasoning capacity God has given us into that mystery to appreciate it. But even St. Thomas said it was all “straw” in the end. Providence still left us with his work.

 

[o_mlly]

We gain nothing in this conversation by trying to pretend that all of us routinely experience extreme suffering.

If what one now suffers claims it to be extreme suffering then they merely evidence that they have not yet experienced real suffering. Welcome to the human condition.

 

[Magnanimity]

I reviewed this in detail in the other topic, I think starting around Post# 78

Thanks, I haven’t read the other topic at all. I’ll check it out now.

We see and acknowledge the unfathomable divine mystery, and rest in it

Very true. And I’m perfectly fine with mystery. I think it would be hard to be Catholic if we couldn’t stand mystery (it might even be hard to be human not acknowledging substantial mystery here).

If what one now suffers claims it to be extreme suffering then they merely evidence that they have not yet experienced real suffering. Welcome to the human condition.

Sure, I was only trying to acknowledge the difference between the universal, ordinary human suffering and the rare, extreme instances of suffering. We tolerate and generally accept the existence of the former. We are repulsed by and reject the existence of the latter. So, yeah we all suffer, but we do not all suffer like Job. It’s an important distinction to make for the problem of evil discussion.

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

I reviewed this in detail in the other topic, I think starting around Post# 78

Thanks, I haven’t read the other topic at all. I’ll check it out now.

I just double checked and realized I got the post# wrong. It starts post# 72.

Problem of Evil (again): Logic [intro] Philosophy

I have 4 to 5 posts of content here. The forums have a three-consecutive-post limit. I’m going to need an assist/bump halfway through. The treatment I’d like to give this would require at least an essay, so I’ve opted to responding with “a few” sentences. Those who put forth the Problem of Evil as an objection to an omniscient, omnipotent, perfectly good God assume that evil is a real phenomenon in the world, at least for the sake of argument. Many atheists I speak to are, in reality, ethical…

 

[o_mlly]

So, yeah we all suffer, but we do not all suffer like Job. It’s an important distinction to make for the problem of evil discussion.

We should at least suffer like Job. Job is our first lesson in how to suffer. Christ is our last.

 

[Latin]

That is, I think the “to bring about a greater good “argument only works if the greater good is actually fulfilled for the entirety of creation.

The Church officially may not yet teach God saves every member of the human race.

Yet the whole Church is praying for the salvation of every member of the human race (CCC 1058) and we all should believe what we are praying for.
.
Also, many members of the Catholic Church from about the highest level teaching from long time that God will save the entire human race, which is not heresy, the Church would not pray for the fulfilment of a heresy.
.
Also Cardinal Luis F. Ladaria Jesuit theologian has been secretary, the second in command, of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith since 2008 until 02/07/2017 and at this date Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Ladaria SJ. to the position of the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and he is openly teaching Universal Salvation since many years.

Jesus Christ Salvation of All by Cardinal Luis F. Ladaria SJ, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Excerpt from his book:
“Jesus includes everyone and excludes no one, and all of us have received his fullness (cfr. John 1:16).

The universality of salvation and unity of Christ’s mediation mutually affirm each other.

Yet by dying, he gave us life that is the life of his resurrection.

Even those who do not know him are called to this divine vocation, that is, to the perfect son-ship in and through Christ.

Christians and non-Christians reach this goal by virtue of the gift of the Spirit that associates us with the unique paschal ministry of Christ even if it is through diverse paths known only to God.”

.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith formerly known as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition.
It was founded to defend the church from heresy; today, it is the body responsible for promulgating and defending Catholic doctrines.
.
In our modern Roman Catholic Church more and more Catholic theologians and Catholic Priests teaching Universal Salvation.

We all should believe what we are praying for, which is the salvation of the entire human race.

.
Fallen man cannot redeem himself, (De fide dogma). – It is God’s responsibility to save ALL OF US.
.
Without the special help of God the justified cannot persevere to the end in justification, (De fide dogma). – It is God’s responsibility to keep us saved by virtue of His grace, the gift of final perseverance, which is an INFALLIBLE PROTECTION of the salvation of every receiver, without it there is no salvation, INFALLIBLE teachings of the Trent.

CCC 2016 The children of our holy mother the Church rightly hope for the grace of final perseverance.
.
Makes no difference how we cut it, aided free will and God’s gift of final perseverance rules out hell, makes it null and void. – It is plain and simple.
In my opinion: Someone doesn’t need much logic to conclude it.
.
God bless

 

[Neithan]

openly teaching Universal Salvation since many years

I am not familiar with Cdl Ladaria’s writing, but if by “Universal Salvation” you mean Apokatastasis: that all human beings will eventually receive eternal life in Heaven; then he does not teach that. I did a quick search and found a blog post with a quote from the book you cite:

“The possibility of damnation, above all for one’s self, is always before us. Apokatastasis is not compatible with the Christian message of salvation, simply because it distorts the message, stripping it of all meaning and significance. It makes automatic what should be the free response of love to the love of God, which offers to us, in Christ and in his Spirit, participation in the divine life.” [p. 131]

 

[Latin]

God bless you too. It seems that you’re pointing out the catechism’s teaching of the “greater good” of permitting evil; but is all suffering just and deserved?

Neithan please consider a Chemotherapy for a cancer treatment.

The doctor is justly doing the Chemotherapy for his patient, the Chemotherapy heals the patient, and the Chemotherapy cause the suffering of his patient, his patient doesn’t deserve the suffering.

By the same reasoning:

OUR SUFFERINGS MAKES US JOYFUL SAINTS IN HEAVEN.

This is above the reason, GOD CREATED THE DRAMAS OF EVIL AND SIN.

THE DRAMAS OF EVIL AND SIN cause the sufferings of the human race, these sufferings makes the human race joyful saints in heaven.

As we see, for our benefit in this world, God is justly cause us the sufferings, because our sufferings makes us joyful saints in heaven, but God cannot be justly punish us from our sins which He is tailor made for us to commit from all eternity and He causes us to perform for our benefit.

THE REASON GOD CREATED THE DRAMAS OF EVIL AND SIN

Life without suffering would produce spoiled brats, not joyful saints.

Our struggle and tribulation while journeying towards our ultimate perfection through the dramas of evil and sin is the cost which in-prints the virtue/ nobility into our souls – the cost of our road to nobility and perfection.

In this world man has to learn by experience and contrast, and to develop by the overcoming of obstacles (Lactantius, “De ira Dei”, xiii, xv in “P.L., VII, 115-24. St. Augustine “De ordine”, I, vii, n. 18 in “P.L.”, XXXII, 986).

In His training program God designed every obstacles down to its minutest details, and He also designed His aids for us down to its minutest details, the way He aides us that we will able to overcome every our obstacles.
At the end of our training program on this earth, we will be joyful saints in heaven.
.
God bless

 

[Latin]

I am not familiar with Cdl Ladaria’s writing, but if by “Universal Salvation” you mean Apokatastasis:

HERE IS THE EDITORIAL REVIEWS OF THE BOOK

EDITORIAL REVIEWS
“Luis F. Ladaria SJ presents a powerful statement openly advocating universal salvation.
His advocacy of universal salvation is openly and undeniably proclaimed.
David Sielaff, Associates for Scriptural Knowledge, ASK David Sielaff, Associates for Scriptural Knowledge, ASK.
.
This book is a collection of essays published between 2003 and 2006.

The author addresses why it is necessary to maintain that Christ is the universal savior, even though this assertion may sound unintelligible, perhaps shocking, and arrogant to some of our contemporaries.

Ladaria nevertheless holds to the uniqueness of the person Christ as being essential for the ultimate salvation of humankind, because salvation means to participate in the glory that Christ possesses in his humanity, offering us salvation as a free gift and revealing himself a paradigm of what humanity can fully be and become.”
.
When a citation comes out his book that does not always mean he is the author of it.

.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence explains.

This, the beneficent purpose of an all-seeing Providence, is wholly gratuitous, entirely unmerited (Romans 3:24; 9:11-2).

It extends to all men (Romans 2:10; 1 Timothy 2:4), even to the reprobate Jews (Romans 11:26 sq.); and by it all God’s dealings with man are regulated (Ephesians 1:11).

It extends to every individual, adapting itself to the needs of each (St. John Chrysostom, "Hom. Xxviii.).

All things are created and governed with a view to man, to the development of his life and his intelligence, and to the satisfaction of his needs (Aristides, “Apol.”, i, v,).

His wisdom He so orders all events within the universe that the end for which it was created may be realized.

God preserves the universe in being; He acts in and with every creature in each and all its activities.

That end is that all creatures should manifest the glory of God, and in particular that man should glorify Him, recognizing in nature the work of His hand, serving Him in obedience and love, and thereby attaining to the full development of his nature and to eternal happiness in God.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm
.
Universal salvation is NOT HERESY, the whole Catholic Church is praying for universal salvation (CCC 1058), we all should believe what we are praying for.
.
Apocatastasis or apokatastasis literally, (“restoration” or “return”) is the teaching that everyone will, in the end, be saved. It looks toward the ultimate reconciliation of good and evil; all creatures endowed with reason, angels and humans, will eventually come to a harmony in God’s kingdom. It is based on, among other things, St. Peter’s speech in Acts 3:21 ("Christ Jesus who must remain in heaven until the time of the final restoration of all things χρόνων ἀποκ…

Hell not as an eternal punishment, but a tool of divine teaching and correction.
.
God bless

 

[FiveLinden]

At most general answers about why such things may happen disproportionately, and answers as to how there is no contradiction to God’s perfect goodness, but why this individual rather than that one specifically? Perhaps not.

But there is no equivalence between individuals who do well in life and those who suffer. All non-humans end their lives in suffering and pain, often great pain. The numbers experiencing this daily outnumber all the humans who have ever lived, let alone all those who have had a ‘good life’ either in terms of enjoyment or in terms of doing good. You can’t restrict the ‘problem of pain’ to humans. Other creatures experience pain. They have, in Catholic thought, no prospect of eternal life.

 

[IWantGod]

Why hasn’t God, who is all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly loving, eliminated evil?

I would say that the potential for evil or suffering is necessary for the kind of beings that we are. We only know good and have the practical wisdom that good is desirable because we have practical knowledge of the potential for evil or suffering. It is then a question of whether or not it is good to create us knowing that we have the potential for evil and suffering, and i would say yes if there is a greater good that would be lost had god not created us.

 

[FiveLinden]

THE DRAMAS OF EVIL AND SIN cause the sufferings of the human race, this sufferings makes the human race joyful saints in heaven.

As we see, for our benefit in this world, God is justly cause us the sufferings, because our sufferings makes us joyful saints in heaven, but God could cannot justly punish us from our sins which He is tailor made for us to commit from all eternity and He causes us to perform for our benefit.

Why did God create trillions of non-human creatures nearly all of which die in pain and many of which suffer great agony? They have no prospect of eternal life. They committed no sin.