George Pell on The problem of evil
Pell defended the Christian response to evil, arguing that suffering has redemptive value in God's plan.
In his debate with Dawkins on ABC's Q&A (2012), Pell addressed the problem of evil from a traditional Catholic perspective. He argued that suffering, while genuinely terrible, has redemptive value within God's plan. The cross of Christ demonstrates that God does not stand apart from human suffering but enters into it and transforms it.
Pell's theology of suffering drew on the Catholic tradition of redemptive suffering — the idea that uniting one's sufferings with those of Christ gives them meaning and value. This did not make suffering good in itself, but it situated suffering within a larger narrative of salvation.
His response was criticised as cold comfort to the actually suffering, and his debate performances were widely seen as less effective than his opponents'. Nevertheless, Pell articulated a position held by many Christians: that the problem of evil, while serious, does not disprove God because the Christian story provides a framework for understanding and ultimately redeeming suffering.
“The cross shows that God doesn't stand apart from suffering. He enters into it. That doesn't explain suffering, but it does transform it.”