What Jesus teaches about response to suffering
Standing in the church sanctuary, I listened to the heart-wrenching story of a man whose mother had been euthanized. Tearfully he shared how he and his siblings had clashed over their mother’s decision to have her life ended due to chronic illness. Tragically, he and another sibling wanted their mom to live while his other siblings thought she’d suffered enough.
I believe a solid biblical case can be made against euthanasia. I’ve consistently advocated against so-called medical assistance in dying (MAiD) even before it was legalized in 2016. But whenever I speak about it, the question of suffering inevitably comes up. Isn’t MAiD a compassionate answer to suffering?
Emotionally I get why many see MAiD as a compassionate way to end suffering of the hopelessly sick. It’s hard watching people suffer from illness. Most people want to see it stopped. My own wife (patiently!) bears the debilitating effects of over 25 years of multiple sclerosis, so I’ve experienced the emotional toil of watching her decline.
However, can we biblically and morally support that euthanasia is the right answer to those suffering chronic, terminal or mental suffering? I’ve argued at length elsewhere why we can’t. But that begs the question, “How then should followers of Jesus respond to the suffering of others if MAiD is not an answer?”
Most know the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37). A man on the way to Jericho from Jerusalem gets mugged, stripped of his belongings and left on the side of the road “half-dead” (10:30). That’s not just an English idiom, but a literal translation of the Greek word derived from hemi (half) + thanatos (death). If there is anyone in Scripture who was a candidate to have his suffering ended by euthanasia, it was this man.
What does Jesus want us to do in the face of suffering? Like the Samaritan, to be utterly inconvenienced.
It’s easy to look down our moral noses at the priest and Levite as they steer clear of the man (10:31–32). We don’t know why they avoided the man, though some commentators note they were forbidden by the Law from touching dead bodies (Leviticus 21:1–4).
But what if we stop to consider what our emotional response would be to the bloody, naked, dying man? Speaking both from experience and countless conversations, I know being a bystander to suffering causes personal pain. (In that regard, we ought never to downplay why we naturally seek to avoid or escape dealing with others’ suffering. Maybe we’re more like the priest and Levite than we realize.)
Along comes the Samaritan. What does he do? Though most likely an enemy to the battered Jew, the Samaritan acts. Depending on your count, he does at least ten things to address the man’s sufferings. This included stopping and risking his own safety, interrupting his own agenda, using his own goods and financial resources, and even committing to the man’s long-term care (10:33–35).
Jesus then asks His audience to identify who acted as a neighbour (10:36). The teacher of the Law knows the answer, but refuses to name him as a Samaritan, resorting instead to “The one who had mercy on him” (10:37a). To which Jesus commands the lawyer – and us – “Go and do likewise” (10:37b).
What does Jesus want us to do in the face of suffering? Like the Samaritan, to be utterly inconvenienced.
The words mercy and compassion today are emotionally laden. They invoke being moved in our heart, having feelings of sympathy and care. To be sure, we hope those who have the love of God poured into our hearts (Romans 5:5) will indeed be moved in our spirits and emotions.
But let’s be honest with ourselves: How often does someone else’s suffering cause us personal discomfort and distress? As much as we might feel compassion, we also know responding well means giving up our own agenda, time, finances, goods, and efforts for the sake of the one suffering. It sounds a whole lot like what Jesus did, giving up the glory and riches of heaven to come and serve us sick sinners (Philippians 2:7; Luke 19:10; Mark 2:17).
Caring for a loved one in physical need isn’t always easy. I confess I struggle sometimes to do it with patience and love. But inconvenient compassion is what it means to serve those with terminal, chronic or mental illness. It is rarely easy, economical or convenient.
Prematurely ending a life to end suffering may seem to be a compassionate and convenient response. But the compassion modelled by Jesus’ Good Samaritan is demanding, costly and, yes, inconvenient.
There’s increased pressure placed on suffering people to “take advantage” of MAiD. But can we do something completely countercultural and ask the Holy Spirit to help us be channels of God’s mercy, actively seeking to do all we can to lovingly serve those who suffer? No matter how inconvenient long-suffering compassion might be?
David Guretzki is the EFC’s president and CEO. Read more of these columns at FaithToday.ca/CrossConnections. Illustration of man with cane and supporter: Handrush Supply