Ryan Tubridy outdid himself on the Late Late Show last Friday with an interview with a so-called “visionary” from Medjugorje, Vicka Ivanković-Mijatović, who claims to be in daily contact with the Virgin Mary. Mijatović is in Ireland all this week. Earlier on Friday, she spoke to a capacity crowd in the RDS Concert Hall.
The interview was mostly a monologue. Tubridy allowed her to speak freely (and was gently chastised for interrupting her flow at one stage) while she whittled on about how Mary’s dress sense and the occasional cameos of Jesus during her regular encounters. It was mad, delusional, contradictory stuff. If not for the prevalence of Roman Catholicism in Ireland, would Tubridy have been so patient and understanding? Say a woman came on the show to talk about her frequent meetings with polka dotted llamas dressed in bowler hats beseeching people to jump on one leg for a few hours each day, would the reception have been the same? Don’t answer that.
Within her ecstatic rantings, she talked about suffering being a gift. It was here that I lost my composure. The idea that suffering is a “gift” must be one of the most pernicious and cruel canards ever invented by mankind. Suffering is bad enough without someone suggesting that there is some sort of supernatural reason for it. It implies that somehow, you deserve it. You have done something in your past, or you have thought things that call you out for special treatment at the hands of the Gods. Or perhaps God has some special mission in mind for you, so that you will continually torment yourself to understand what exactly it is you should be doing in your life at a time when you can least afford such vexations. Perhaps if you consider suffering to be a gift, you will therefore be reluctant to lose this gift by seeking medical help or other forms of assistance. Perhaps you will see suffering in loved ones as a “gift”, thereby prolonging their agonies too?
As anyone who has been around suffering long enough will attest, there is nothing at all glorious about it. Far from enriching lives, it wrecks it. It sucks the colour out of existence, leaving people in a perpetually vulnerable, negative, fearful and disordered state. In far too many cases it is capricious. It hits one person, leaving others unaffected. It’s roots may be genetic, age related, accidental or based on factors totally outside your control. It is plain to see that the most deserving of suffering in this life often never get their just desserts while the least deserving may sometimes receive it in spades. Even when suffering is deserved, the resulting effect may be out of all proportion to the severity of the cause. Suffering is not a gift. It’s a crap shoot.
Those who suffer do not need our prayers. They don’t need us to tell us that it happened for a reason. They don’t need to believe that somebody, somewhere singled them out for special treatment. They don’t need the mental torture that comes along with the statement that suffering is a gift. Any god who loved us would not send us such gifts, period. Any reasonable definition of love would never, repeat, NEVER, include torture, but some strains of religious thought have no problem accepting this.
There is no easy solution to suffering in the world. People get sick and die every day. Shit happens to us all, and for some it would fill a Boeing 747 with knobs on. There are reliefs in some situations and in those cases they should be embraced wholeheartedly. People can help and medicine can help and treatments can help and time can help, but there will always be unfortunate exceptions.
What sufferers do not need are the trite, malign rationalisations telling them how lucky they are.
Sunny spells and scattered showers 
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 21, 2011 at 6:11 pm
pilgrim
<>
For all the suffering in Vicka’s life, and there has been much, she still manages a smile and be an inspiration for many people.
And all of us are in need of prayer, even when we can’t understand why.
Suffering does not deny the love of God. It illuminates it.
Two things are inseparable… suffering and compassion. No suffering, no compassion… and compassion is love. God is love.
I am always puzzled by those who choose not to believe in God but yet are prepared to express their concept of God… <>
The “gift” aspect of suffering is a grace in understanding and acceptance of one’s suffering, certain in the knowledge that God is present is all aspects of our life.
But if we choose to believe that there is no God, then Vicka’s statement is never going to be acceptable. And that really is the crux of the matter – choosing to believe or not, faith or no faith, in God.
Vicka and anyone else are not denied the freedom to seek healing for their ailment. Vicka has been receiving hospital treatment these past two years for a particular injury, God does not deny us the freedom to seek healing. To say that he does is a misunderstanding of suffering as a gift.
And that is the wonder about free will. We are free to choose to accept or not accept, God, or even suffering. If we accept God then we will view our life, and all that it entails, as a gift. If we choose not to accept God, then it is unlikely that we will be able to accept our life and any suffering it entails, as a gift.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Peace.
February 21, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Colm
“Suffering illuminates the love of God”, “No suffering, no compassion”, “the “gift” aspect of suffering is a grace”. This is quite nonsensical. Quite without foundation. Have you done a poll? Only a religious mindset would warp common experience in this way. .
I never said that seeing suffering as a gift would therefore exclude you from seeking help. But it does affect how some people deal with it. Or, how they deal with another’s suffering.
My question is still not answered. Would a loving god torture his people?
February 21, 2011 at 6:30 pm
bipedalhumanoid
He was incredibly accommodating to her and appologised profusely when he wanted to get a word in edgewise.
Anyone remember the way he treated Richard Dawkins, or more recently Jim Corr?
I’m no fan of Jim Corr, but Turbridy was badgering the guy to the point that he couldn’t get a word in edgewise. Corr didn’t get an opportunity to speak about the topic he went on the show to discuss. The same happened with Dawkins. He was there to speak about his new book “The Greatest Show on Earth” and was only given an opportunity to discuss his old book “The God Delusion”.
If you’re a fluffly religious charlatain or a psychic claiming to use super powers to locate missing children, the stage is yours. If you have views that are likely to be less appealing to the ignorant majority, you won’t get a word in edgewise.
February 21, 2011 at 9:47 pm
Colm
Yes. I saw the Dawkins interview and I agree completely. It’s almost as if he had not read the Greatest Show on Earth.
February 22, 2011 at 1:14 am
pilgrim
<>
Absolutely not – and God doesn’t. You are assuming that God dispenses sickness and suffering. It’s not the case. It’s back to whether you want to accept life as a gift or not. If you do accept that life is a gift and simply a journey to an everlasting life in heaven, then suffering is part of life and all that it entails. If you don’t accept life as a gift, then you probably won’t want to accept suffering as part of the process, but there is no escaping it, God or no God.
Would a loving person want to inflict torture on another human being? Of course not. But when a person ceases to love, then they can knowingly hurt others. God never ceases to love. He is Love itself. The need to love and be loved is within all of us. The need to be fulfilled in love manifests in many ways and can take us down many blind alleys in our search. Until we find that pearl then we shall always suffer because of the lack of love in our lives. But when we do discover the love of God in our hearts, then that is also the time we realise that the absence of God’s love in our lives is the cause of real suffering is on this planet.
There is a simple truth in the statement: “No suffering, no compassion”. Ponder on it and try and reflect on the instances in your own life, your compassion for others, and the compassion shown to you by others. Compassion is an expression of love. Suffering allows others to express their love, sometimes in the most difficult and painful circumstances.; the love that we all want but sometimes can only give to others through compassion. We become selfless and giving. That’s love.
Thanks agin for allowing to comment. Peace.
February 22, 2011 at 10:12 am
Colm
Em. A gift is something given, is it not? There is intention involved in giving. I say suffering is often random, happenstance, an effect of physics and biology. If that is your view also, then fine. But it is no longer a gift. If, on the other hand, it has been given and the effect is terrible, random, unfair, what is that?
I think you do the people who suffer a great disservice when you talk about finding pearls, or absence of love. This imputes that sufferers are somehow responsible for their distress or that they are not doing it right: special pleading of a most odious nature. You can find as many pearls as you want, but if its bad enough the suffering will continue.
I wonder what we would get if we could draw a graph of suffering versus compassion. The more suffering one experiences, the more compassionate they should get, right?
February 22, 2011 at 12:12 pm
pilgrim
Colm… sure a “gift” is something given, but we have to be mindful of the intention of the “gift”. If someone decides to attack me on the street one night and do me damage then giving me a beating is not a gift with any intention of love behind it, only hate. And it wasn’t God that beat me up, either. God does not inflict suffering, but gives life. Life is the gift and all that it entails.
If a couple decides to have children, do they do so unaware that there will be pain or suffering attached to the process? Of course, they know that life brings suffering, but it does not prevent them from wanting to bring life into the world. So should we say that this couple should not bring children into the world knowing that the children will experience suffering? Is the couple being irresponsible or lacking in love when they decide to have children? Of course not. And they will tell you that their children are a gift, a treasure, a joy, even pearls, despite any suffering along the way. Life is gift.
As to receiving compassion through suffering, that’s dependent on how open or closed the heart is. I know some who close themselves completely to compassion, maybe not intentionally, but go in on themselves and shut out the reality of all around them and won’t let people near them. Such is their suffering. It draws compassion, but they can’t or won’t accept it.
Suffering and compassion are two sides of a coin. We can be open and recognise both, or we can be closed and see only the suffering and not recognise the compassion, or be capable of having compassion but not choosing to apply this to the suffering that we see around us. Either side, gift is involved.
Thank you again. Peace.
February 24, 2011 at 6:28 am
Woo
*rolls eyes*
February 24, 2011 at 10:35 am
Agnostic
For what it’s worth, the Roman Catholic position is that we must never glorify suffering and the nonsense peddled by the Medjugorge visionary is therefore at variance with Catholic orthodoxy. So, even from a religious viewpoint, that is yet another reason to dismiss the authenticity of the supposed visions.
Here is an article from an American Jesuit theologian:
The Mystery of Suffering: How Should I Respond?
by Kenneth R. Overberg, S.J.
Suffering surrounds us. Mental and physical illness, poverty and starvation, wars and violence of all kinds overwhelm individuals, communities, entire nations. We ourselves experience suffering. It might be broken relationships and alienated families, accidents and disease, failed dreams or boring jobs, in dying and death. How many people suffer from addictions, abuse and other forms of violence!
A terrible image of suffering now burns in the memories of so many of us: planes burying themselves into the World Trade Center and erupting in giant fireballs. Shock and horror led to grief and lament, heroism and vengeance—and to questions about God. “How could God allow this to happen?” “Where is God in all this suffering?” Those directly involved in suffering often ask, “Why did this happen to me?” and sometimes even “What did I do wrong to be punished in this way?”
Humans have long asked these questions. The whole Book of Job in the Bible is about the question of suffering. Christians have tried to discover meaning for suffering in studying and praying about the suffering and death of Jesus told in the Gospels. Some of the more violent biblical perspectives, however, fail to satisfy fully. Hearts and minds long for the God of compassion revealed by Jesus.
How should I respond to suffering? There’s a question for everyone. In this Update we’ll consider the life of Jesus, including some of the major interpretations of his suffering and death. We will return to Scripture and Tradition for another perspective on Jesus’ life and death. There we will find clues for our own response to suffering.
Jesus and suffering
From the Gospels we learn three important points about Jesus and suffering. Books can and have been written about them. Here they are in brief:
1. Jesus resisted and eliminated suffering. Many Gospel stories tell of Jesus healing the blind and sick. Matthew’s Gospel summarizes this way: “Then Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and curing every disease and every sickness” (9:35).
2. Jesus rejected suffering as punishment for sin. Deeply embedded in the Hebrew tradition is the conviction that suffering is punishment for sin, called the “Law of Retribution.” The people in exile in Babylon, for example, interpreted their exile as God’s punishment for their failure to follow the covenant faithfully. This conviction appears in many religions and cultures. Jesus, however, rejected it. Matthew’s Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount describes God as beyond all that: “for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust” (Mt 5:45).
Similarly, John’s Jesus heals the blind man and explicitly rejects the idea that suffering is punishment for sin. Jesus tells those listening, “Neither he nor his parents sinned; it is so that the works of God might be made visible through him” (see Jn 9:1-41, especially 2-5).
Finally, consider Luke 13:4-5, a question about people who died in the tragic collapse of the tower of Siloam. Jesus indicates that the victims were not killed due to some sin or guilt on their part. Everyone, he says, needs to repent, to turn towards God.
3. Jesus trusted a compassionate, present God. The Gospels reveal Jesus’ intimate, loving relationship with God. Jesus’ surprising use of the word Abba (“Daddy”) to describe God conveys a sense of simplicity, familiarity and trust. The parables also give us a glimpse of Jesus’ sense of God. The Prodigal Son (Lk 15:11-32) tells us a lot about the father: He allows his son freedom even to waste the inheritance; he watches for his return; he forgives the son without any bitterness, throwing a party to celebrate; he goes out to console the angry older brother. Abba is a loving, forgiving, gentle parent. Even as he faced suffering and death, Jesus remained faithful to his call, always trusting God. In the Resurrection, God confirms Jesus’ faithfulness.
Interpreting a terrible death
The life and teaching of Jesus highlighted the healing presence of a God of love and life. In the end, however, Jesus suffered a horrible execution. The mystery of suffering and death—first Jesus’ and later others’—led the early Christian communities to search for light and meaning. They looked to their own culture and their Hebrew Scriptures for possible interpretations. These insights found their way into their preaching and eventually into the New Testament.
From Jewish culture they knew about ransom. From their Jewish practices they also experienced sacrifice and atonement. From their Wisdom literature (the Book of Wisdom is an example) they were familiar with the theme of the vindication of the Innocent Sufferer. From the prophet Isaiah (chapters 42, 49, 50, 52-53) Jesus’ followers creatively used the songs of the Suffering Servant to interpret Jesus’ suffering and death. The Messiah, of course, was not expected to be a suffering messiah.
The facts of crucifixion and death jarred Jesus’ followers into searching the Hebrew Scriptures for insight. A good example of this whole process is the New Testament’s Letter to the Hebrews. Here we read of the priesthood and sacrifice of Jesus (see Chapters 3-10).
Scholars tell us that what the Bible understands by terms such as sacrifice and atonement may be quite different from the understandings that many of us have. For example, for Hebrew people, the blood of the sacrificed animal symbolized the life of the person or community. Pouring the blood on the altar was a symbolic gesture reuniting life with God. The sacrifices were an expression of the people’s desire for reconciliation and union with God. The ritual, of course, still included violence and the death of the victim.
Throughout the centuries Christians have reflected on and developed these different interpretations, leading to a variety of theologies and popular pieties, some of them quite distant from the Scriptures and even farther from the vision of Jesus.
In the fourth century, St. Augustine spoke of satisfaction for sin in legal terms of debts and justice. A key development took place in the 12th century when the theologian St. Anselm developed St. Augustine’s ideas to describe atonement for sin. Anselm, reflecting the medieval culture of his day, understood sin to be something like a peasant insulting a king. Reconciliation would require satisfaction for this insult to the king’s honor. Sin, however, is an infinite offense against God that demands adequate atonement. While humanity was obliged to atone, no human could pay this infinite debt. Only God could do so adequately.
According to this 12th-century view, that is exactly what Jesus, the God-Man, accomplished by his suffering and death. It was actually later theologians and preachers who added to Anselm’s position by emphasizing blood and pain as the satisfaction that placated God’s anger. Many Catholics still grow up with such an understanding.
This image of God—angry, demanding, even bloodthirsty—often appears in sermons, songs and popular pieties today, although the focus is usually placed on Jesus’ willingness to bear the suffering. Many people are uneasy with this view of God, even if they do not know exactly why. This image of God is very different from the one expressed in the life and teachings of Jesus.
Jesus is not Plan B
There is an alternative interpretation of the life and death of Jesus, also expressed in the Scriptures and throughout the tradition. This view, perhaps only on the margins of many people’s religious understanding and devotion, is completely orthodox and is solidly rooted in the Christian tradition. Indeed, it offers perspectives much closer to Jesus’ own experience and vision.
What, briefly, is the heart of this alternative interpretation? It holds that the whole purpose of creation is for the Incarnation, God’s sharing of life and love in a unique and definitive way. God becoming human is not an afterthought, an event to make up for Original Sin and human sinfulness. Incarnation is God’s first thought, the original design for all creation. The purpose of Jesus’ life is the fulfillment of the whole creative process, of God’s eternal longing to become human. Theologians call this the “primacy of the Incarnation.”
For many of us who have lived a lifetime with the atonement view, it may be hard at first to hear this alternative, “incarnational” view. Yet it may offer some wonderful surprises for our relationship with God. God is not an angry or vindictive God, demanding the suffering and death of Jesus as payment for past sin. God is, instead, a gracious God, sharing divine life and love in creation and in the Incarnation. Such a view can dramatically change our image of God, our approach to suffering, our day-to-day prayer. This approach finds its strongest scriptural expression in John’s Gospel and in the letters to the Colossians and the Ephesians.
Throughout the centuries great Christian theologians have contributed to this positive perspective on God and Jesus. From the groundbreaking Cappadocian Fathers in the fourth century (St. Basil, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Gregory of Nazianzus) to Franciscan John Duns Scotus in the 13th century to Jesuit Karl Rahner in the 20th century, God’s gracious love and the primacy of the Incarnation have been proclaimed.
In the late 20th century, theologian Catherine LaCugna pulled together many of these themes in her book God For Us. She uses and expands the Cappadocians’ wonderful image of the Trinity as divine dance to include all persons. Borrowing themes of intimacy and communion from John’s Gospel and Ephesians, she affirms that humanity has been made a partner in the divine dance not through our own merit but through God’s election from all eternity. She writes: “The God who does not need nor care for the creature, or who is immune to our suffering, does not exist….The God who keeps a ledger of our sins and failings, the divine policeman, does not exist. These are all false gods….What we believe about God must match what is revealed of God in Scripture: God watches over the widow and the poor, God makes the rains fall on just and unjust alike, God welcomes the stranger and embraces the enemy.”
The emphasis on Jesus as God’s first thought can free us from the idea that God is violent. It allows us to focus on God’s overflowing love. This love is the very life of the Trinity and spills over into creation, Incarnation and the promise of fulfillment of all creation. What a difference this makes for our relationship with God! Life and love, not suffering and death, become the core of our spirituality and morality.
The abyss of suffering
But what about the “dark abyss” (Psalm 88) of suffering? The alternative approach with its emphasis on God’s overflowing love leads us beyond our natural question of “Why?” and suggests four elements of a response to suffering:
1. Acknowledge suffering. Being truthful means avoiding denial and admitting the pain and horror of the suffering, whatever the cause. We must never glorify suffering. Yes, it can lead us to deeper maturity and wisdom, but suffering can also crush the human spirit. Following the lead of the Psalmist (see Psalms 22, 44, 53, 77, 88, 109 and many others), we can express our pain in lament. The first step to grief and healing is to move from overwhelmed silence to the bold speech of lament. The psalms show us how to speak out against suffering and oppression, even to complain against God. Such crying out allows us both to grieve and to grow into a mature covenant partner with God.
2. Trust in God. Lament renews our relationship with God. Trusting in God, of course, is especially challenging in the dark times of suffering. Our usual response is initially just the opposite. We question how God could cause this suffering or at least allow it. We ask why. We may complain to God or even begin to doubt God’s existence. That is exactly why the lament psalms can be so helpful, matching our experience and emotions. The lament allows us to stay in conversation with God, gradually moving to a new trust.
Jesus, of course, is a marvelous example of trust in God. His deep, trusting relationship with Abba grounded his life and teaching. “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. And even the hairs of your head are all counted. So do not be afraid; you are of more value than many sparrows” (Mt 10:29-31).
3. Act. Trust in God both allows and inspires our response to suffering in our action. We acknowledge that at times our choices have caused personal and social suffering, so one form of action is moving toward repentance and a change of heart. We also suffer from sickness and many other personal challenges. In this suffering we need to reach out to others, to ask for help, to receive what they offer, to allow them to accompany us in “the dark abyss.” As we reach out to people, so too we move toward God, who may seem very distant. Lament, praise, gratitude—all of these are forms of worship.
Following the life and ministry of Jesus, we work as individuals and as communities to overcome and end suffering. Our actions include remaining with others in their suffering. We can also directly express our compassion by preparing meals, running errands, providing transportation and praying with those who suffer.
Awareness of the world’s suffering leads us to action concerning political and economic issues. The needs are so great and the issues so complex—what can one person do? We can search in solidarity with others for courageous ways to overcome suffering and its causes in our world. We cannot do everything, but we can at least do one thing. We can, for example, tutor in an inner-city school or organize parish groups that promote the consistent ethic of life.
4. Stand in awe. We know that it is a human reaction to ask “Why?”, to search for meaning and reasons for our suffering. Yet suffering remains a mystery, not a problem to be solved. We stand with Job at the end of his bold contest with God: “What can I answer you? I put my hand over my mouth” (40:4).
The emphasis on creation-for-Incarnation, culminating in the Resurrection, also gives us great hope. God does not desire suffering but works to overcome it. God did not demand Jesus’ suffering and does not want ours. Thus, we lament and act to overcome suffering, even as we acknowledge its incomprehensibility. We marvel at God’s remarkable respect of human freedom. We know that the suffering of injustice and terrorism results from peoples’ evil choices. Yet we also know that the suffering of incurable disease or natural disasters simply happens in a world that is not yet fulfilled.
Finally, however, suffering is not fully understandable. Rather than “why?” perhaps we should be asking, “How can I respond? What can we do now?” A profound trust in a compassionate God allows us to ask these questions and then to act, with surprising peace and hope.
Kenneth R. Overberg, S.J., is professor of theology at Xavier University, Cincinnati. He holds a Ph.D. in social ethics from the University of Southern California and is the author of numerous articles and books, including the award-winning Conscience in Conflict: How to Make Moral Choices (St. Anthony Messenger Press).