Religion as a Companion Through Suffering
Calicem salutaris accipiam et nomen Domini invocabo (Ps 115,4). I shall drink the chalice of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord.
N.B. — Special thanks to Dr. Jahdiel Perez for his invaluable mentorship.
According to Sigmund Freud in The Future of an Illusion, religion works as a universal neurosis, providing a psychological coping mechanism for humanity in the face of nature’s destructive forces. On the other hand, James Cone — the founder of Black Liberation Theology in America — presents in Legacies of the Cross and the Lynching Tree a more nuanced view, i.e., that religion functions as both a crutch and a source of meaning for the black community. Cone suggests that a God with scars, through the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, offers hope and solidarity to marginalized groups of people by finding meaning through suffering. Through suffering, both authors use trauma as a lens for understanding the meanings and use of religion. Freud focuses on how trauma leads individuals to seek safety in religious illusions, while Cone portrays religion’s role in addressing collective suffering with marginalized groups of people. This essay will contrast Freud’s and Cone’s views on religion as a crutch before offering my own perspective on the role of religion in human society. In it, I will argue that religion functions as a companion to help those in suffering find meaning and strength (though not in a completely guaranteed way). To further explore the meaning and purpose of religion, I will also incorporate My Bright Abyss by Christian Wiman, a contemporary Christian writer, which serves as a reflection on the religious significance of personal suffering.
Freud’s Notion of Religion: Illusion and Neurosis
Freud begins his interpretation of why people are drawn to religion through a lens of suspicion in the concept of the illusion. Here, Freud sees religion as a psychological coping effort which masks reality and numbs individuals. The illusion is believed to be derived from man’s desire for fulfillment in what he wishes to be true in the world, but it is not actually real. The power of illusions in fulfilling human desires is illustrated by the following statement: “What is characteristic of illusions is that they are derived from human wishes” (Freud, 20). Here, religion is said to fulfil human wishes by providing solace and hope for individuals facing trauma and suffering in their lives. Such an illusion would then serve as a foundation for the formation of religion in human civilization. Freud then elaborates on the human desires that are to be be fulfilled: “The benevolent rule of a divine Providence allays our fear of the dangers of life; the establishment of a moral world order” (Freud, 38). This means that Religion, being formed by our illusions, fulfills man’s wishes to have a benevolent authority which establishes rules so as to create a sense of order away from the cruelty of the real world. Hence, religion — through the illusion — can act as a coping mechanism for human civilization against the forces of nature.
Freud then suggests the metaphor of neurosis to describe a certain psychological structure and behavior which arises from the repression of fear so as to provide stability in the human mind. Neurosis arises from those unresolved psychological conflicts that individuals have problems facing directly. Religion, as a universal neurosis, is said to fulfil the same role on a psychological level, addressing humanity's shared fear of the unpredictability of nature. Freud explains this through the idea of the primal father by saying, “Religion would thus be the universal obsessional neurosis… arose out of the Oedipus complex, out of the relation to the father” (Freud, 55). This explains how a divine authority meets the needs that we have for a father figure. Shaping God as a protective father figure creates a sense of stability for human civilization by giving comprehensible traits to a force man cannot control. Freud argues that neuroses allow individuals to avoid directly confronting painful truths by creating comforting illusions—such as the promise of divine justice or an afterlife.
For Freud, these illusions mask the cruelties of reality by enabling people to bear life’s hardships without addressing their root causes. Thus, neurosis serves as the structure by which religion imposes order and suppresses fears, while illusion is the content of the comforting belief that fulfills human wishes. Together, these two concepts explain how religion operates as a psychological coping mechanism which helps people feel secure while limiting an individual’s ability to confront life rationally.
With the origins of religion defined in order to explain the psychological coping effect, Freud then suggests that religion is a crutch meant to palliate the pain coming from the cruel realities of life without addressing the root cause. Religion is therefore compared to the effects of a drug: “The effect of religious consolation may be likened to that of a narcotic…surfeiting them with piety” (Freud, 62). This explains how the comforting illusions derived from human wishes serve to dull the harshness of the world by providing psychological relief. But for Freud, religion remains insufficient to resolve the fears that individuals actually face, just like how a narcotic can only provide temporary relief. Rather, religion would merely enable individuals to endure suffering with an excess of religious belief to soothe their fears. This “surfeiting” of piety would then keep individuals psychologically dependent on religion for comfort. It is this dependency that reveals how religion — in the Freudian worldview — acts as not just a cope, but a crutch, supporting individuals through life’s hardships but ultimately limiting their ability to confront reality directly.
Cone’s Notion of Religion
As an alternative to Freud’s view of religion as a numbing illusion, Cone argues that religion as a crutch provides a basis for the marginalized to confront suffering. The marginalized and traumatized groups are interchangeable with those people who are in the midst of suffering. By drawing parallels between the crucifixion of Christ and the lynching of Black people, Cone illustrates how those oppressed were able to find Divine revelation in their suffering. Cone’s idea of solidarity is rendered thus: “Because God was present with Jesus on the cross and thereby refused to let Satan have the last word, God was also present at every lynching in the United States” (Cone, 97). The belief that God stood with the black community in their pain provided the emotional foundation to endure the systematic violence of racism. In this perspective, religion does not function as a narcotic or an escape from reality, but rather provides the marginalized with a base to face injustice; just like how God the Father was present with Jesus Christ on the Cross. Therefore, religion as a crutch would have the benefit of providing a basis for fortitude among the black community in the face of their suffering.
In such a perspective, with religion being a source of fortitude for marginalized groups, it would only be through remembering the lynching tree in light of the Cross that the Black community may move toward a more meaningful future. The merger of the two symbols as a beacon of hope is thus expressed: “Yet the lynching tree also needs the cross, without which it becomes simply an abomination. It is the cross that points in the direction of hope” (Cone, 99). This connection reminds the oppressed that their suffering is not meaningless: but rather, part of a broader Divine story. The cross transforms suffering into hope, offering confidence in liberation beyond the oppressor’s power. This faith in justice beyond the immediate reality inspired movements against systemic oppression, rooted in the belief that faith is not passive, but rather, a call to action. Unlike Freud’s view of religion as a crutch that masks reality and numbs individuals to their struggles, Cone reveals how religion can serve as a foundation of strength, enabling the marginalized to face injustice and find meaning in suffering. The idea that symbols create meaning in suffering is developed in light of the transformative power of faith, which can transform symbols of suffering into emblems of hope: “God took the evil of the cross and the lynching tree and transformed them both into the triumphant beauty of the divine” (Cone, 101). The lynching tree and the Cross, both rooted in suffering, therefore serve as a reminder that God is both present in the trauma and in the work towards liberation. This transformation gives the oppressed the ability to confront these realities with strength by finding purpose. As such, Freud reduces religion to an escape mechanism that limits human potential, whereas Cone seeks to redeem the idea of religion as a crutch by emphasizing its ability to be a force for hope among the marginalized. It is by directly challenging the notion of religion as a mere crutch with no benefit that Cone highlights religion’s potential to inspire strength and liberation for traumatized groups.
Religion as Companion
Christian Wiman provides an important addition to Cone’s ideas on religion through his personal reflections on his own suffering. He addresses his existential struggle with cancer and his struggle to find solace in religion: “God has not lessened my anxieties, and I find myself continually falling back into wounds, wishes, terrors” (Wiman, 9). This seems to reflect the idea that faith does not erase personal suffering or provide a guaranteed sense of resolution (as opposed to Cone’s optimism) by suggesting that faith does not necessarily resolve suffering, but may also require living alongside it in the long term. Wilman’s reflections seem to argue that religion provides no clear path out of suffering, but serves as a companion to suffering that has the potential to transform it.
While Freud presents an interesting argument for the notion that religion is something which limits man’s ability to confront reality, I believe that Cone’s argument on the power of religion to inspire hope and strength provides a clearer way to encapsulate the idea of religion as a crutch for human civilization. Freud argues that religion fails to help man discover the root of his sufferings, serving only as a psychological coping mechanism. Cone, on the other hand, suggests that religion as a crutch provides more than this. Through the symbolism of the lynching tree and the Cross, he argues that Faith has the power to give marginalized groups a deeper insight into their suffering, providing a space to grow from the experience.
For these kinds of groups, religion may provide a transformative power in finding meaning through their trauma. Marginalized groups of people like black Americans need religion to transform their suffering into something meaningful — all of which Freud does not seem to take into consideration.
With this in mind, I believe that Cone presents a more compelling argument on what religion provides as a crutch (i.e., the formation of deeper and more meaningful insights in the face of trauma). However, one must also take into account Wilman’s perspective, that the ability of faith to get someone through hard times is not so clear-cut. (As mentioned before, Wilman struggled to find solace in religion throughout his experience with cancer.) Hence, I prefer to think of religion as more of a companion that can help sufferers pass through hard times, rather than a crutch.
The problem with viewing religion as a crutch is that it reduces it to a tool for temporary support, limiting its role as an aid in the midst for suffering. Even with Cone’s redemption of the crutch metaphor as a source of strength for the marginalized, it still confines the notion of faith to a functional utility. This is because a crutch implies that religion is inherently reactive and something relied upon only in moments of crisis. This perspective views religion as something which does not actively engage with individuals for their emotional and spiritual growth. Such a notion constrains religion’s ability to walk alongside individuals in bringing meaning to all stages of life — not just in hardship. By reducing religion to a means of just addressing pain, the crutch metaphor denies its transformative capacity to inspire lasting and progressive growth. As the crutch confines faith as a temporary support in moments of weakness, we must move toward a richer metaphor that reflects religion’s potential to promote growth beyond crisis events.
Accordingly, religion as a companion engages with a person not just in moments of suffering, but throughout the broader experience of his of her life. While a crutch offers temporary support by helping individuals find meaning in the immediate pain of a crisis, a companion actively promotes growth and transformation beyond the experience. A companion does not just provide a comfort in weakness, but also a guide toward spiritual growth. This metaphor emphasizes religion as a constant presence that encourages individuals to endure suffering and to grow deeply from it. As it walks alongside individuals through all stages of life, a companion can help integrate life’s challenges into a deeper and more meaningful synthesis. This way, the companion metaphor expands on the strengths of the crutch and offers a fuller picture of religion’s transformative power to guide individuals beyond crisis and toward lifelong growth.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the crutch metaphor confines religion to a temporary response to suffering. This diminishes the potential religion has to engage with individuals beyond moments of crisis. The companion transcends these limitations by illustrating religion as an constant presence that empowers individuals to grow in all stages of life — not just their struggles. This new metaphor shifts our understanding of religion’s purpose of religion from passive dependence to active engagement in every aspect of life. By moving beyond the crutch’s temporary endurance of suffering, the companion metaphor reveals the potential of religion’s ability to enrich and transform the lives of individuals in the long term.
Santino Dee is an Economics and Philosophy double major at Villanova University. With his main interests being Philosophy, Politics, and Economics; he is an active member of the Villanova Chess Club and the Villanova Consulting Group; and is also an Economic Research Assistant in the same university.