James Clark – Book Review of Take This Cup

Last updated on: February 14, 2022 at 8:39 pm by Fr. Charles Erlandson

James Clark – Book Review of Take This Cup 2022-02-14T20:39:53-05:00 Fr. Charles Erlandson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Review – Take This Cup by Charles Erlandson | The North American Anglican

James Clark

Take This Cup: How God Transforms Suffering into Glory and Joy. By Charles Erlandson. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2020. 216 pp. $46 (cloth); $26 (paper).

Suffering, as Charles Erlandson observes, is the only universal human experience. Given that suffering is additionally “so heavy, so painful, [and] so destructive” (1), it is unsurprising that so many books have been written on suffering in the Christian life.

Erlandson contributes to this vein of reflection by “offering a Christian theodicy—a vindication of God’s goodness in light of the existence of evil and suffering.” His argument should thus be distinguished from a defense, in which one offers a possible rather than plausible explanation for suffering (e.g., Alvin Plantinga’s God, Freedom, and Evil). Moreover, Erlandson says his theodicy “will only make sense…to Christians” (x).

Erlandson begins by noting that suffering is “the just punishment for sin, and the necessary consequence for disobeying God and disordering his creation and our hearts” (31). We fallen humans “know that suffering is evil and naturally want to avoid it” (2). Yet suffering finds us nevertheless—as Erlandson puts it, “Ever since the fall, to be human is to suffer” (18)—and if we were left to our own devices that would be the dismal end of the matter.

God, however, desires “to redeem us from our sin and its consequences,” and for this reason “Jesus Christ, the Son of God, takes the cup [of suffering] on our behalf” (7). Indeed, “Christ came to redeem all mankind from every kind of evil and suffering,” and Erlandson points out that to this end Christ’s suffering consisted in “not only the six hours on the cross or the twelve or so hours at the passion and crucifixion but his entire life” (18–19, emphasis original).

Now having risen and ascended, Jesus, “by his suffering…has transformed all Christian suffering” (31, emphasis original). This is not to say suffering is no longer painful: “Make no mistake: suffering is not inherently redemptive but is instead inherently evil and destructive” (31). Even so, “What men and Satan mean for evil, God means for good. This is true not only for Joseph [from Genesis] but also for the Christian and all Christian suffering” (30).

The way in which Christian suffering is transformed by Christ, as Erlandson explains it, is that when we are baptized we are thereby “truly united to Jesus Christ” (51) and become “partakers of Christ” (54, emphasis original). After our baptism, we continue to partake of Christ through the Eucharist, in which “we consume the Lord who has given himself to us as heavenly food” (68).

In both of these sacraments Christians are made part of what is called the mystical body of Christ. This is not a “mere metaphor,” but refers to a “metaphysical reality” (47) in which Christ and the church are united, with Christ as the head and the church as his body, yet “without either of them losing its identity” (47–49). Practically speaking, the church is “the prolongation or extension of the life of Jesus Christ through time and space. The scope of Christ’s ministry is not merely the two billion Christians alive today but includes all of the things He has done or will do for men through men from the first chapters of the Scriptures until the time he returns!” (50)

On Erlandson’s account, this has significant implications for Christian suffering: “Remembering all that we have said about Christ uniting himself to us, we rejoice because our suffering unites us to the source of all joy. This union with Christ is the source of our every joy” (98, emphasis original). In short, Christian suffering is transformed into glory and joy because in our suffering we are united to Christ. Some of the particular joys God brings about through our suffering include being “brought back to [God] the Shepherd when we wander like sheep from him” (109), being transformed into Christ’s image (113), and binding us to our fellow-sufferers in Christ (119).

In addition to such joys as these, Erlandson emphasizes that “because of the sacramental bond between Christ and his mystical body, the church, Christ partakes of our suffering, and we partake of his sufferings” (76). As such, Erlandson argues, there is a real sense in which our suffering is redemptive: “While my suffering itself remains an evil, God has now, through Christ, transformed it into a means of his redemption of the world” (107). In other words, “Redeemed man, the body of Christ, now participates directly in the redemption of the world” (170). To say we participate in redemption does not mean redemption originates in us, for “the glorious work of redemption…is purely God’s” (171). Rather, Christ, “through you…is redeeming your suffering , your life, and the suffering and lives of others. This is the meaning of human suffering” (169, emphasis original).

By way of evaluation, while Erlandson says his theodicy will only make sense to Christians, it would be more precise to say it will only make sense to Christians who accept the sort of high ecclesiology articulated by figures like E. L. Mascall and Fulton Sheen, both of whom Erlandson cites favorably. For that matter, Christians who do not have a similarly high sacramentology will find less to appreciate here.

One final point: Erlandson suggests that “a kind of suffering…may…be at the heart of the Holy Trinity” (120). On its face, this appears to be a denial of divine impassibility. However, Erlandson has clarified to me in private correspondence that if this were in fact possible, it would be very different from “suffering” as it is predicated of humans. Indeed, Thomas Weinandy—author of Does God Suffer?, one of the foremost defenses of divine impassibility—also speculates that it might be possible to predicate suffering of God in a way “radically different” (168) from conventional usage. It is worth noting, however, that Weinandy goes on to say, “It would be better, for the sake of clarity and consistency, not to predicate suffering of God at all” (170).

In sum, Erlandson’s book is a distinctively high-church reflection on the significance of Christian suffering that deserves to be widely read and digested.

Take This Cup

Anglican

book review

Fr. Charles Erlandson

suffering

take this cup

Previous Post

February 11, 2022

Joseph Laughon - Book Review of Take This Cup

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Book Reviews Featured Give Us This Day Give Us This Day Devotional love me love my wife Love My Wife Reformed Catholicism Blog Spirit-Reality Take This Cup Uncategorized

Select a Month February 2022 November 2021 October 2021 August 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 September 2018 July 2018 March 2018 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which prophet was told to eat a scroll in a vision?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Joel Obadiah Ezekiel Daniel