A Jewish friend explains that, according to her brand of Judaism, the sufferings and injustices we encounter in life are “chosen just for us, to help our souls grow.” She asks if this is compatible with Christianity.
It is not.
It is a possible explanation for her because her form of Judaism believes in reincarnation. Without reincarnation, the formula does not always work: innocent children often suffer, while obviously vicious people often do not. Stalin died in his bed of natural causes. With reincarnation, when bad things happen to good people, we can suppose it is for something they did in a past life. This is the familiar doctrine of karma.
One obvious criticism is that it leads to passivity and acceptance in the face of evil; there is now no sense of need to try to make things better in the world. Indeed, to do so might seem impertinent, or impossible. This is not merely a Christian criticism; it is a common secularist one.
Worse, the doctrine of karma leads to blaming the unfortunate for their own misfortune. If he’s a blind beggar, it must be somehow his own damned fault. He is to be despised, not helped.
Reincarnation would be convenient for Christian theology; besides accounting for the suffering of the innocent, it could resolve the problem of “limbo.” That is, what happens to children who die before baptism, or before the age of reason? They have not merited either heaven or hell; they have not been morally tested. It is obviously unfair if they are now denied forever the possibility of heaven. Where else can they go, then, if not to another life for a second chance?
Reincarnation could also neatly reconcile Christian with Buddhist or Hindu cosmology. It might be that any soul keeps being reincarnated until born into a Christian cultural context, so that they get an equal opportunity to hear the full Christian message and either accept or reject it. Buddhist or Hindu lifetimes, then, are indeed necessarily reincarnations; Christian lifetimes are for keeps.
But this comes up against Paul’s pronouncement in Hebrews 9: “It is given to man once to die, and then the judgement.” Reincarnation was a familiar belief in the Hellenic world of the time; Plato and Socrates believed in it. The fact that Jesus and the Gospel writers do not refer to the possibility is also illustrative. It was an option they ignored, or did not consider.
Accordingly, suffering, for Christians, is not a matter of making up for some personal deficit. Suffering builds soul: suffering brings you closer to God. But you do not suffer because you deserve it.
Besides bringing us closer to God, suffering can be redemptive for others: the great model being the suffering and death of Jesus himself. He died for our sins. In the same way, in Catholic understanding, we can consecrate our own sufferings to help others, such as the souls in purgatory.
Those who suffer now are also to be compensated for this in the next life.
Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount says “blessed are the poor in spirit”; “blessed are those who mourn”; and blessed are the persecuted. In the Gospel of Luke, he immediately follows these Beatitudes with a parallel set of curses, or warnings:
Suffering in a bad world is warrant that one is a good person. Being happy in a bad world is alarming.
It is not.
It is a possible explanation for her because her form of Judaism believes in reincarnation. Without reincarnation, the formula does not always work: innocent children often suffer, while obviously vicious people often do not. Stalin died in his bed of natural causes. With reincarnation, when bad things happen to good people, we can suppose it is for something they did in a past life. This is the familiar doctrine of karma.
One obvious criticism is that it leads to passivity and acceptance in the face of evil; there is now no sense of need to try to make things better in the world. Indeed, to do so might seem impertinent, or impossible. This is not merely a Christian criticism; it is a common secularist one.
Worse, the doctrine of karma leads to blaming the unfortunate for their own misfortune. If he’s a blind beggar, it must be somehow his own damned fault. He is to be despised, not helped.
Reincarnation would be convenient for Christian theology; besides accounting for the suffering of the innocent, it could resolve the problem of “limbo.” That is, what happens to children who die before baptism, or before the age of reason? They have not merited either heaven or hell; they have not been morally tested. It is obviously unfair if they are now denied forever the possibility of heaven. Where else can they go, then, if not to another life for a second chance?
Reincarnation could also neatly reconcile Christian with Buddhist or Hindu cosmology. It might be that any soul keeps being reincarnated until born into a Christian cultural context, so that they get an equal opportunity to hear the full Christian message and either accept or reject it. Buddhist or Hindu lifetimes, then, are indeed necessarily reincarnations; Christian lifetimes are for keeps.
But this comes up against Paul’s pronouncement in Hebrews 9: “It is given to man once to die, and then the judgement.” Reincarnation was a familiar belief in the Hellenic world of the time; Plato and Socrates believed in it. The fact that Jesus and the Gospel writers do not refer to the possibility is also illustrative. It was an option they ignored, or did not consider.
Accordingly, suffering, for Christians, is not a matter of making up for some personal deficit. Suffering builds soul: suffering brings you closer to God. But you do not suffer because you deserve it.
“Now there were some present at the same time who told him about the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered such things? 3 I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all perish in the same way. 4 Or those eighteen, on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them; do you think that they were worse offenders than all the men who dwell in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no, but, unless you repent, you will all perish in the same way.” (Luke 13)
Besides bringing us closer to God, suffering can be redemptive for others: the great model being the suffering and death of Jesus himself. He died for our sins. In the same way, in Catholic understanding, we can consecrate our own sufferings to help others, such as the souls in purgatory.
Those who suffer now are also to be compensated for this in the next life.
“Now there was a certain rich man, and he was clothed in purple and fine linen, living in luxury every day. 20 A certain beggar, named Lazarus, was taken to his gate, full of sores, 21 and desiring to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the rich man’s table. Yes, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The beggar died, and he was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died, and was buried. 23 In Hades, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far off, and Lazarus at his bosom. 24 He cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue! For I am in anguish in this flame.’
25 “But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that you, in your lifetime, received your good things, and Lazarus, in the same way, bad things. But here he is now comforted, and you are in anguish.’” (Luke 16).
Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount says “blessed are the poor in spirit”; “blessed are those who mourn”; and blessed are the persecuted. In the Gospel of Luke, he immediately follows these Beatitudes with a parallel set of curses, or warnings:
“But woe to you who are rich!
For you have received your consolation.
25 Woe to you, you who are full now,
for you will be hungry.
Woe to you who laugh now,
for you will mourn and weep.
26 Woe, when men speak well of you,
for their fathers did the same thing to the false prophets.”
Suffering in a bad world is warrant that one is a good person. Being happy in a bad world is alarming.
No comments:
Post a Comment