The blessed and the knowledge of the fate of the damned: how some supporters of endless conscious torments defended the endlessness of hell
The blessed
and the konwledge of the fate of damned: how some supporters of endless conscious torments defended the
endlessness of hell
It is a
standard Christian teaching that Christians should love and pray for their ‘enemies’[1].
At the same time, most Christians also believed and believe that hell is an
eternal and irrevocable state. In this post, I’ll provide some quotes of
ancient and medieval theologians who supported endless conscious torment (ECT) in
order to see how they tried to reconcile this view and the teaching of ‘loving
enemies’. While nowadays few supporters of an endless hell[2]
would agree, various theologians suggested that, paradoxically, the sight of
punishments will increase the blessedness of saints[3].
Also, these theologians seem to argue that one can’t pray for the damned
precisely because the damned are beyond hope of any kind of conversion – so it
would be a fruitless prayer. The aim of this post is to present the
views and they do not reflect the views of the author of the post.
Tertullian
of Carthage (fl. 2nd-3rd centuries)
“But
what a spectacle is that fast-approaching advent of our Lord, now owned by all,
now highly exalted, now a triumphant One! What that exultation of the angelic
hosts! What the glory of the rising saints! What the kingdom of the just
thereafter! What the city New Jerusalem! Yes, and there are other sights: that
last day of judgment, with its everlasting issues; that day unlooked for by the
nations, the theme of their derision, when the world hoary with age, and all
its many products, shall be consumed in one great flame! How vast a spectacle
then bursts upon the eye! What there excites my admiration? What my derision?
Which sight gives me joy? Which rouses me to exultation? — as I see so many
illustrious monarchs, whose reception into the heavens was publicly announced,
groaning now in the lowest darkness with great Jove himself, and those, too,
who bore witness of their exultation; governors of provinces, too, who
persecuted the Christian name, in fires more fierce than those with which in
the days of their pride they raged against the followers of Christ. What
world's wise men besides, the very philosophers, in fact, who taught their
followers that God had no concern in ought that is sublunary, and were wont to
assure them that either they had no souls, or that they would never return to
the bodies which at death they had left, now covered with shame before the poor
deluded ones, as one fire consumes them! Poets also, trembling not before the
judgment-seat of Rhadamanthus or Minos, but of the unexpected Christ! I shall
have a better opportunity then of hearing the tragedians, louder-voiced in
their own calamity; of viewing the play-actors, much more dissolute in the
dissolving flame; of looking upon the charioteer, all glowing in his chariot of
fire; of beholding the wrestlers, not in their gymnasia, but tossing in the
fiery billows; unless even then I shall not care to attend to such ministers of
sin, in my eager wish rather to fix a gaze insatiable on those whose fury
vented itself against the Lord. This, I shall say, this is that carpenter's or
hireling's son, that Sabbath-breaker, that Samaritan and devil-possessed! This
is He whom you purchased from Judas! This is He whom you struck with reed and
fist, whom you contemptuously spat upon, to whom you gave gall and vinegar to
drink! This is He whom His disciples secretly stole away, that it might be said
He had risen again, or the gardener abstracted, that his lettuces might come to
no harm from the crowds of visitants! What quæstor or priest in his munificence
will bestow on you the favour of seeing and exulting in such things as these?
And yet even now we in a measure have them by faith in the picturings of
imagination. But what are the things which eye has not seen, ear has not heard,
and which have not so much as dimly dawned upon the human heart? Whatever they
are, they are nobler, I believe, than circus, and both theatres, and every
race-course.” (‘The
Shows’, chapter 30)[4]
Augustine
of Hyppo (fl. 4th-5th centuries)
“And
this reasoning is equally conclusive against those who, in their own interest,
but under the guise of a greater tenderness of spirit, attempt to invalidate
the words of God, and who assert that these words are true, not because men
shall suffer those things which are threatened by God, but because they deserve
to suffer them. For God, they say, will yield them to the prayers of His
saints, who will then the more earnestly pray for their enemies, as they shall
be more perfect in holiness, and whose prayers will be the more efficacious and
the more worthy of God's ear, because now purged from all sin whatsoever. Why,
then, if in that perfected holiness their prayers be so pure and all-availing,
will they not use them in behalf of the angels for whom eternal fire is
prepared, that God may mitigate His sentence and alter it, and extricate them
from that fire? Or will there, perhaps, be some one hardy enough to affirm that
even the holy angels will make common cause with holy men (then become the
equals of God's angels), and will intercede for the guilty, both men and
angels, that mercy may spare them the punishment which truth has pronounced
them to deserve? But this has been asserted by no one sound in the faith; nor
will be. Otherwise there is no reason why the Church should not even now pray
for the devil and his angels, since God her Master has ordered her to pray for
her enemies. The reason, then, which prevents the Church from now praying for
the wicked angels, whom she knows to be her enemies, is the identical reason
which shall prevent her, however perfected in holiness, from praying at the
last judgment for those men who are to be punished in eternal fire. At present
she prays for her enemies among men, because they have yet opportunity for
fruitful repentance. For what does she especially beg for them but that God
would grant them repentance, as the apostle says, that ‘they may return to
soberness out of the snare of the devil, by whom they are held captive
according to his will?’ But if the Church were certified who those are, who,
though they are still abiding in this life, are yet predestinated to go with
the devil into eternal fire, then for them she could no more pray than for him.
But since she has this certainty regarding no man, she prays for all her
enemies who yet live in this world; and yet she is not heard in behalf of all.
But she is heard in the case of those only who, though they oppose the Church,
are yet predestinated to become her sons through her intercession. But if any
retain an impenitent heart until death, and are not converted from enemies into
sons, does the Church continue to pray for them, for the spirits, i.e., of such
persons deceased? And why does she cease to pray for them, unless because the
man who was not translated into Christ's kingdom while he was in the body, is
now judged to be of Satan's following?”[5]
(City of God, book
21, chapter 24)
Gregory
the Great (fl. 6th-7th century)
“GREGORY.
Certain it is, and without all doubt most true, that as the good shall have no
end of their joys, so the wicked never any release of their torments: for our
Saviour himself saith: ‘The wicked shall go into everlasting punishment,
and the just into everlasting life’. Seeing, then, true it is, that which
he hath promised to his friends: out of all question false it cannot be, that
which he hath threatened to his enemies.
PETER.
What if it be said that he did threaten eternal pain to wicked livers, that he
might thereby restrain them from committing of sins?
GREGORY.
If that which he did threaten be false, because his intent was by that means to
keep men from wicked life: then likewise must we say that those things are
false which he did promise: and that his mind was thereby to provoke us to
virtue. But what man, though mad, dare presume so to say? For if he threatened
that which he meant not to put into execution: whiles we are desirous to make
him merciful, enforced we are likewise (which is horrible to speak) to affirm
him to be deceitful.
PETER.
Willing I am to know how that sin can justly be punished without end,
which had an end when it was committed.
GREGORY.
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.
PETER.
But no judge that loveth justice taketh pleasure in cruelty: and the end why
the just master commandeth his wicked servant to be punished is, that he may
give over his lewd life. If, then, the wicked that are tormented in hell fire
never come to amend themselves, to what end shall they always burn in those
flames?
GREGORY.
Almighty God, because he is merciful and full of pity, taketh no pleasure in
the torments of wretched men: but because he is also just, therefore doth he
never give over to punish the wicked. All which being condemned to perpetual
pains, punished they are for their own wickedness: and yet shall they always
there burn in fire for some end, and that is, that all those which be just and
God's servants may in God behold the joys which they possess, and in them see
the torments which they have escaped: to the end that they may thereby always
acknowledge themselves grateful to God for his grace, in that they perceive
through his divine assistance, what sins they have overcome, which they behold
in others to be punished everlastingly.
PETER.
And how, I pray you, can they be holy and saints, if they pray not for their
enemies, whom they see to lie in such torments? when it is said to them: Pray
for your enemies.
GREGORY.
They pray for their enemies at such time as their hearts may be turned to
fruitful penance, and so be saved: for what purpose else do we pray for our
enemies, but, as the Apostle saith, ‘that God may give them repentance to
know the truth, and recover themselves from the devil, of whom they are held
captive at his will’?
PETER. I
like very well of your saying: for how shall they pray for them, who by no
means can be converted from their wickedness, and brought to do the works of
justice?
GREGORY.
You see, then, that the reason is all one, why, in the next life, none shall
pray for men condemned for ever to hell fire: that there is now of not praying
for the devil and his angels, sentenced to everlasting torments: and this also
is the very reason why holy men do not now pray for them that die in their
infidelity and known wicked life: for seeing certain it is that they be
condemned to endless pains, to what purpose should they pray for them, when
they know that no petition will be admitted of God, their just judge? And
therefore, if now holy men living upon earth take no compassion of those that
be dead and damned for their sins, when as yet they know that themselves do
some thing through the frailty of the flesh, which is also to be judged: how
much more straightly and severely do they behold the torments of the damned,
when they be themselves delivered from all vice of corruption, and be more
nearly united to true justice itself: for the force of justice doth so possess
their souls, in that they be so intrinsical with the most just judge, that they
list not by any means to do that which they know is not conformable to his
divine pleasure.
PETER.
The reason you bring is so clear, that I cannot gainsay it: but now another
question cometh to my mind, and that is, how the soul can truly be called
immortal, seeing certain it is that it doth die in that perpetual fire.” (Dialogues, book 4, chapter 34)[6]
Thomas
Aquinas (fl. 13 th century)
“Question
94. The relations of the saints towards the damned
Do the
saints see the sufferings of the damned?
Do they
pity them?
Do they
rejoice in their sufferings?
Article
1. Whether the blessed in heaven will see the sufferings of the damned?
Objection
1. It would seem that the blessed in heaven will not see the sufferings of the
damned. For the damned are more cut off from the blessed than wayfarers. But
the blessed do not see the deeds of wayfarers: wherefore a gloss on Isaiah
63:16, "Abraham hath not known us," says: "The dead, even the
saints, know not what the living, even their own children, are doing" [St.
Augustine, De cura pro mortuis xiii, xv]. Much less therefore do they see the
sufferings of the damned.
Objection
2. Further, perfection of vision depends on the perfection of the visible
object: wherefore the Philosopher says (Ethic. x, 4) that "the most
perfect operation of the sense of sight is when the sense is most disposed with
reference to the most beautiful of the objects which fall under the
sight." Therefore, on the other hand, any deformity in the visible object
redounds to the imperfection of the sight. But there will be no imperfection in
the blessed. Therefore they will not see the sufferings of the damned wherein
there is extreme deformity.
On the
contrary, It is written (Isaiah 66:24): "They shall go out and see the
carcasses of the men that have transgressed against Me"; and a gloss says:
"The elect will go out by understanding or seeing manifestly, so that they
may be urged the more to praise God."
I answer
that, Nothing should be denied the blessed that belongs to the perfection of
their beatitude. Now everything is known the more for being compared with its
contrary, because when contraries are placed beside one another they become
more conspicuous. Wherefore in order that the happiness of the saints may be
more delightful to them and that they may render more copious thanks to God for
it, they are allowed to see perfectly the sufferings of the damned.
Reply to
Objection 1. This gloss speaks of what the departed saints are able to do by
nature: for it is not necessary that they should know by natural knowledge all
that happens to the living. But the saints in heaven know distinctly all that
happens both to wayfarers and to the damned. Hence Gregory says (Moral. xii)
that Job's words (14:21), "'Whether his children come to honour or
dishonour, he shall not understand,' do not apply to the souls of the saints,
because since they possess the glory of God within them, we cannot believe that
external things are unknown to them." [Concerning this Reply, Cf. I:89:8].
Reply to
Objection 2. Although the beauty of the thing seen conduces to the perfection
of vision, there may be deformity of the thing seen without imperfection of
vision: because the images of things whereby the soul knows contraries are not
themselves contrary. Wherefore also God Who has most perfect knowledge sees all
things, beautiful and deformed.
Article
2. Whether the blessed pity the unhappiness of the damned?
Objection
1. It would seem that the blessed pity the unhappiness of the damned. For pity
proceeds from charity [Cf. II-II:30]; and charity will be most perfect in the
blessed. Therefore they will most especially pity the sufferings of the damned.
Objection
2. Further, the blessed will never be so far from taking pity as God is. Yet in
a sense God compassionates our afflictions, wherefore He is said to be
merciful.
On the
contrary, Whoever pities another shares somewhat in his unhappiness. But the
blessed cannot share in any unhappiness. Therefore they do not pity the
afflictions of the damned.
I answer
that, Mercy or compassion may be in a person in two ways: first by way of
passion, secondly by way of choice. In the blessed there will be no passion in
the lower powers except as a result of the reason's choice. Hence compassion or
mercy will not be in them, except by the choice of reason. Now mercy or
compassion comes of the reason's choice when a person wishes another's evil to
be dispelled: wherefore in those things which, in accordance with reason, we do
not wish to be dispelled, we have no such compassion. But so long as sinners
are in this world they are in such a state that without prejudice to the Divine
justice they can be taken away from a state of unhappiness and sin to a state
of happiness. Consequently it is possible to have compassion on them both by
the choice of the will—in which sense God, the angels and the blessed are said
to pity them by desiring their salvation—and by passion, in which way they are
pitied by the good men who are in the state of wayfarers. But in the future state
it will be impossible for them to be taken away from their unhappiness: and
consequently it will not be possible to pity their sufferings according to
right reason. Therefore the blessed in glory will have no pity on the damned.
Reply to
Objection 1. Charity is the principle of pity when it is possible for us out of
charity to wish the cessation of a person's unhappiness. But the saints cannot
desire this for the damned, since it would be contrary to Divine justice.
Consequently the argument does not prove.
Reply to
Objection 2. God is said to be merciful, in so far as He succors those whom it
is befitting to be released from their afflictions in accordance with the order
of wisdom and justice: not as though He pitied the damned except perhaps in
punishing them less than they deserve.
Article
3. Whether the blessed rejoice in the punishment of the wicked?
Objection
1. It would seem that the blessed do not rejoice in the punishment of the
wicked. For rejoicing in another's evil pertains to hatred. But there will be
no hatred in the blessed. Therefore they will not rejoice in the unhappiness of
the damned.
Objection
2. Further, the blessed in heaven will be in the highest degree conformed to
God. Now God does not rejoice in our afflictions. Therefore neither will the
blessed rejoice in the afflictions of the damned.
Objection
3. Further, that which is blameworthy in a wayfarer has no place whatever in a
comprehensor. Now it is most reprehensible in a wayfarer to take pleasure in
the pains of others, and most praiseworthy to grieve for them. Therefore the
blessed nowise rejoice in the punishment of the damned.
On the
contrary, It is written (Psalm 57:11): "The just shall rejoice when he
shall see the revenge."
Further,
it is written (Isaiah 66:24): "They shall satiate [Douay: 'They shall be a
loathsome sight to all flesh.'] the sight of all flesh." Now satiety
denotes refreshment of the mind. Therefore the blessed will rejoice in the
punishment of the wicked.
I answer
that, A thing may be a matter of rejoicing in two ways. First directly, when
one rejoices in a thing as such: and thus the saints will not rejoice in the
punishment of the wicked. Secondly, indirectly, by reason namely of something
annexed to it: and in this way the saints will rejoice in the punishment of the
wicked, by considering therein the order of Divine justice and their own
deliverance, which will fill them with joy. And thus the Divine justice and
their own deliverance will be the direct cause of the joy of the blessed: while
the punishment of the damned will cause it indirectly.
Reply to
Objection 1. To rejoice in another's evil as such belongs to hatred, but not to
rejoice in another's evil by reason of something annexed to it. Thus a person
sometimes rejoices in his own evil as when we rejoice in our own afflictions,
as helping us to merit life: "My brethren, count it all joy when you shall
fall into divers temptations" (James 1:2).
Reply to
Objection 2. Although God rejoices not in punishments as such, He rejoices in
them as being ordered by His justice.
Reply to
Objection 3. It is not praiseworthy in a wayfarer to rejoice in another's
afflictions as such: yet it is praiseworthy if he rejoice in them as having
something annexed. However it is not the same with a wayfarer as with a
comprehensor, because in a wayfarer the passions often forestall the judgment
of reason, and yet sometimes such passions are praiseworthy, as indicating the
good disposition of the mind, as in the case of shame pity and repentance for
evil: whereas in a comprehensor there can be no passion but such as follows the
judgment of reason.” (Summa
Theologiae, Supplement to the Third Part, question 94)[7]
[1] Cf. Matthew
5:43-48 and Luke
6:27-36
[2] The current Catechism of the Catholic
Church describes hell as ‘lamentable’, for instance. See: https://www.catholiccrossreference.online/catechism/#!/search/1056-1057
[3] With the possible exception
of Tertullian, who seemed to rejoice in thinking about the torments themselves,
the others would say that the saints rejoice because it is a display of God’s
justice and the blessed rejoice in seeing in God’s justice and because they
would contemplate the contrast between their conditions and that of the damned
and be grateful for God’s mercy.
Comments
Post a Comment