Human pain and Redeemer’s work: an abstract taken from the traditional Redeemer Address

ufficiostampa — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:48:48 +0000

From the 2009 Redeemer Address by Patriarch Card. A. Scola

1. Personally, I was provoked to choose pain and suffering as the topic for the Redeemer Address during the Pastoral Visitation, as I met in their homes people who were seriously sick or very ill. This issue has become more urgent to me, I would say unpostponable, because of the faces, the looks and the few but radical words that were addressed to me by them and by their loved ones. In the history of the human family, it seems that the aggression of pain and suffering never stops. Like all elementary realities that are part of universal human experience (knowledge, love and so on), also pain and suffering are difficult to explain. Here, we just want to reflect a little on the immense travail of pain and suffering that mankind as a whole — but always in the flesh of individuals — has to bear. If –- as St. Augustine said – every man is, as such, a great question, at the heart of the man-question lies the question on pain and suffering.

2. “The shelves of the human pharmacy:” with this colorful expression Balthasar describes the main human attempts to face the agonized question of pain and suffering. In his analysis he examines first of all two categories that are apparently opposed, but that in reality share the same attitude of resignation: “defeatism” and “rebellion.” “Defeatism” is objectively the foundation of the temptation to commit suicide, either carried out directly or “assisted.” This is a true “surrender in front of too much suffering, thinking that in this way one can free oneself from it” (Balthasar). The second position, “rebellion,” is self-contradictory: even if it can blame, in turn, God, mankind or radical evil, in reality it boils down to rebellion for the sake of rebellion, a challenge against suffering which is extreme as it is powerless, in the delusion of keeping it quiet. Nowadays, however, there is an ever more prevalent attitude which wants to mount a frontal attack on pain and suffering in the attempt to eliminate them. It is born out of scientific and technological power which, especially in the field of medicine, seems to make man the master of his own health and life, in the conviction that pain and suffering will be defeated, even in a not too distant future. From this perspective, tragedies like those in L’Aquila or Viareggio become a stumbling stone (scandal), because they reveal starkly that we remain powerless in front of the violence of some evils. In fact, the current obsession with health, which pursues only indefinite physical well-being, clashes with the elementary human experience of being “one in soul and body” (Gaudium et Spes 14). It then becomes abstract, if not unrealistic, to talk about health (and disease)if one does not identify a center to the I, a point of connection between the psyco-physical and spiritual dimensions. Health and disease always concern all of the I.

3. In the development of history pain and suffering keep rising again from their ashes in new forms, like a tragic phoenix. So much so that man is tempted to call God to task for the existence of pain in the world. Christian tradition, but also western thought, record repeated attempts to “justify” God in this regard. In order not to attribute evil to God himself, or in order not to regard it as an original principle independent of God, the traditional doctrine has stated that God allows evil for the sake of good. It does so in order to put man to the test, to purify him or even to make the beauty of good more evident and to express the whole richness of the cosmos. But, is the thesis that God allows evil enough for a man who experiences radical evil (Kant), unjustifiable evil (Nabert), innocent evil (Fr. Gnocchi)? Jesus Christ did not elaborate any theory to explain the existence of pain and suffering in the world. He learned “obedience from what he suffered, and made perfect” (Heb 5:8-9) he carried out a work of redemption by whose power every suffering receives light. In the opus Dei of Jesus Christ, the Son made man for us by dying nailed all evil, taking it directly upon himself. Not only did he experience terrible physical suffering, but he also went through an unrepeatable experience of moral pain: abandonment by the Father. Writing to the Corinthians, St. Paul uses extremely strong words: “He who had not known sin, God treated him as sin for our sake” ( 2Cor 5:21). What does this mean? It can only mean that Jesus experienced the most radical pain and suffering: the loss of Love. Sin indeed separates, destroys every relationship. We glimpse the abyss of the mysterious dialogue between the agonized question by the Son abandoned on the cross and the Father’s answer, made of silence. Now, “in the father’s silence on front of the question by the son is found the proper place of suffering.” Of every human suffering. Jesus lived this experience freely. His mission was not only the choice of God’s solidarity with suffering humanity, but also a choice made in our place. Not only with us, but for us (vicarious substitution). The suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus have the power to expiate all the sins of the world. We face the unfathomable mystery of the human sorrow of the Son of God, sorrow embraced by the human freedom of the divine Person of the Word. A few elements from experience help us understand it: for man it is impossible to accomplish worthy enterprises of any kind without a high dose of suffering; in every man’s life there is no genuine fecundity without pain; above all, a man who has committed injustice is restored to his dignity though expiation leading him back into the truth. The redeemer, by dying on the cross in our place, reveals all the fecundity of sorrow.

4. The work accomplished by the love of Christ is not confined to his individual person. It has the power to touch every human suffering in order to turn it into a work of love and hope. Human suffering, embraced by the love of the crucified one, also becomes fruitful. For those who adhere to Christ, explicitly or implicitly, the possibility of full (eternal) life is already realized. Here, in history, not only in the next life. Suffering is able to change the fortunes of personal and social history (see the little shepherds of Fatima) because it shares in the Redemption of Jesus. “Why have you abandoned me?”: a son’s question that receives as an answer the father’s silence. Not a question without answer, because also silence is an answer. Is this not the dominant experience that all of us have when we face somebody else’s suffering? To be quiet, not to know what to say. Well, such silence, in a seemingly paradoxical fashion, (as always in Christianity) brings us closer to God instead pushing us farther away.

The Redeemer did not try to erase pain through a more brilliant theory, but accomplished a work of total self-identification with suffering, shedding light on its deep meaning: collaboration to His redemption of the world. Even though speaking of expiation for the sins of the world may bother our post-modern sensitivity, we cannot deny this reality. Thus, the suffering of Christ is inclusive, that is it opens the way to other sufferings, which can expiate vicariously in union with his suffering. This awareness does not give up on the tireless effort to fight human suffering, but gives rise to a creativity which is not utopian.

5. Now I would like to let the logic of incarnation, which is proper to the Christian faith, lead me to consider our behavior in front of certain situations of extreme suffering, patients in a vegetative state and those terminally ill. They raise very delicate questions which, incidentally are being debated in parliament in these very days. Viewed in the context of the previous reflections, the experience of people tested by sickness and disability, together with the unavoidable burden of pain and suffering, sheds light also on medicine’s therapeutic action. The latter is authentic only if the intervention to alleviate suffering is offered within an integral image of the human being. It seems impossible to refute the conclusion reached by many experts that what is commonly called “vegetative state” is not a disease, but rather the most serious form of disability. Vegetative state does not require extraordinary devices to support the vital functions, but only action on the patient’s behalf to satisfy the needs he/she cannot fulfill independently any longer: hygiene, movement, nutrition (that is, food and water).

This is perhaps the most mysterious situation, very hard to diagnose, and it raises deep questions about the dignity of the human person and the mystery of our being. Care of somebody in this state means, then, simply taking care, with minimal technological content but a very intense human and nursing engagement. Even if aware of the very low likelihood of recovery, one can keep accompanying the patient, without falling into the opposite extremes of obstinacy or abandonment. According to the experts the case of so-called “terminal patients” is very different. It is precisely in this context that questions arise regarding putative therapeutic excesses and forms of euthanasia. When I was visiting some of these sick people, a question came to me: is it not us, the healthy ones, who ask for a “dignified death,” whereas those who are sick ask for a dignified life even with disease, a dignified life to the last instant, made of what characterizes man: the ability to love and to be loved? A precious and concrete example of what it means to take care of these sick people is given us by palliative treatments. The modern definition of such treatments, as given by the European Association for Palliative Care, says: “Palliative treatments respect life and regard dying as a natural process. Their goal is not to accelerate or postpone death, but rather to preserve the best possible quality of life till the end.” This definition shows great realism. It must be especially kept in mind by the care-givers, since quite a few studies have shown that requests for euthanasia or assisted suicide by terminal patients depend to a significant extent on the attitude that health workers and relatives have towards life, disease and especially the patient.

6. Among the factors that truly affect a person’s choices — both by forbidding practices and granting rights, and by helping shape a mentality –one must include a country’s laws. This why the legislator must be very careful to produce “objectively just laws.” Regarding the Dichiarazione anticipata di trattamento (DAT, a kind of living will), I feel the responsibility to invite the legislator to guarantee the essential principles that have been recalled several times by the Italian Bishops’ Conference. At the same time, the law promoting palliative treatments must be implemented as soon as possible and given all the necessary funding so that these treatments may be practiced everywhere in our country. Adequate funds must also be spent on conventional pain therapy.

7. The mystery of pain and suffering stands inexorable in front of each one of us, but its value is already kept safe in the burning core of trinitarian love. Thus, we have been given a light-filled road to face them. Under the condition that the freedom of each one of us must raise them up daily into the horizon of true love of God, of others and of oneself.

Pictures from the Redeemer’s celebration in Venice

ufficiostampa — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 09:03:46 +0000

Angelo Scola - eng vers » redeemer

Human pain and Redeemer’s work: an abstract taken from the traditional Redeemer Address

Pictures from the Redeemer’s celebration in Venice