3 G. WEINANDY, O.F.M., Cap. Does God Suffer? To St Edith Stein Cad Does God Suffer? Thomas G. Weinandy, O.F.M., Cap. UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME PRESS NOTRE DAME, INDIANA Copyright © T&T Clark Ltd, 2000 Published in Great Britain by T&T Clark Ltd, 59 George Street, Edinburgh EH2 2LQ, Scotland www.tandtclark.co.uk This edition published under license from T&T Clark Ltd by University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, IN 46556 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of University of Notre Dame Press. First published 2000 0-—268-—00890-6 (pb.) Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Weinandy, Thomas G. (Thomas Gerard) Does God suffer? / Thomas Weinandy. p- cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-—268—00890-6 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Suffering of God. 2. Suffering of God—History of doctrines. I. Title. BT453. S8W45 1999 231’.4—dc21 99-39506 Typeset by Fakenham Photosetting Ltd, Fakenham, Norfolk Printed and bound in Great Britain by Bell & Bain Ltd, Glasgow Contents Preface ig The God Who Suffers Theology — Problems and Mysteries Yahweh: The Presence of the Wholly Other Bridges to the Patristic Doctrine of God The Patristic Doctrine of God The Trinity’s Loving Act of Creation 113 God’s Love and Human Suffering 147 The Incarnation — The Impassible Suffers 72 LOPWoFTPN TOhe RNedempAtive Suffering of Christ 214 10. Suffering in the Light of Christ 243 Conclusion 287 Bibliography 288 Index of Names 305 Index of Subjects 309 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation https://archive.org/details/doesgodsufferO000wein Preface I did not want to write this book. In August of 1975 I completed my doctoral dissertation on the relationship between God’s immutability and the Incarnation — on how an unchanging God can actually become man.' In attempting to bring clarity to that issue I became acutely aware that the question of God’s impassibility, particularly that God, within his divine nature, does not experience inner negative emotional states such as suffering, was indeed even more problematic. One of my supervisors, H.P. Owen (the other being E.L. Mascall) wrote at the time that the impassibility of God ‘is the most questionable aspect of classical theism.” For approximately twenty years I tried to avoid the topic, even though it incessantly arose within lectures, tutorials, seminars, and even within ‘pub’ conversations. I was aware of what the majority of the contem- porary theological community was teaching, and I knew what it had concluded — God is passible and so he suffers. I basically knew why such was proposed — because God, being personal, is loving and compassionate, he surely suffers in solidarity with those he loves. I too, obviously, held that God is loving, but I was not comfortable with the inference that he must therefore suffer. I was not convinced by the arguments, though I did acknowledge that they were intellectually and emotionally persuasive, and that I could not easily dismiss or refute them. While part of me wanted to throw myself into what I considered an exciting and significant philosophical and theological fray, another part of me fearfully refused to become engaged. What frightened me was not simply the need to confront the biblical evidence where God, especially in the Old Testament, is said to experi- ence differing emotional states, including suffering. I suspected that the truth of such statements needed to be interpreted from within a broader and deeper revelation of who God is. Nor was I particularly bothered by the historical questions. Because of my knowledge of the Fathers and Aquinas, who held God to be impassible, I instinctively knew that they could not possibly be guilty of all, though maybe of some, of the errors of which they were so frequently accused. Moreover, since I considered 1 This was subsequently revised and published as Does God Change?: The Word's Becoming in the Incarnation (Petersham: St Bede’s Publications, 1985). 2 Concepts of Deity (London: Macmillan, 1971), p. 24. vii Viii Preface myself an adequate philosopher, neither was I particularly timid in the face of the philosophical issues, though I knew that these would be the most knotty. I confidently trusted that, given some hard thought, I could satisfactorily address them. Nor was I put off by the doctrinal and theo- logical concerns. I felt that I could ultimately address the trinitarian, incarnational and soteriological questions in quite a creative and insightful manner. While it would have required some effort on my part to address all of these concerns in a comprehensive and scholarly fashion, they did not frighten me. No, what I feared most was Auschwitz — with all of its contemporary iconic meaning and pathos. With the Holocaust and similar events of horrendous human suffering as the existential backdrop, how could I write a book in which I would argue that God is impassible and so does not suffer? How could such a book, and it was this book that I knew I must write, even be contemplated? Within this contemporary setting, to write such a book would demand that it be not only academically sound, but also, and even more so, emotionally compelling. I feared that my book, should I ever choose to write it, would lack this latter virtue, and so for many years it never was attempted. To use a favorite phrase of one of my esteemed colleagues, Professor R. Swinburne, I refused ‘to grasp the nettle.’ On 13 February 1995 Mrs Jane Williams, then of Darton, Longman and Todd, having read my book, Does God Change?, and finding it ‘a breath of fresh air,’ wrote to me asking if I would be interested ‘in doing a more popular and accessible book in defence of impassibility.’ I wryly smiled at the words ‘popular’ and ‘accessible,’ but I consented to ‘give it a go.’ I gave such consent aware that, because of the complexity of the topic, and more so because of my own need to work through all of the ‘unpopular’ academic questions that required attention, I would probably be unable to write such a ‘popular’ book. My suspicion was correct, and Darton, Longman and Todd, having considered some draft chapters, rightly turned it down. Nonetheless, it was Mrs Williams who compelled me to conquer my fear and to undertake, finally, the topic I had so long avoided. For this I owe her a great deal of gratitude. In response to those who advocate a passible and so suffering God I endeavor, in this book, to accomplish two ends. First, I strive to refute what I consider to be the often erroneous arguments and assumptions that support the notion of a suffering God, and in so doing diminish the sincere but ultimately, I believe, often misconceived sentiments attached to them. Second, and more important, I offer a positive Christian view of God and of his relationship to humankind, with its history of grief, which, I trust, is more biblically authentic, more historically accurate, more philosophically convincing, more theologically persuasive, and so more emotionally gratifying. I attempt the above by systematically, in the various chapters, addressing each of the issues concerning God and human suffering. I attempt to safeguard the logical progression of my arguments, both within the individual chapters and in the sequence of the chapters, so as to ensure that all the distinct elements are properly placed and related. In so doing I hope that the reader will be able to give assent at each critical