What makes suffering senseless? In asking that question, there are two underlying assumptions that are made: 1) suffering is inescapable, and whether or not we like it, there will always be suffering in the world, and 2) there is suffering that is senseless and suffering that is not. German theologian Dorothee Söelle suggests that if we do not find meaning in the suffering that we experience, it allows the suffering to “deprive us of the activity of living.”1 Equating suffering with life is a bold statement to make in the face of genuine evils, but she writes this in the wake of Auschwitz, which is arguably the most obvious example in modern history of how much one human can suffer at the hands of another human. If we ask “yes, but why is suffering necessary?” I think we miss the point, and we get distracted dreaming of a parallel universe where we can eat a whole pint of Chubby Hubby without gaining weight. I don’t know if suffering is necessary. I know that it exists, and the only thing left to do with it is figure out how to give it meaning, so that it is not senseless suffering, and to see what we can do together to minimize each other’s suffering.
Who experiences suffering? We all do. Every human suffers on some level, and unfortunately some have to suffer more than others. If all humans suffer, and Jesus is fully human, then Jesus suffered also. If Jesus suffered and Jesus is God, does that mean that God also suffers? If we think of suffering as something to avoid at all costs, then we want to protect our concept of God by saying, “God is too strong and too powerful to suffer,” since we cannot imagine that God could be cornered and forced to suffer. An all-powerful God who is aloof to suffering, or a God that is weakened in suffering are not the only options. Jürgen Moltmann offers active suffering as a choice that is made by God for the sake of love, saying that “if God were in every respect incapable of suffering, he would also be incapable of love.”2
If we think about it, in any relationship where love exists, there also exists suffering. We suffer for the sake of love. We choose our own suffering over the suffering of others. This is the dangerous memory of the radical love of the Cross that people who want to inflict suffering want everyone to forget.3 If we forget the Cross, we forget the Resurrection. If we cannot make meaning of suffering and it becomes an end that consumes us, then we have no hope. We must remember that even Christ was in despair in Gethsemane, but despite his personal anguish he chose to accept suffering for the sake of love. Sometimes we are the ones accepting the suffering on behalf of others, and sometimes we are the ones that are grateful that someone has accepted suffering on our behalf. In either case, if there were no love, there would not be suffering.
So, if suffering is a known reality, how can we really blame those who cause it? The inevitability of suffering does not absolve the one by whom suffering comes (Luke 17:1). For any kind of suffering or injustice, we all have a responsibility to prevent it, recognize it, and address it in whatever capacity we are able. If we know to do good, and we do not do it, James 4:17 teaches us that this is a sin. Some say that the slogan silence is violence has been politicized and used to justify violence, but the fundamental concept is not new in the political arena, with John Stuart Mill saying in 1867 that “bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” This is an invitation for all of us to consider whether we are the one who is causing someone else to suffer, the one who is on the receiving end of this suffering, or the bystander who is witnessing this suffering. For the rest of this article, I will try to convince you that we have a responsibility to minimize the suffering of others, even if it means suffering ourselves.
So, what do we do now? It depends on who you are in the equation. The sufferer, the cause of the suffering, and the witness to the suffering each have different responsibilities. Many times in our community, it is the person that is suffering who is given all of the responsibility to “endure suffering so that you can go to heaven.” We tell stories of the martyrs and Diocletian. We often interpret the Cross in a way that does not just recognize that “suffering is a reality,” but instead accepts the subtle confusion that “suffering must be a reality.” In the first statement, suffering is expressed as the natural byproduct of the freedom that God gives us, but in the second case we are saying that God is the one who ordains our suffering for the sake of purification. At this point in my life, I am not even comfortable with the language that “God allows suffering,” since I think it gives the false impression that God is passively sitting idly by while suffering is happening. God is actively working against suffering, but God is doing so in a way that does not undermine our freedom as human beings. This is the mystery of the Cross.
Our job is to carry our own cross, so that we can work with God against suffering. This is the central message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that we love one another as God has loved us (John 13:34). It is not loving and it is not even true to tell someone who is suffering that “God wanted it this way for a reason.” The most important message that one can tell someone who is suffering is “you are not alone.”4 Even in clinical medicine, the most important gift that providers offer to patients is compassion, not the actual medical treatment.5 So if you are the person that is suffering, you do not need to feel crazy and wonder to yourself, “why doesn’t anyone care that I’m suffering?” It is a failure of your community if it not only allows suffering to happen, which is arguably inevitable, but it also holds such a tragically misguided understanding of the meaning of suffering that makes you feel that this is exactly what is supposed to happen, and you are a “bad Christian” if you think otherwise.
There is a possibility that someone is reading this who has knowingly or unknowingly caused the suffering of another person. To you I will confess that the person writing this is also someone who has both knowingly and unknowingly caused the suffering of another person. The hope that we have for each other is that we do not do this willingly, and we do not keep this hidden, but allow the truth to come to the light, so that we can bear fruits of repentance. We believe that all of our sins can be forgiven, but we must not use God’s forgiveness and mercy as a reason to let ourselves off the hook of the consequences of our negative behavior. We must be strict with ourselves and tolerant of others, as was both said and lived out by Marcus Aurelius. God’s grace is not a cheap grace that we take for granted, but the costly grace of Dietrich Bonhoeffer who also taught and lived out the responsibility we have in claiming to be followers of Jesus Christ. It is not enough to say, “I am not perfect, but I am doing my best” if there are very clear steps that I can take to lessen the suffering of another human being.
In deciding what these clear steps are and how to take them, there is a tremendous amount of discernment that is necessary in order to know what to do to help a situation without causing unnecessary collateral damage. Just to simplify the concept, let’s just say there is a decision between A and B. There are strong opinions in favor of A and strong opinions in favor of B. You are the one who needs to make this decision, and in listening to all the arguments, you find yourself looking at a spectrum of decision making that looks like this:
On the far left end of the spectrum, the choice is clearly A, and on the far right end the choice is clearly B. However, you have heard so many strong arguments for both sides, that you are able to see it both ways, and you are simply trying to figure out where on this spectrum there is a shift from a shade of gray that is dark enough to decide A, to a shade of gray that is light enough to decide B. Someone else may draw that line elsewhere, but you need to decide where that line is for you, and then critically evaluate the situation well enough to figure out on which side of the line this specific decision lies. For any decision maker, where to put this line and how the evidence is evaluated will be based on a perspective driven by experience that is inevitably fraught with biases. The best that we can do is try to unearth these biases, so that we can render them as ineffective as possible. Therefore, after minimizing your own bias, hearing all of the different arguments for both sides, and deciding where you draw your line, you have to choose between A and B. Or do you? Sometimes there is a choice C that takes the best elements of A and B, to combine them into a broader solution that appeals to enough people on both sides so that instead of a yes or no that alienates one side or another, there is a consensus that rejects the extremes:
In the current sexual abuse crisis that the Coptic Church is dealing with, we are each being presented with a false choice: do you support the Church, or do you support the survivors? This is an artificial A and B choice. It is not only possible, but it is necessary to find a way to suffer with those who have suffered in our community, without getting rid of our community altogether. These would both be examples of senseless suffering. We are in a very fragile place right now as a result of differences in sociocultural norms, and decisions that have been made in the absence of the proper dialogue. We must move to a place of antifragility that takes suffering and transforms it into strength.6 If we empower every congregant to advocate for equality and combat abuse in all its forms, we will have a Church that is an open, transparent, and safe environment that is filled with love, support, and trust between the clergy, the servants, and the laity. This is the vision of The Agape Project, and we invite you to share with us in the dialogue that looks for a solution that asks everyone involved, not just the survivors, to suffer for the sake of love.
Mena Mesiha
The Agape Project | Engagement Form
- Sölle, Dorothee. Suffering. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, 126.
- Moltmann, Jürgen. Jesus Christ for Today’s World. 1st Fortress Press ed.. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994, 44.
- Johann Baptist Metz, Faith in History and Society: Toward a Practical Fundamental Theology (2007), Chapter 5, “The Dangerous Memory of Jesus Christ,” 88.
- https://www.agape-project.org/resources
- Dempsey, Christina. The Antidote to Suffering : How Compassionate Connected Care Can Improve Safety, Quality, and Experience. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2018.
- Taleb, Nassim Nicholas. Antifragile : Things That Gain from Disorder. 1st ed.. New York: Random House, 2012.
