The book is a collection of Wolterstorff's writings about the death of his son. He introduces the text in the preface thus: "I wrote the following more than twelve years ago, to honor our son and brother Eric, who died in a mountain-climbing accident in Austria in his twenty-fifth year, and to voice my grief. Though it is intensely personal, I decided to publish it in the hope that some of those who sit beside us on the mourning bench for children would find my words giving voice to their own honoring and grieving."
The thing I appreciated most about this book was how raw and honest Wolterstorff is in his grief for his deceased son Eric. He asks a lot of searching questions about God (he's a Christian) and life and death and suffering. Death and suffering in particular are touchy subjects for anyone, especially for religious persons. Wolterstorff doesn't attempt to give definite answers to his questions - most of them are simply unanswerable - but his asking them is clearly an integral part of his mourning.
Here are some excerpts of the book that touched me the most:
"Rather often I am asked whether the grief remains as intense as when I wrote. The answer is, No. The wound is no longer raw. But it has not disappeared. That is as it should be. If he was worth loving, he is worth grieving over. Grief is existential testimony to the worth of the one loved. That worth abides.
So I own my grief. I do not try to put it behind me, to get over it, to forget it. I do not try to dis-own it. If someone asks, 'Who are you, tell me about yourself,' I say - not immediately, but shortly - 'I am one who lost a son.' That loss determines my identity; not all of my identity, but much of it. It belongs within my story. I struggle indeed to go beyond merely owning my grief toward owning it redemptively. But I will not and cannot disown it. I shall remember Eric. Lament is part of life.
A friend told me that he had given copies of Lament to all his children. 'Why did you do that?' I asked. 'Because it is a love-song,' he said. That took me aback. But Yes, it is a love-song. Every lament is a love-song.
Will love-songs one day no longer be laments?"
(Wolterstorff writes super well.)
"Someone said to Claire [Wolterstorff's wife], 'I hope you're learning to live at peace with Eric's death.' Peace, shalom, salaam. Shalom is the fulness of life in all dimensions. Shalom is dwelling in justice and delight with God, with neighbor, with oneself, in nature. Death is shalom's mortal enemy. Death is demonic. We cannot live at peace with death.
When the writer of Revelation spoke of the coming of the day of shalom, he did not say that on that day we would live at peace with death. He said that on that day 'There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.'
I shall try to keep the wound from healing, in recognition of our living stillin the old order of things. I shall try to keep it from healing, in solidarity with those who sit beside me on humanity's mourning bench."
"I have no explanation. I can do nothing else than endure in the face of this deepest and most painful of mysteries. I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and resurrecter of Jesus Christ. I also believe that my son's life was cut off in its prime. I cannot fit these pieces together. I am at a loss. I have read the theodicies produced to justify the ways of God to man. I find them unconvincing. To the most agonized question I have ever asked I do not know the answer. I do not know why God would watch him fall. I do not know why God would watch me wounded. I cannot even guess.
C. S. Lewis, writing about the death of his wife, was plainly angry with God. He, Lewis, deserved something better than to be treated so shabbily. I am not angry but baffled and hurt. My wound is an unanswered question. The wounds of all humanity are an unanswered question."
"I have come to see that the Christian gospel tells us more of the meaning of sin than of suffering. Of sin it says that its root lies not in God but in the will of the human being. It is true that an inclination toward lovelessness and injustice is now mysteriously perpetuated down through the generations. But it remains an inclination, not a necessity. Sin belongs to us. To this the gospel adds that our lovelessness pains God; it grieves him. And then the good news: God's response to this pain is forgiveness - not avenging fury but forgiveness. Jesus Christ is the announcement: the Master of the Universe forgives.
To the 'why' of suffering we get no firm answer. Of course some suffering is easily seen to be the result of our sin: war, assault, poverty amidst plenty, the hurtful word. And maybe some is chastisement. But not all. The meaning of the remainder is not told us. It eludes us. Our net of meaning is too small. There's more to our suffering than our guilt."
(I don't know whether I wholly agree with this thought. Is there more to suffering than sin? I don't think so; I think that the "why" of suffering can be answered with "sin". The way I see it, the cause of Wolterstorff's grief and suffering is death. To me, death is the consequence of sin. Not necessarily a specific individual's sin, but sin as an overarching concept. Nobody is to blame for Wolterstorff's son's death, hence nobody is to blame for Wolterstorff's grief and suffering. But it does come back to sin, and sin is on us, the human race. I think sin is much deeper and more mysterious than the things we do and say. Sin is part of the human condition. If man hadn't sinned (again, I'm talking about sin as an inherent aspect of humankind and life in the here and now, not the sin of any particular person[s]), human beings wouldn't die, but live for eternity. In my understanding, the Christian concept of "eternity" isn't just to do with time - it's related to doing life with God, enjoying and revelling in His presence - but it DOES encompass time, i.e. "eternity" does mean "forever" in the temporal sense. Hence, eternal life in the new heavens and new earth encompasses the absence of death, both physical and spiritual. As Wolterstorff points out, in the new order of the forthcoming Kingdom of God, death won't be in the picture at all. No sin, hence no death, and no suffering at all. It does come back to sin. Christ defeated sin at the cross, but we're still living in the now but not yet phase of the world's history, and unfortunately sin is still around and wreaking havoc. But in saying all this, I respect Wolterstorff's perspective, and am open to being challenged on this point.)
"Faith is a footbridge that you don't know will hold you up over the chasm until you're forced to walk out onto it. I'm standing there now, over the chasm. I inspect the bridge. Am I deluded in believing that in god the question shouted out by the wounds of the world has its answer? Am I deluded in believing that someday I will know the answer? Am I deluded in believing that once I know the answer, I will see that love has conquered?"
"We are surrounded by death. As we walk through the grasslands of life it lurks everywhere - behind, to the left, to the right, ahead, everywhere in the swaying grass. Before, I saw it only here and there. The light was too bright. Here in this dim light the dead show up: teachers, colleagues, the children of friends, aunts, uncles, mother, father, the composers whose music I hear, the psalmists whose words I quote, the philosophers whose texts I read, the carpenters whose houses I live in. All around me are the traces and memories of the dead. We live among the dead, until we join them."
"How is faith to endure, O God, when you allow all this scraping and tearing on us? You have allowed rivers of blood to flow, mountains of suffering to pile up, sobs to become humanity's song - all without lifting a finger that we could see. You have allowed bonds of love beyond number to be painfully snapped. If you have not abandoned us, explain yourself.
We strain to hear. But instead of hearing an answer we catch sight of God himself scraped and torn. Through our tears we see the tears of God.
A new and more disturbing question now arises: Why do you permit yourself to suffer, O God? If the death of the devout costs you dear (Psalm 116:15), why do you permit it? Why do you not grasp joy?"
"Love in our world is suffering love. Some do not suffer much, though, for they do not love much. Suffering is for the loving. If I hadn't loved him, there wouldn't be this agony."
"God is love. That is why he suffers. To love our suffering sinful world is to suffer. God so suffered for the world that he gave up his only Son to suffering. The one who does not see God's suffering does not see his love. God is suffering love.
So suffering is down at the center of things, deep down where the meaning is. Suffering is the meaning of our world. For Love is the meaning. And Love suffers. The tears of God are the meaning of history.
But mystery remains. Why isn't Love-without-suffering the meaning of things? Why is suffering-Love the meaning? Why does God endure his suffering? Why does he not at once relieve his agony by relieving ours?"
(I struggle with this thought. Why indeed, God? I haven't figured it out. I'm certain I never will, not in this life anyway.)
Read "Lament for a Son". And then let's have a chat over coffee.
G.