On the rejection of post-mortem chances of salvation given by many ancient and medieval Christians

On the rejection of post-mortem chances of salvation given by many ancient and medieval Christians

When one reads a text like Luke 15, it is hard to not be struck by the beauty of the message: it seems evident that God truly wants the salvation of each sinner. However, in the third parable of that chapter, it is also evident that the ‘lost son’ returned to his father, after coming to his senses. This means that the lost son, which represents a sinner, must come to repentance/conversion (Greek: metanoia) in order to be saved[1]. At the same time, however, there are indeed many passages in the New Testament that seem to prefigure a final separation between those are saved and enter the Kingdom of God and those are excluded from it (perhaps, the most famous of these is the parable of the sheep and goats, in Matthew 25:31-46). Taken both these passages at face value, they seem to be in tension: on the one hand God seems to truly desire the repentance and conversion of all sinners, on the other, it seems that there is at least the possibility that some or many of these sinners will be lost forever. As one might expect, this ‘tension’ created considerable interpretative controversies in Christian history[2].

In this post, I’ll present an arguments that some important theologian of the past have made to explain how an ‘eternal perdition’ can happen. Indeed, it seems that they were convinced that there is no chance of repentance after death and, therefore, after this earthly life there will be no chances of salvation. It is not that God wouldn’t accept a conversion after death but they seem to say that such a conversion is simply impossible. Given that a belief in at least the possibility of ‘eternal perdition’ is the majority view among Christians[3] it is worthy, in my opinion, to see how ancient and medieval Christian theologians explained why there after this life there are no further chances for salvation. Indeed, it would seem unjust that God would still punish forever people who repent after death. It seems that supporters of the idea of some kind of ‘endless punishment’ generally asserted that after death, the will of unrepentant sinners is irreversibly fixed in sin and their conversion is impossible[4].

The below list of theologians that endorses this kind of view isn't of course exhaustive. It just shows how prevalent this view was. 

Aphrahat the Persian (fl. 4th century), an ancient Syrian Christian theologian wrote:

“The dead shall rise and the living shall fly to meet the King. The banquet is laid, and the cornet shall encourage and the trumpets shall hasten (them). The Watchers of heaven shall speed, and the throne shall be set for the Judge. He that laboured shall rejoice, and he that was unprofitable shall fear. He that did evil shall not draw near unto the Judge. Those on the right hand shall exult, and those on the left shall weep and wail. Those that are in the light shall be glorified, and those that are in the darkness shall groan that they may moisten their tongue. Grace has gone by, and justice reigns. There is no repentance in that place. Winter is at hand; the summer has passed away.” (Demonstration 6.6, source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/370106.htm )

Severus of Antioch (fl. 5th/6th century), a West-Syrian theologian wrote:

“But when someone, like us, hears that God became incarnate, and without change became man for our redemption; and that because of this he came down from heaven, and clearly decreed a “fire which is not extinguished and a worm which does not die” (Mk 9:44), and yet despises all these things—how shall he not be counted worthy to be condemned in double measure (if it be possible to say so) to everlasting fire and to severe punishment without end? For even if he should live a hundred years or more than this in this world, and pass all of his time like this in vanity; it should be known that if he were able to live without end, remaining without dying, he would not desist from avarice and lasciviousness and licentiousness and a disgraceful life which consists of lusts.” (Severus of Antioch, Letter to Caesaria, source: https://www.syriacstudies.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/A23-Severus-of-Antioch.pdf )

Jacob of Serugh (fl. 5th/6th century) wrote:

“The sinner who repents not, if he had lived forever, would have sinned forever, and according to the inclination of his mind to continue in sin he justly falls into everlasting hell.” (Jacob of Serugh, letter to Stephen Bar Sudayli, translated by A. Frothingham in “Stephen Bar Sudaili the Syriac Mystic”)

Pope Gregory the Great (fl. late 6th century) wrote:

“This which you say might have some reason, if the just judge did only consider the sins committed, and not the minds with which they were committed: for the reason why wicked men made an end of sinning was, because they also made an end of their life: for willingly they would, had it been in their power, have lived without end, that they might in like manner have sinned without end. For they do plainly declare that they desired always to live in sin, who never, so long as they were in this world, gave over their wicked life: and therefore it belongeth to the great justice of the supreme judge, that they should never want torments and punishment in the next world, who in this would never give over their wicked and sinful life.” (Dialogues, book 4, chapter 43, source: https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_04_dialogues_book4.htm#C44 )

John of Damascus (fl. 8th century), another influential Syriac Christian writer, wrote:

“Note, further, that what in the case of man is death is a fall in the case of angels. For after the fall there is no possibility of repentance for them, just as after death there is for men no repentance.” (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, book 2, ch. 4; source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/33042.htm )

Thomas Aquinas (fl. 13th century), the most famous scholastic theologian:

“But this punishment of the soul would not be everlasting if its will could be changed for the better, since it would be unjust if its punishment continued after its will is good. Therefore, the will of a lost soul cannot turn towards the good.” (Summa Contra Gentiles, book 4, ch. 93, source: https://aquinas.cc/en/la/~SCG4.C93 )

Conclusion

It seems that all the quoted theologians, despite living in quite different historical contexts, agreed that the reason why eschatological punishments will be endless is that the will of the unrepentant sinners is irreversibly fixed in sin. It is not that a post-mortem repentance would be ineffective. The reason for the endlessness of the condemnation is that repentance is no longer possible for them.

 

 

 


[1] There is one verse that explicitly seems to assert that God wants that all come to ‘metanoia’: “The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9)

[2] To just make one example, I have compiled the evidence of the presence of the view that all humans will be saved (universalism) in the ancient Christian theologians Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia and in the East-Syrian tradition (most notably in Isaac of Nineveh), where they have been revered (not, however, without controversy)   

[3] Even nowadays the Catholic Church, while holding that God wants the salvation of all and prayers should be made for the benefit of all, asserts that ‘eternal hell’ is a real possibility and that after death there is no chance of repentance (and, therefore, salvation). See the following paragraphs of the current Cathechism of the Catholic Church: 1021-1022, 1033-1037, 1058, 1821.

[4] I’ll leave the judgment on this view to the reader. I just want to present how this argument was apparently quite popular in Antiquity both in the East and in the West. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ in Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ [1] in  Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia Introduction In this text, witnesses of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s and Diodore of Tarsus’ eschatological ‘universalist’ views, are reported.  As shall we see, the attestations of Diodore’s endorsement of a form of apokatastasis are always accompanied by an attestation of his disciple, Theodore, endorsing the same view. All these common testimonies are from Syriac sources, both Eastern-Syriac - Isaac of Nineveh (fl. 7 th century in his Second Part, 39.7-14; for Theodore only in his Second Part, 3.3.94 ), Solomon of Basra (fl. 13 th century in his book of the Bee, 60 ), Theodore bar Konai (fl. 8 th century in his Liber Scholiorum 2.63 ) - and Western-Syriac - John of Dara (fl. 9 th century in his On the Resurrection of Human Bodies 4.21 ). There is a brief comparison of a passage in Isaac’s Third Part (discourse 6) about eschatological punishments and the cont...
Read more

On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors

  On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors Introduction In what follows, I’ll present some evidence for the presence of a doctrine or a sympathy of universalism (i.e. the belief that all human beings will be ultimately saved) in some Latin Fathers. There are some suggestive passages in the writings of Ambrose of Milan and John Cassian. Also, Rufinus of Aquileia, in his quarrel against Jerome of Stridon, while admitting that the fate of the wicked is a mystery shows a clear sympathy for the doctrine of universalism. However, it should be noted that none of the figures I quote in this post have been cited as universalists (as far as I know) before the 19 th century and, also, the interpretation of their texts never seem to have caused controversy among later writers (again, as far as I know) about the possible presence of genuine universalist beliefs or interpolations in their texts. While this fact alone doesn’t exclude an universalist...
Read more

On the presence of universalism in East Syrian tradition

On the presence of universalism [1] in East Syrian tradition East Syrian theologians were influenced by Diodore of Tarsus (fl. 4 th century), his disciple Theodore of Mopsuestia (fl. 4-5 th century) who is called the ‘Interpreter/Exegete/Expositor’ in the East Syrian church (also called ‘Church of the East’), and Evagrius Ponticus (fl. 4 th century) [2] .  The point of this text is to show that there a was significant prevalence of the idea in this tradition (this doesn’t necessarily mean that it was a majority view). For more details about Diodore and Theodore see my previous post: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/01/ancient-and-medieval-witnesses-of_28.html A testimony of an opponent: Babai the Great (fl. 6 th century): Let me start with the testimony of an opponent of ‘universalism’ in the East-Syrian Church. This testimony is particularly interesting because it provides evidence that ‘universalism’ was often actively contested in this Tradition. Also, it p...
Read more