The absent God, divine self-withdrawal, and Christ crucified: does Weil's God-who-absents-Himself solve the problem of evil or evacuate divine providence?

Simone Weil, answered from the texts and cited to the page.

The position in brief

God's omnipotence consists in the freedom by which He has chosen not to be everything. Creation is the act of divine self-withdrawal — God renounces the fullness of being to make space for what is not God. The world is what remains when God has emptied Himself out of His omnipotence; necessity is its structure. In this world the divine cannot be present as sensible reality without violating the freedom that the self-withdrawal made possible — and so divine love appears in the world as absence.

Christ crucified is the central mystery: God in His most extreme humiliation and abandonment, dying the death of the slave, crying out the dereliction-cry. The Crucifixion is not the prelude to Resurrection-as- compensation; it is the structural form that love takes in a world organized by necessity. The Resurrection is real but it does not undo the Crucifixion; the Crucifixion remains the structural truth of God's relation to the world in time.12

Sources

  1. The very act of creation entailed the withdrawal of the Creator from the created, so that the sum total of God and his world and all of its creatures is, of course, less than God himself. Having withdrawn from the universe so that it might exist, God is powerless within it, ineffective except as his grace penetrates on special occasions, like a ray of light, the dark mechanical realm of unlimited misery.
    Waiting for God, pp. 37–38
  2. DECREATION Decreation: to make something created pass into the uncreated. Destruction: to make something created pass into nothingness A blameworthy substitute for decreation. Creation is an act of love and it is perpetual. At each moment our existence is God's love for us. But God can only love himself. His love for us is love for himself through us.
    Gravity and Grace, pp. 32–33

Where the argument is made

  • 'The Love of God and Affliction' (1942) in Waiting for God
  • 'Forms of the Implicit Love of God' in Waiting for God
  • the entries on the absent God, providence, and Christ crucified across Gravity and Grace and the Notebooks
  • the late essay on creation in Late Philosophical Writings
  • Letter to a Priest §§14-29 on the heterodox theological positions

How the argument was received

The God-who-absents-Himself doctrine is structurally adjacent to several historical mystical and theological traditions — the Catholic mystical tradition (John of the Cross, the Carmelite line), the Lurianic Kabbalah's tzimtzum (divine contraction in creation, which Weil seems not to have known but which her doctrine resembles), the Lutheran theologia crucis (Luther's theology of the cross). Springsted's Christus Mediator (1983) is the canonical study of the Christological structure. Critics worry that the doctrine evacuates divine providence — if God has withdrawn, what is left of the God who hears prayer, who acts in history, who raises the dead? Defenders argue the structural claim is compatible with a renewed understanding of providence as operating through the void rather than despite it. The position resonates with the Holocaust theology of Hans Jonas ('The Concept of God after Auschwitz') and the Deus absconditus tradition.