When disasters like that in Haiti occur, and we are confronted with human suffering of the most terrible kinds, people naturally ask how such events can be squared with the existence of God.

This is a reasonable question, and what answers can be given are complex and partial. The starting point for any answer has to be that it is better for God to create a world in which suffering is possible than one in which it is not. In a world in which suffering is possible there are goods that could not otherwise exist: for example, our actions have consequences and so our choices have moral significance, and we become interdependent, forming communities instead of living in isolation. A world without suffering can only be desolate. A world with the possibility of suffering can sometimes be cold and lonely, but it can sometimes be so much more.

Making some people dependent upon others is a risk, and a risk that can have innocent victims. If you rely on me for shelter, and I don’t answer the door, then through no fault of your own you will be exposed to the elements. If you rely on me for food, and I consume it myself, then through no fault of your own you will go hungry. There can be (though there needn’t be) a price to be paid for interdependence, and it can fall upon any one of us to pay it.

Who should we blame in such cases? Should we blame God for creating a world in which suffering is possible, in which each of us depends upon others? Or should we blame the person who didn’t answer the door, who consumed the food themselves? In creating a world in which suffering is possible, God chose the best option. In causing suffering, a person who lets down their dependant doesn’t.

In the aftermath of Haiti, people have asked, “Didn’t God know that this was going to happen?” But we knew that this was going to happen, or at least something very much like it. We understand how earthquakes work, and what happens when they occur. We were given fair warning. We should have expected this.

People have also asked, “Couldn’t God have prevented this from happening?” But we could have prevented this from happening. The extent of the suffering in Haiti is a consequence of the extent of the poverty there. Had we distributed the world’s wealth more equally, had we invested in stronger buildings, better roads, and larger airports, the effects of the earthquake would have been far less severe. Not only should we have expected this, we should have done something about it.

To those who say that because God knew what was going to happen in Haiti and could have prevented it he is therefore responsible for it, I say this: We  must get out of the habit of blaming God for our own failures. God provided for the people of Haiti, and he provided for them through us. We knew what was going to happen. We could have prevented it. We cannot just write off the suffering in Haiti as an act of God, but must recognise that our choices could have made Haiti safe.

There are many other Haitis happening or waiting to happen, areas exposed to earthquakes, hurricanes, famine, or flood. If we abhor suffering as much as we claim to, then we must show it in our actions.