So I was going to talk about this. The snow. Or more specifically the hurricane snowstorm that is currently battering NYC. This picture is actually from last weekend, but I'll update with new pics later. In the meantime I just want to say we have had more snow in the past month than I have ever seen in my life.
Unfortunately, snow in NYC is just miserable, I mean really, really miserable. Not fun, not enjoyable, not a chance to celebrate and roll in the ground (because you never know what is thrown on those infamous NYC streets, even the parks are not safe). And this wonderful snow accumulates on the sidewalks and street corners to make slushy dirty messes that soak your pants and make walking difficult if not impossible.
But that tirade is not what I actually want to talk about. Instead, this should be titledTheodicy: The Question of God and the existence of Evil
This is something I wrestle with frequently. Often at night when sleep seems to be quite fleeting and pain dominates my thoughts. Like tonight. As Trent sleeps peacefully by my side I am laying awake, thinking. So here's the question that is running through my mind.
How can a good and loving God allow such evil in the world?
This question a popular one, especially right after calamitous events such as what happened in Haiti last month. But in my perspective it is a question that is ultimately not helpful coming to any spiritual conclusion. So let's break it down. Essentially there are three instances that we would categorize as "evil." Harm that one person/people cause to another person/people. Illness and death (cancer, heart-attack, etc). And natural disasters or "chance." In all three of these cases this action is something that offends our sense of normality and order. Evil is an unjustifiable reality, or more succinctly, disorder.
Given this reality we now look to what our options are on how to approach this evil. There are essentially three responses. (1) This is the way that the world is. (2) We as humans must work together to fix it. (3) There is a God who has promised He is both good and loving in his care for us.
The nihilist would say there is nothing we or any being (god or other) can do, evil simply is part of the necessity of functioning. This response removes all chance of hope or promise for a better life aside from pure luck. If I were to encounter extreme suffering and pain like what I have seen in Darfur or so many other places, this answer seems both dehumanizing and redundant. Those people are clearly unlucky and must simply wait for their fortunes to change, either way there is nothing to be done in the meantime but wait.
The second response to evil is to say there is no god, and it is only humanity that has the power to create change. You could also say that there is a God and he is either evil or incapable of acting in any way (which would beg the question how can he then be God), but in any case the reality is still the same. All that can or will be is up to us. All that is in the world is up to us to manage, for better or worse. More likely this side would be of the opinion that humanity is naturally good and that cooperation amongst people and coordinate efforts will produce relief from suffering and pain (evil) at some point. The West's reliance on modern medicine would mostly fall under this approach. If we research long enough and hard enough we will find a cure to it all. If we all love each other and work together the world will be in peace. In this instance the ultimate promise though is as hollow as the first response. To the woman in Darfur, the family in Haiti, the child with incurable cancer the response is the same. We will do our best. The problem is, no matter how much work is put forth or how earnest our efforts to "fix" these problems evil continues to arise. Until humanity can harness the weather, perfect the medical body, and arrive at perfect justice these evils will continue to exist. What comfort is that to the family of the child that is dying? What hope does that give to the woman in Darfur? What happens when the child dies? The woman is raped? What hope can you promise them? This response is ultimately a circular argument that leaves the burden of work on the person you are trying to comfort or yourself. What happens when it is humanity itself that is causing evil, since humanity under this response is all that is saving us from this evil? Who or how can one side ever win?
The third response and the one I ultimately always fall to is this response. There is a God and He is good. While I might not understand all that is at work in the world or why I must suffer in pain each night I am comforted by the fact that this God is working for ultimately my best interest. When my husband wrestles with the fact that he can do nothing to alleviate my pain, and I have exhausted all the current medical world can provide for help, we can rest in the knowledge that there is an end that is good. We are not weighed down with the burden of constantly trying to fix the problem ourselves (a special comfort to the incurably afflicted or persecuted). We are not left with this is just the way that life is, so deal with it. For me, there is no other way I can handle the suffering I face every day than to hope there is a God that is greater than I and lovingly caring for my life. To have anything less to hope for is nothing at all, no comfort for the grieved.
So when we are tempted to say to the one who is struggling with evil "this is out of God's hands (implying it is up to you to fix)" or "c'est la vie" haven't we done them more harm then good. To remove a person of hope for a relief from this evil gives them nothing meaningful to live for. This is the greatest injustice that could be done to a person.
I apologize for the 5:00 am ramblings. I couldn't get this out of my mind so hopefully by writing this down (however jumbled and incomprehensible it might be) I might finally be able to get some sleep. Goodnight!
