Jan. 20, 2025. Suffering and the Church: A Question of Legitimacy

I am not a doctrinal scholar, but rather an interested member of the Roman Catholic community seeking to explore the complexities of the Church’s response to suffering. Throughout its history, the Roman Catholic Church has wielded considerable influence over moral, spiritual, and social matters, shaping the lives of billions. However, this authority has often been accompanied by tensions and contradictions, particularly in its responses to human suffering. The Church's claims to divine authority, rooted in Scripture and tradition, have been challenged as society evolves, raising questions about whether its teachings genuinely align with Christ’s message of love and compassion.​


The Problem of Suffering and the Church’s Response
One of the most enduring critiques of the Church concerns its stance on suffering. Stephen Fry’s well-known critique, questioning how a benevolent God could permit suffering such as childhood cancer, encapsulates this issue. The Church’s responses often invoke theological constructs such as free will, the "soul-making" theodicy, and divine providence (CCC 311-314). However, these explanations frequently fall short of addressing the emotional and existential anguish experienced by individuals, leaving many feeling abandoned by an institution that claims to embody divine love.

Marriage, as an institution governed by the Church, serves as a pertinent example of this broader issue. The Church upholds marriage as a sacrament, reflecting Christ’s union with the Church (Ephesians 5:25-32; CCC 1601). Yet, it enforces rigid rules, such as the prohibition of divorce, which can exacerbate suffering in cases of irreconcilable breakdowns, loveless unions, or even abusive relationships. The insistence on permanence, often dictated by celibate clergy, raises critical questions: can those who have never experienced the complexities of marriage truly understand its challenges?

Moreover, the pressure to maintain a failing marriage in accordance with Church teaching often leads to psychological distress, fostering feelings of guilt and unworthiness. The annulment process, while intended as a compassionate solution, is frequently criticised for being opaque, slow, and legalistic, leaving many feeling trapped within a framework that prioritises rules over human dignity (Familiaris Consortio, 1981).



Celibacy, Authority, and the Limits of Empathy.
The Church’s emphasis on celibacy among its clergy has been both a source of strength and contention. Historically, the majority of saints canonised by the Church have been priests, nuns, or martyrs, reinforcing the perception that celibate lives are spiritually superior (Sacerdotalis Caelibatus, 1967). This has contributed to a clerical hierarchy that often appears disconnected from the lived experiences of ordinary laypeople.

Christ’s own celibacy may have set a precedent, encouraging the Church to idealise religious life over marital life. However, critics argue that this focus has led to an institutional blind spot regarding the complexities of human relationships and suffering. This raises a fundamental contradiction: if celibacy is the preferred state, yet marriage is necessary for human continuity, how can the Church claim authority over both without recognising the inherent tensions?

Additionally, the celibate clergy's lack of first-hand experience in marital life may result in an oversimplified, idealised vision of marriage that does not reflect its practical challenges. This disconnect can contribute to a lack of pastoral sensitivity when addressing the struggles of married couples, perpetuating a cycle of alienation and disillusionment among the faithful.


Doctrinal Evolution and Self-Interest
A broader critique of the Church’s legitimacy focuses on the development of doctrine over time. Many of the rules governing marriage, suffering, and sin were not explicitly instituted by Christ but rather emerged through centuries of theological interpretation and ecclesiastical authority. This raises the question: are these rules divinely inspired, or are they institutional constructs shaped by historical, cultural, and political contexts?

For example, the institutionalisation of marriage as a sacrament was partly driven by the Church’s desire to regulate inheritance and property rights. Similarly, the celibate priesthood, often justified as a means of spiritual purity, was historically influenced by practical considerations, including economic and administrative control. Such developments reflect an expansion of institutional power that may not always align with Christ’s original message of love and compassion (Lumen Gentium, 1964).

The Church’s resistance to doctrinal change, particularly regarding marriage and family life, often fuels perceptions of self-preservation. Critics argue that rigid adherence to outdated interpretations may serve institutional interests rather than the spiritual and emotional needs of the faithful. This tension highlights the Church’s struggle to reconcile tradition with contemporary realities.



The Struggle for Reform and Relevance
In response to these critiques, the Church has made efforts to emphasise a broader vision of holiness that includes lay vocations. Vatican II (1962–1965) sought to affirm that all people, regardless of their state in life, are called to holiness (Lumen Gentium, 40). Pope Francis, through documents such as Gaudete et Exsultate (2018), has further promoted this inclusive vision. However, meaningful reform requires more than doctrinal statements—it demands a fundamental shift in how the Church approaches authority, empathy, and pastoral care.

The tension between upholding tradition and adapting to modern realities remains a critical challenge. As long as the Church prioritises institutional authority over the lived experiences of its members, questions about its legitimacy will persist. A more pastoral approach—one that listens to and accompanies people in their struggles—is essential if the Church is to maintain relevance and credibility in the modern world.


Conclusion: Seeking Balance in Suffering
Ultimately, the legitimacy of the Church’s claims to authority hinges on its ability to guide individuals in balancing their personal relationship with the divine, their role within the community, and their own well-being. Its teachings on suffering, exemplified in its approach to marriage, must reflect an equilibrium between doctrinal fidelity and genuine pastoral care (Amoris Laetitia, 2016).

The Church must ask itself: is it fostering a path that enables individuals to seek divine grace within the support of their community, or is it merely reinforcing institutional barriers? True reform lies in acknowledging that suffering is not a singular experience but one intertwined with personal, communal, and spiritual dimensions, requiring understanding, flexibility, and above all, compassion.
​
私は教義の学者ではなく、単なるカトリック信者として、教会が苦しみにどのように対応しているかを考察したい。カトリック教会は歴史を通じて道徳的・霊的な問題に影響を及ぼしてきたが、その権威には矛盾が伴う。特に離婚禁止などの厳格な結婚観は、多くの信者に苦しみを与える可能性がある。独身の聖職者が結婚について決定を下すことに批判があり、教会の教義と信徒の実生活の乖離が指摘される。教会は教義の厳格さと信徒の現実的な課題のバランスを取る必要がある。

---