The Irenaean Theodicy
History
Irenaeus's view has been put forward in modern times by such philosophers
as John Hick (Evil and the God of Love, 1966) and Richard Swinburne.
According to this view the pains and sufferings of the world are meant by God
to act as a means of producing a truly good person.
This view of suffering as a means to good is rejected famously by the Russian
novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky in The Brothers Karamazov. One of the
characters, Ivan, rejects this view on the grounds that the suffering of one
child can never be justified in terms of what good results.
Summary
The so-called 'Irenaean theodicy' comes in two parts. The first stems from St
Irenaeus (130-202 AD), a Father of the early Christian Church, who thought
that humanity was not created perfect, but that they required growth in order
to approach spiritual perfection. However, God does not necessarily intend
evil to provide a means for this growth (i.e. by providing challenging
situations), for a person could grow to spiritual perfection simply by obeying
God's laws. Also, from Irenaeus's point of view, God does not intervene in
human affairs to prevent evil because that would be to interfere with free will.
The philosopher John Hick (b.1922) has developed this view further. Hick
agrees with Irenaeus that God created us with the potential for spiritual
growth. However, Hick then sees the process of 'soul making' (as he calls it)
to be a response to the evil in the world. So, if cancer did not exist, or the evil
actions of others, then we would not have the means whereby we could
develop spiritually. Also, Hick argues, there exists what he terms an 'epistemic
distance' between human beings and God, so that we are not born knowing of
his existence, and it is not something which it is easy to gain certain
knowledge of. Therefore, the process of soul making also involves a battle to
attain religious faith.
Two further consequences of Hick's theodicy should be borne in mind here:
firstly, because some individuals do not seem to have opportunity to develop
spiritually (e.g. in the case of infant death), Hick argues that we must bring the
possibility of an afterlife into the equation (so that such soul's receive a
heavenly reward); secondly, because there is such a great amount of evil in
the world, and not all suffering seems fair or understandable, we must finally
admit that we cannot fully understand God's reasons or His plan.
Questions
1. Briefly give an over view of Irenaean theodicy.
2. Does this argument justify evil?
3. Can we judge any action only on its consequences?
4. Do the means justify the ends? What sort of good might the
Holocaust justify? Would it be worth it?
5. The idea of "soul-making" supposes that an individual may be given
enough time to learn. Where infants die, or children, how can we
view their chances against someone who lives, say, to the age of
80?
6. Does this view imply that some souls are more important than
others?
7. Can the justification of soul-making be used when we can't prove if
the soul exists or not?
8. Can suffering ever be loving?
Extension:
Using the key words below, draw a diagram or picture to describe the main points of the
theodicy
Epistemic, soul-making, love, development, potential, perfection