Call for Papers: Diakrisis 7 (2024) – Suffering and Asceticism

Diakrisis, 2024

Christ recreates all creation that follows Him. Personally embracing His Salvation is the transcendent and central Christian duty, realized as a certain act of taking responsibility. This embracement turns the fact of suffering into a weapon against the devil and the appearance that natural biological death is a misfortune into the insight that it is the opening of the Gate of the Kingdom. This paper outlines the Holy and Living Tradition’s essential message on the topic at hand: The message about the fact that suffering is, in itself, neither good nor bad and about the way in which the Cross of Christ offers the rectifying Justification of the human being and, through man, of the whole of the fallen creation. Consequently, rather than a philological approach, it offers a synthetic dogmatical insight into this, based on the premise that the Holy Tradition is alive since the first centuries and until the more recent Saint Theologians of the Church.

2013

A popular local Pentecostal chorus, well known around West Africa, begins with the lines, “Me I no go suffer, I no go beg for bread; God of miracles na my papa O! (I will neither suffer, nor will I beg for bread; for the God of miracles is my Father!). This seemingly innocuous chorus is reflective of the growing sentiment among many African Christians today who seek a life free from suffering because of their perceived favored status as children of God. Life, however, is full of crises and Christians are not exempt from them. How a Christian handles lingering crises such as suffering reveals much about their commitment, conviction, and allegiance to the Savior. Often, Christians from backgrounds that are animistic face extreme pressure and temptation to revert to pre-Christian practices in their quest for solutions to the problem of suffering. While they remain in their new faith, some may have no qualms about visiting a shaman or diviner for help, thereby slipping into the practice...

2020

Despite the irreducible non-equivalence of individual experiences of suffering, there is a solidarity possible among sufferers especially during times of collective crisis. This essay focuses on the suffering of the disciple Peter in order to formulate a model for suffering that resonates deeply with other, more recent accounts. Peter’s suffering is linked with Bryan Stevenson’s Just Mercy, as well as the work of certain German political theologians, in order to show how it is our human inability to adequately respond to suffering that gives us the existential vulnerability we need in order to stand in solidarity with others who suffer too—the primal element of Christian love. At a precarious time when so many feel a vulnerability perhaps never felt before, such vulnerability potentially transforms us into more responsible social agents and political actors.

The American Journal of Biblical Theology, 2016

This paper will examine the problem of suffering as it arises from both moral and natural evil through a Christian philosophical and theological perspective. Suffering throughout our planet is pervasive. We all experience it in one form or another. In western culture, we are bombarded, through the media with the terrible tragedies that occur in our home country and abroad. Inevitably we ask ourselves, the following question, as Professor Ramon Martinez, probes into his book, Sin and Evil, " Why does God permit suffering? " In order to address the question of suffering and its relation to the God of Christianity, we must understand what suffering is and how it affects humanity.

Journal of Psychology and Theology, 2010

Should alleviating suffering always be the primary goal in treatment? This paper proposes that suffering can best be understood in the context of the flourishing life, from the intersecting vantage points of positive psychology, philosophy of theology. We further argue that in this context, we can articulate a role for suffering. Suffering can be understood as a marker of disordered living, a means of cultivating characteristics that are essential to the flourishing life, or an opportunity for worldview orientation. In sum, the role of suffering is not to endure it for its own sake, but for the sake of cultivating the flourishing life. Finally, we will consider some implications of this conceptualization for the practice of therapy.

The first part is a broad outline of the Christian and Buddhist understanding of the human predicament as sin and suffering (dukkha) respectively, and of the approaches of the two religions as to their causation and dissolution. With the Christian teaching of Grace as the backdrop, the second part attempts to show that, in spite of the emphasis of effortful praxis, the Buddhist discourse distinctly indicates that the dissolution of dukkha is ultimately available not by “self-power” (Visuddhimagga xx 47) but by liberating insight or effortless perception of transcendental reality (Vism vii. 78), co-incident with the cessation of volitional and mental activity (Digha Nikaya i.184); and yet the Buddhist tradition has maintained a studied silence about this reality and refrained from explicating it as “other-power”.

Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy, 2021

The COVID-19 global pandemic, the ExtraJudicial killings (EJK) here in the Philippines, and the natural calamities we experienced have put human suffering in our collective consciousness. Perhaps one of the most enigmatic human experiences is suffering. We often associate suffering with misery, pain, loneliness, and even evil, but the mystery of suffering goes beyond its cause or reason because it touches on the very meaning of suffering, especially when we consider the suffering of the innocent. St. John Paul II (1984) in Salvifici Doloris (#3, henceforth SD) writes: "In whatever form, suffering seems to be, and is, almost inseparable from man's earthly existence." Indeed, suffering is part of our human existence, and there is no escaping it in this temporal life. Suffering is as much of a part of human existence as death. The moment we are born, we are bound to suffer and then die. We experience pain, illness, disability, hunger, poverty, grief, hatred, frustration, heartbreak, guilt, humiliation, anxiety, loneliness, self-pity, and death. We witness the mass execution of innocent people, the unimaginable toll of natural calamities on communities, and the poverty and hunger of the poor, to name a few examples of mass suffering. Human suffering reminds us of the Buddhist first noble truth, which states that there is suffering, human existence is suffering. According to the Buddha, suffering comes in many forms. Three obvious kinds of suffering correspond to the first three sights the Buddha saw on his first journey outside his palace: old age, sickness, and death. However, according to the Buddha, the problem of suffering goes much deeper. Life is far from ideal and comfortable; it frequently fails to live up to our expectations. Human beings are subject to desires and cravings, and more often, we desire the things of this world. However, even when we are able to satisfy these desires, the satisfaction is only temporary. Pleasure does not last, or if it does, it becomes monotonous. Even when we do not suffer from external causes like illness or bereavement, we are unfulfilled and unsatisfied. This is the truth of suffering; it is connected to our desires, according to the Buddha. It is only in death that we are able to free ourselves from suffering. Death offers us escape. Death, however, while something that is inevitable to happen, is not an option, escape is not an option. We continue living despite the suffering and miseries. However, given that we cannot escape suffering in this life, does it mean that our life

In a theological framework, the problem of suffering is heightened to fundamental, relational questions between God and his creatures. At issue are: what essentially is the problem of suffering, how should it be understood and how close is God to his suffering creatures? The contemplation of these queries plunges the philosopher into the realm of the incomprehensible. Daily, the Christian must grapple with the reality of a God who is the fullness of being - in whom is the perfection of all that is good and a world which is fallen from that perfection. In this, man encounters mystery.

Studia Ecologiae et Bioethicae, 2004

2016

The prevention and relief of suffering has long been a core medical concern. But while this is a laudable goal, some question whether medicine can, or should, aim for a world without pain, sadness, anxiety, despair or uncertainty. To explore these issues, we invited experts from six of the world’s major faith traditions to address the following question. Is there value in suffering? And is something lost in the prevention and/or relief of suffering? While each of the perspectives provided maintains that suffering should be alleviated and that medicine’s proper role is to prevent and relieve suffering by ethical means, it is also apparent that questions regarding the meaning and value of suffering are beyond the realm of medicine. These perspectives suggest that medicine and bioethics has much to gain from respectful consideration of religious discourse surrounding suffering.