Monotheistic Theodicy as Imaginary Face‐Work

Abstract

In this article, I outline the cognitive process involved in accomplishing monotheistic theodicy, or the act of reconciling the belief in an omnipotent and morally perfect God with personal experiences of suffering. Based on in‐depth interviews with intimate partner violence victims, I argue that believers accomplish monotheistic theodicy by performing imaginary face‐work—or protective face‐work on the behalf of significant imagined others—that saves God's face as a morally perfect being. Believers perform this imaginary face‐work by constructing accounts that portray God as morally innocent of their suffering. These accounts fall into three main types: (1) fidelity to a higher principle, (2) ultimate benefit, and (3) shifting blame. These accounts serve as new cognitions that resolve the cognitive dissonance and concomitant negative emotions believers experience because of their suffering. Overall, the findings and analysis contribute to sociological theory by further extending the concepts of face and face‐work to imagined others.

Theodicy or Not? Spiritual Struggles of Evangelical Cancer Survivors

“…At times, theodicy is described in the results of qualitative studies, or operationalized quantitatively, only in terms of religious views of suffering. In these cases, the presence of an instigating threat to or questioning of God as a result of suffering seems to be assumed (e.g., Furnham & Brown, 1992; Hutsebaut, 2003; Sharp, 2014).…”

“…They later go on to say, “It appears that theodical questions are commonplace at the end of life in those with life-threatening illness” (p. 206). Similarly, Sharp (2014) states, “experiences of suffering trigger the need for those who hold religious beliefs to undertake theodicy” (p. 873).…”