From the time an earthquake decimated the city of Lisbon (modern day Portugal) in 1755 until today a multitude of theologians and philosophers have sought to explain God in relationship to various types of ‘evils’, whether moral or natural in character. Since Lisbon, there has been no shortage of arguments and opinions about what God is doing in the face of a vast amount of human carnage and suffering on the earth. It was the perfect storm of events converging at the time which allowed for open questions about God’s character and intention to be asked. This earthquake could be seen as the event that shaped modern thinking or simply a match dropped, while still smoldering, into a field of dry coppice ready to blaze for the next two centuries. In essence, this blaze still burns today in the world that modernism has left us as an inheritance. The United States are the ideological child of European modernism.
This brings to light the most challenging question for the monotheist religions who believe in the all powerful, all present and all good God: How can such grotesque evil exist in the presence of a Deity that is all of the above and more? This is where the measureless numbers of arguments are born. It is in the defense of God, that most of what we would call ‘modern’ era philosophy was born. The giants in this field were ultimately seeking to reconcile this question in the face of the ugly realities they were waking up to everyday. All the monotheistic religions have highly developed theodicies to try to answer this challenging question: How can evil exist in the presence of God?
In light of the radical nature of evil seen in the Holocaust, many thinkers have scrutinized conventional arguments explaining God’s role in such horrific events. Questions which would have been considered absolutely blasphemous in previous generations are now openly out on the table after Auschwitz. Today, God is on trial for the crimes against humanity. This discussion has become an enterprise in the world of political theory, philosophy, religion and theology.
In seeking to understand theodicy in light of the Holocaust, it is my hope to grapple with the sufferers of these atrocities and listen carefully to their voice. It is the hope of this essay to try to walk in the shoes, and prison garb of those who have survived the atrocities of the Nazi death machine to seek an informed theodicy that is not based on simple, theodic/doctrinal constructions, but in empathy and reality of deafening cries of burning children. With this picture in the backdrop of my presentation, my thoughts are kept in check and I can proceed with care, compassion and stillness.
Because we are grappling with the question of theodicy in light of the Holocaust the sources for this discussion should be informed by Jewish thinkers and theologians who have wrestled with the question of the problem of evil, post-Holocaust. There is a wide range of responses to the Holocaust from Jewish thinkers. These ideas are informed by the history of Jewish thought. This history is diverse in nature and so the responses to the Holocaust are diverse as well. This seems to be the logical place to inform ourselves about a meaningful theodicy for the Holocaust. Here we will mention a few of the responses to Auschwitz which have emerged. These theodicies were powerfully articulated in a powerful film entitled, “God on Trial”.
Testing- The Israelites were being tested. This was a test of faith and they had the option to stand up to this test or fail God and curse him. Just as Job was tested, so now they were now being tested. There was a need for them to endure in their faith to show themselves faithful to God.
Punishment- The Holocaust is an act of punishment from God. Traditionally interpreted, events of this magnitude in the scriptures usually related to some sort of rebellion, neglect or sin on the part of the Nation of Israel. This theodicy begins with the assumption that God is just and the fault can only fall to His subjects. This would put the Holocaust in the category of a retributive act of God to punish the sins of Israel.
Soul Making- The above thought is taken further in that it is seen as a resolution of spiritual needs on behalf of the ones being punished. God’s eschatological purpose (to get all of his people through to the final destination of heaven) is the overriding and all important mission that makes all earthly suffering worth it. God is forming his character into His people through suffering.
Purification- While these events are an absolute horror and the pain is unimaginable, God is working out His purposes to purify His people. Examples that can serve to support this argument- The Flood, The destruction of the Temple, Masada Stand against Rome- These events are thought to be an example of purification which were events that God used to surgerize the cancerous parts of the body of Israel- This allowed for the preservation of the faith they so fiercely defended.
Jewish History- The Holocaust fits within the landscape of historical events in the history of the Jewish people and should not affect Jewish theology or theodicy at all. The former means of interpreting such events are adequate to interpret this event.
Free Will Defense- The Holocaust, while intolerable to God, is a part of the price we have to pay for having free will. God will not interfere with history because this would truncate and taint free will. This free will is necessary to humanity remaining human. Without it we become robots is service to all of God’s purposes. According to this view, Auschwitz implicates humanities failure. God is not accountable for the free will decisions of men.
God is Dead- If God were present, there would be no way for Him to allow such a travesty as the Holocaust, and thus God is no longer present. He has turned away from Humanity and is no longer a part of the discussion regarding such tragedies.
Jews as the suffering servant of Isaiah- Jewish people collectively suffered for the sins of the world. The Holocaust is an act of atonement on behalf of all humanity.
God is not Omnipotent- This view allows God to remain good in the presence of such a horrific event. He just is impotent to do anything about what is going on. He is wise and good, but not all powerful.
These are only a representative sample of some of the arguments used in defense of Auschwitz. There is more to this discussion than can be effectively covered in this essay. These are all meaningful explanations to suffering in general and add value to the discussion regarding Auschwitz. But it all seems inadequate in the presence of such sufferers as these. The point of this brief exercise is not to teach theodicy, but to explain and defend my own theodicy. My defense for God in the presence of burning children is silence. The only justifiable response in the presence of the survivors of Auschwitz is silence. Silent solidarity with them in compassion of the plight they have faced. Logic demands an answer on behalf of God. The problem is logic is illogical in the presence of the gas chambers of Birkenau. Picture the mass grave in Vinnitsa, Ukraine, in 1942. This is the site of my defense for God. I love my God, but I cannot explain this for Him... He is capable for His own defense here.
I hope, mainly, to not appease my own conscience of such events, but to sit silently and sympathetically with the victims of such atrocities. The best possible theodicy I can muster in the presence of such terrible events is represented by the words of Pope Benedict XVI upon one of his visits to Auschwitz.
“To speak in this place of horror, in this place where unprecedented mass crimes were committed against God and man, is almost impossible - and it is particularly difficult and troubling for a Christian, for a Pope from Germany. In a place like this, words fail; in the end, there can only be a dread silence - a silence which is itself a heartfelt cry to God: Why, Lord, did you remain silent? How could you tolerate all this? In silence, then, we bow our heads before the endless line of those who suffered and were put to death here; yet our silence becomes in turn a plea for forgiveness and reconciliation, a plea to the living God never to let this happen again.”
Pope Benedict XVI, Auschwitz-Birkenau, 28 May 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment