• Why does God allow suffering?

    Why does God allow suffering?

    Here’s my answer in the form of a sermon.

    To be strictly honest, I’m not sure that it is particularly my answer. I think it may be the only answer.

    And I’m moved to have seen that this has been shared by people since I preached it and has been avidly watched in New Zealand. It has also, apparently been used by a religious studies teacher today to engage with Higher Religious, Moral and Philosophical Studies students in a school in Glasgow.

     

    This is a church which helps people to articulate questions.

    Not just little questions but big questions.

    I hope that we can help people to answer questions too, but in a way I’m more concerned that we keep building this place as a place where good questions can be asked and articulated.

    Good questions. Big questions. Questions that matter.

    That was a part of the diocesan pilgrimage days that we have had over the last couple of weeks welcoming friends from around the diocese. A key part of the day was gathering the questions. Indeed, one of the things that I’ve learned from working with Cedric is how important it is to devise processes for gathering questions and allowing people to give voice to what matters to them.

    We’re now running God Factor 12 or 13 or something like that. I’ve started to lose count.

    But one question keeps coming up – I think it has come up in most if not all the God Factor session at one time or another.

    And it is some variation on one of the questions that is behind the gospel reading for today.

    Why does God allow suffering?

    Why does God allow bad things to happen?

    Why do disasters happen and what is God’s part in it?

    Why does God let people suffer? Make people suffer? Allow suffering at all?

    And in the gospel reading this morning we have an attempt to answer that question.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s only one real answer to that question and that Christians keep on asking the question because they don’t like the answer but it is the only one that exists.

    In this morning’s gospel reading we get the same and only answer that I can give to the question. But then we get a wee story tagged on the end.

    And maybe the story is interesting.

    Firstly, Jesus is asked about the Galileans who have been killed by Pilate. Were they worse than other Galileans?

    No he says, but then says, “Repent, or you will die as they did”.

    Then he remembers 18 people killed in a disaster when the tower of Siloam fell on them. Were they worse than all the others in Jerusalem?

    Why do disasters happen to some people?

    Why does God allow suffering?

    No, he says, but then repeats, “Repent, or you will die as they did”.

    So, does repentance stop you getting killed then Jesus?

    The question lingers on the lips of people through the centuries. If you put things right will God will that stop bad things happening to you.

    The trouble is, he’s already answered that. No, he has said clearly – the ones killed by the tower were no worse than the ones who were not killed. Repentance doesn’t stop bad things happening to you.

    So why does he tell them to repent?

    Well, I think it is because repentance isn’t a way to stop death, it is a way to bring life.

    And that’s maybe why we read this difficult gospel in Lent rather than at some other time of the year.

    Repentance, metanoia, turning around – it is good for us to turn ourselves around. Good for us to change. Good for us to put things right. It is life enhancing to take stock – to stop, to work out where we are going wrong and to turn towards what it good; to turn towards God.

    Will it make bad things stop happening – well it might make us stop doing bad things, but no, it won’t make suffering come to an end

    The Buddha said life is suffering. Jesus says take up your cross and follow me.

    Part of having a mature grown up faith is accepting that this is just the way life is – being alive means knowing suffering and also knowing that it doesn’t seem to come fairly or equally. There’s a randomness to life that we can’t fathom and it won’t make sense even if we project it onto God and talk as though God afflicts us.

    God never afflicts us. God loves us.

    Bad things happen but not from God.

    God still loves us.

    Terrible things happen unfairly to some rather than others.

    And God goes on loving us even as we rage about how unfair life is.

    But Jesus isn’t finished there. He tells us this perplexing story about a man with a fig tree that won’t produce figs.

    “Cut it down! Why should it be wasting the soil?”

    His gardener replies – ‘Sir, let it alone for one more year, until I dig around it and put manure on it. If it bears fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down.’”

    What on earth do we make of that. We never find out whether the tree ends up cut down or not? We never find out whether it bears fruit or dies? We never find out who the gardener or the man are supposed to be.

    People say Jesus was good at storytelling but this time there’s no plot – no development, no conclusion.

    Just the image of a tree that isn’t growing and a gardener who believes in second chances.

    And the smelly reality of what they used to fertilize their trees with in those days.

    Our translation describes it as manure but there are other rather earthy words that could be used.

    You want my learned interpretation of this passage?

    You want to know what I think Jesus might have been trying to convey in telling this story – a fragment, surely only a fragment of which survives in our gospel today.

    It is a free translation and a flight of the imagination to be sure, but I think he’s saying this.

    You grow best when the manure is piling up around you.

    God loves you there just as much as anywhere.

    You grow nearer to God when you just can’t seem to shake off the dung.

    God loves you whether you smell of heaven or the “earth” from which you were made.

    And, yes, oh yes, you grow most when you are in the shit.

    God loves you anyway.

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

6 responses to “Here or there?”

  1. Gary Avatar

    Up there. High altar. No doubt.

  2. Tom Allen Avatar

    I am very much with Richard Giles on this one – there should liturgically only be one main altar – ideally this is achieved by romoving the former High altar and dedicating that space to some other purpose – where that is not possible as in historic cathedrals then it should be left dormant (covered in a simple cloth perhaps) and only the altar which is being used for worship should be dressed since this is in fact THE altar.

    Despite all the reservations about removing former altars in the end it solves long-term problems, and provides a single visual focus for Eucharistic worship. At times when a high altar is needed then the new altar can moved there.

    This kind of fuzziness illustrates that our liturgical practice has become dominated by hertiage criteria.

    I am about to replace our main altar with something moveable and aesthetically more appropriate, but am facing a Registrars ruling that the current altar (and former eastward facing number more recently provided with wheels and moved to the chancel!) must be burnt, and that the wood frontal cannot be used for a screen.

    Dont’ we get ourselves tied up in knots!
    Tom

  3. Stewart Avatar

    A thought came to my mind this afternoon. At the Creed we all face east. This results in the choir turning their back on the Nave Altar and in most cases put the High Altar in their sight.

    Considering Tom’s comments, another thought thinking about some English Cathedrals which have multiple altars around the building, it is not usually possible to see more than one at a time. Some have a chapel behind the High Altar – behind a screen.

    Turning back to St Mary’s – all the action at the 10:30 service is centred and focused around the Nave Altar. However there is still the High Altar, the Pheobe Traquair Reredos and Gwyneth Leach mural of Our Lady at the East End. To my mind their presence enhances the worship around the Nave Altar and does not detract from it.

  4. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    The Altar is a table, where we commemorate a meal together. Clearly (to my mind) we should all be sitting round it, as we do (more or less) at present. The table reminds me that Jesus instituted the Last Supper when he was among us (HERE), not somewhere else (THERE).

    I very much hope that the Altar in St. Mary’s can be left where it is.

  5. kelvin Avatar
    kelvin

    It seems to me curious that the practice that I inherited was to light and dress the high altar whilst using the nave altar. It makes no sense, except perhaps to highlight St Mary’s puzzling parallel worlds of deep conservatism mingled with radical liberalism.

    Whist tending to agree with Andrew’s sentiments, it is worth remembering that the nave altar could hardly be said to have stayed in one place these last 20 years.

  6. Elizabeth Avatar
    Elizabeth

    Here. Both. Loving the paradox.

    But maybe I only say that beccause the only church I’ve regularly worshiped in where there are clearly two visible altars is St Mary’s and that’s what I’m used to. I’ve never found it distracting that the high altar is dressed and lit, even though the nave altar is where the action is, so to speak. But then, would I notice if the high altar wasn’t dressed and lit? Probably not.

    I do love the nave altar, peripatetic as it is!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Finding a partner

    Reading the story of Abraham trying to find a wife for Isaac at morning prayer this morning reminded me of a sermon I preached a while ago that the congregation seemed to enjoy. It was all about dating strategies and the Lambeth Conference. It was just before I started videoing sermons, but I did have…

  • Newsletter

    I sent out a St Mary’s newsletter yesterday. If you got it, well and good. If you didn’t and want to read it, you’ll find it here. And if you want to make sure that such things are sent out to you in future, you can sign up here.

  • Equal Marriage Parliamentary Reception

    Had a great time at the Equal Marriage reception at the Scottish Parliament last night. A brilliant mixture of lots of good speakers, lots of great people and wedding cake. There was a great opening speech from Rae Cahill of the Scottish Youth Parliament. Then, very much enjoyed hearing Rabbi Mark Solomon of the Edinburgh…

  • Sermon preached on 29 January 2012

    Here’s Sunday’s sermon. Quite a tricky gospel reading all about casting out a demon. I do like being in a congregation where you can speak from the pulpit about exorcising the demons of the Bible and commanding them to be quiet, as Jesus did with demons. In some places, if you preached a sermon like…