Hospice spiritual care and suffering: towards a theodicy of suffering

Guy Harrison
{"title":"Hospice spiritual care and suffering: towards a theodicy of suffering","authors":"Guy Harrison","doi":"10.1080/13520806.2000.11758892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This century has seen significant changes in the Christian understanding of suffering. Hundreds of years of traditional belief about an unchangeable God who is not liable to pain or suffering have been challenged by theologians who have been required to reflect upon the meaning of God's love for the world in the light of contemporary understanding of what it means to be human. This understanding has partly come about as a result of the experience of mass suffering during two world wars. Totalitarian leaders such as Hitler and Stalin mimicked traditional images of God as One who inflicts suffering for some cause or ideal beyond human understanding. In revulsion against such views God's impassibility has been widely challenged and repudiated. Equally, psychological understandings, gleaned from the work of Freud, Jung and the relatively new theories of psychology and psychoanalysis, have contributed towards a much fuller picture of human personality and development. Thus, for example, within the 'caring professions' practitioners emphasise that personal love and care often have a profound affect on relationships in terms of feelings and emotions; in particular such love may be costly in that it might involve the sharing of experience and the awareness of another's suffering. According to Paul Fiddes this contemporary awareness and experience of other people's suffering means that sympathy may be taken in its literal sense of 'suffering with'.1 Love becomes the sharing of experience, so that the only way a person becomes absolutely aware of someone else's suffering is by participation in that suffering. Furthermore, if God is revealed in Jesus' suffering as an expression of true and costly love, then it is possible to reach the conclusion that a loving God must therefore be a suffering God. Indeed, the biblical evidence suggests that God suffers because of his love for his people. The Old Testament prophets, especially, spoke of a God who grieves, is disappointed and even labours under the burden of Israel's plight. Fiddes quotes the following passage from Jeremiah to illustrate this point;","PeriodicalId":87951,"journal":{"name":"Contact","volume":"13 1","pages":"19 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13520806.2000.11758892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This century has seen significant changes in the Christian understanding of suffering. Hundreds of years of traditional belief about an unchangeable God who is not liable to pain or suffering have been challenged by theologians who have been required to reflect upon the meaning of God's love for the world in the light of contemporary understanding of what it means to be human. This understanding has partly come about as a result of the experience of mass suffering during two world wars. Totalitarian leaders such as Hitler and Stalin mimicked traditional images of God as One who inflicts suffering for some cause or ideal beyond human understanding. In revulsion against such views God's impassibility has been widely challenged and repudiated. Equally, psychological understandings, gleaned from the work of Freud, Jung and the relatively new theories of psychology and psychoanalysis, have contributed towards a much fuller picture of human personality and development. Thus, for example, within the 'caring professions' practitioners emphasise that personal love and care often have a profound affect on relationships in terms of feelings and emotions; in particular such love may be costly in that it might involve the sharing of experience and the awareness of another's suffering. According to Paul Fiddes this contemporary awareness and experience of other people's suffering means that sympathy may be taken in its literal sense of 'suffering with'.1 Love becomes the sharing of experience, so that the only way a person becomes absolutely aware of someone else's suffering is by participation in that suffering. Furthermore, if God is revealed in Jesus' suffering as an expression of true and costly love, then it is possible to reach the conclusion that a loving God must therefore be a suffering God. Indeed, the biblical evidence suggests that God suffers because of his love for his people. The Old Testament prophets, especially, spoke of a God who grieves, is disappointed and even labours under the burden of Israel's plight. Fiddes quotes the following passage from Jeremiah to illustrate this point;
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临终关怀精神关怀与苦难:走向苦难的神正论
本世纪以来,基督教对苦难的理解发生了重大变化。数百年来,人们一直认为上帝是不变的,他不会承受痛苦或苦难,这一传统信仰受到了神学家的挑战,他们被要求根据当代对人类意义的理解,反思上帝对世界的爱的意义。这种理解部分是由于两次世界大战期间的大规模苦难经历而产生的。像希特勒和斯大林这样的极权主义领导人模仿了传统的上帝形象,把上帝塑造成一个为了人类无法理解的事业或理想而造成痛苦的人。在对这些观点的反感中,上帝的不可性受到了广泛的挑战和否定。同样,从弗洛伊德、荣格以及相对较新的心理学和精神分析理论中收集到的心理学理解,也有助于更全面地了解人类的个性和发展。因此,例如,在“护理专业”中,从业者强调个人的爱和照顾往往对感情和情绪方面的关系产生深远的影响;特别是,这种爱可能是昂贵的,因为它可能涉及分享经验和意识到他人的痛苦。根据保罗·菲德斯的说法,这种对他人痛苦的当代意识和经验意味着同情可以从字面上理解为“与他人一起受苦”爱变成了经验的分享,所以一个人完全意识到别人的痛苦的唯一方法就是参与那种痛苦。此外,如果上帝在耶稣的苦难中被揭示出来,作为一种真实而昂贵的爱的表达,那么就有可能得出这样的结论:一位慈爱的上帝必然是一位受苦的上帝。事实上,圣经的证据表明,上帝受苦是因为他爱他的子民。尤其是旧约的先知们,他们谈到了一个忧伤、失望,甚至在以色列困境的重担下努力工作的神。菲德斯引用了耶利米书的下面一段话来说明这一点;
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
LAMinar Flow: Sterol Transport in a Pathogenic Yeast Protection of Membrane Contact Protein by the Methionine Sulfoxide Reductases Neuroacanthocytosis Syndromes: The Clinical Perspective A Possible Role of VPS13B in the Formation of Golgi-Lipid Droplet Contacts Associating with the ER A Role for Two-Pore Channel Type 2 (TPC2)-Mediated Regulation of Membrane Contact Sites During Zebrafish Notochord Biogenesis?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1