Suffering Systems: A Theological Account of Structural Evil

By Father Timothy Blackwood —

Traditional theodicy asks: If God is good and powerful, why does evil exist?

But there's a prior question: What is evil?

The typical answer: individual moral failure—people choosing wrong.

This is incomplete. Much evil isn't individual choice. It's structural—embedded in systems that harm people regardless of individual intentions.

The Classic Problem

Traditional Christian theology treats sin as:

This framework handles individual moral failure. It struggles with:

In these cases, people acting according to system incentives produce evil outcomes. Individual virtue isn't sufficient to prevent harm.

Structural Sin

Latin American liberation theology introduced "structural sin"—evil embedded in social, economic, and political systems.

Examples:

These aren't just unfortunate outcomes. They're structural features. The system functions by producing harm.

Individuals within these systems may be virtuous, generous, kind. The system still produces suffering.

The Fallen Powers

The New Testament speaks of "principalities and powers"—forces beyond individual humans that exert malevolent influence.

Modern theology demythologized this: "powers" became metaphors for human institutions.

But what if it's more literal? Not demons, but actual forces—emergent properties of systems that act autonomously, beyond individual control?

Consider:

These are genuinely "powers"—entities that act, make decisions, and exert force, but aren't reducible to individual humans.

Systems as Agents

Theology traditionally reserves agency for persons—beings with will, consciousness, and moral responsibility.

But systems exhibit agency-like properties:

Are systems moral agents?

Not in the traditional sense—they're not conscious, can't repent, don't experience guilt.

But they produce outcomes, create incentives, shape possibilities. They have something analogous to will.

The Theodicy Problem Shifts

Classical theodicy: Why does God allow individual moral failure?

Structural theodicy: Why does God allow systems that produce suffering regardless of individual virtue?

The problem is deeper. Individual evil can be addressed through repentance, conversion, moral formation. Structural evil requires dismantling and rebuilding systems.

But systems resist change:

The Incarnational Response

Christian theology's core claim: God entered the system.

Incarnation means:

The resurrection then becomes: God breaking the power of systems to deal death.

But resurrection doesn't eliminate suffering systems. It reveals that suffering isn't final—that systems don't have ultimate power.

Practical Theology of Structural Change

If evil is structural, not just individual:

1. Conversion requires system change

Personal moral improvement is necessary but insufficient. Transformation requires:

2. Complicity is unavoidable

We're embedded in systems. Complete purity is impossible. This means:

3. Collective action is spiritual practice

Organizing for systemic change isn't just politics—it's spiritual discipline:

4. Small acts matter differently

Individual choices don't solve structural problems. But they:

The Problem of Timescale

Structural change operates on generational timescales:

Individual moral formation operates on shorter timescales:

This creates tension: we feel urgency about structural evil, but changing systems takes lifetimes.

Theology offers: eschatological patience—working for change while trusting final resolution to God.

But this can become excuse for inaction. The balance is difficult.

Why Systems Resist Redemption

Humans can repent. Can systems?

Systems don't have consciousness or will in the traditional sense. They can be reformed, but not through internal conversion.

System change requires:

None of these are gentle. Structural change is violent—not necessarily physically, but disruptive, painful, costly.

The Suffering of System Change

Dismantling harmful systems creates suffering:

This is real suffering. It's not theoretical. System change means people hurt.

Theology asks: Is this suffering redemptive or merely necessary?

The honest answer: both. It's necessary if we're to build less harmful systems. It's redemptive if we're conscious of it, if we support those who suffer, if we build with compassion.

But it's still suffering.

Conclusion

Evil isn't just individual moral failure. It's embedded in systems—structures that produce harm regardless of individual virtue.

Theology needs to account for this. Traditional frameworks of sin, repentance, and redemption need expansion to include:

The incarnation reveals: God doesn't fix systems from outside. God enters them, experiences their violence, and breaks their ultimate power through resurrection.

We're called to participate in this work:

It's slower, harder, and more complex than individual moral improvement. But it's unavoidable if we're serious about addressing evil in its actual forms.