The current Catholic Catechism and John of Damascus on Hell

The current Catholic Catechism and John of Damascus on Hell

When reading the current Catholic Catechism about the future life[1] and topic of sin[2], one might wonder how the current views mirror the ancient Western theologians. I do believe, however, that the views espoused nowadays in the Catechism are, in fact, closer to those of St. John of Damascus (fl. 7-8th centuries) rather than those of, say, St. Gregory the Great (fl. 6-7th centuries) and St. Augustine (fl. 4-5th centuries). Just to make one example, the Catechism today doesn’t seem to accept the notion of ‘infant damnation’ as even the Church nowadays recognizes[3] and in another post, I discussed in more detail Augustine’s eschatology[4]. In this post, I’ll quote several paragraphs of the Catechism and I’ll try to show how they closely resemble the ideas found in John of Damascus (whose views I treated more extensively here: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/06/the-allowance-of-damnation-irenaeus-of.html). To summarize John’s views about hell and damnation, it seems to be that John believed that:

1.       God will try everything to avoid the damnation of sinners (see his discussion about the ‘complete desertion’ and the case of Judas Iscariot, who he believed that got that fate)

2.       God, being good (indeed, being Goodness), will forever provide good things to all. However, sinners aren’t able to enjoy them because they desire the objects of their sinful desires

3.       There is no chance to repent after death

4.       Damnation is solely the consequence of the abuse of free will

5.       Hell is a state of separation from God in the sense that the damned will never turn to God and repent

Paragraph 1037 of the Catechism is rather instructive in this regard (for the quotes from the Catechism, see the links in the footnotes):

“God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want "any to perish, but all to come to repentance" (2 Pt 3:9)” (CCC, 1037)

Here we read that eternal dereliction in hell is something that goes against the will of God. The Catechism also states:

“For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”” (CCC, 1857)

“ Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.” (CCC, 1861)

These establish the view that not only the necessary condition for going to hell is a misuse of free-will (and hence, those who die incapable of doing mortal sins seem to be fine, although for some reason the Catechism is remarkably silent on the issue[5]), for a sin to be mortal, it needs to be done with ‘full (i.e. sufficient, we might assume) knowledge’ and ‘deliberate consent’. Furthermore, as it is evident from CCC 1037 and 1861, mortal sin alone isn’t a sufficient condition to go to hell: one must also refuse to repent until his or her death. And this is rather similar to what John of Damascus says about ‘complete and hopeless desertion’ and Judas Iscariot:

“Now there are two forms of desertion: for there is desertion in the matters of guidance and training, and there is complete and hopeless desertion. The former has in view the restoration and safety and glory of the sufferer, or the rousing of feelings of emulation and imitation in others, or the glory of God: but the latter is when man, after God has done all that was possible to save him, remains of his own set purpose blind and uncured, or rather incurable, and then he is handed over to utter destruction, as was Judas (Matthew 26:24). May God be gracious to us, and deliver us from such desertion.” (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, 2.29; source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/33042.htm )

Finally, the Catechism makes it crystal clear that there is no chance of repenting (and be saved) after death (see sections 1021-1022) and this clearly echoes the Damascene:

“God Himself, then, being good and compassionate by nature, does not will sin, He does not will the death of the sinner nor is He pleased at the destruction of the living nor is He possessed by the passion of anger or punishes, but He gushes forth good things to all. He who desires receives, and the good man obtains good things; and in this life there is a certain economy and governance and unspeakable providence calling sinners to conversion and repentance, but after death there is no longer turning, no longer repentance, not that God does not accept repentance—for He cannot deny Himself nor does He cast off compassion—but the soul no longer turns. Wherefore, even if one performs all righteous deeds and, turning back, sins and departs from life desiring sin, he will die in his sin. Likewise also the sinner, if he repents and dies in his repentance, his sins shall not be remembered. For just as the demons after their fall do not repent nor do the angels now sin, but both have received immutability, so also men after death have immutability, and the righteous, desiring God and having Him always, rejoice in Him, but the sinners, desiring sin and not having the materials of sin, being devoured as if by fire and a worm, are punished, having no consolation. For what is punishment if not the deprivation of what is desired? In proportion then to their desire, those desiring God rejoice and those desiring sin are punished; for those who obtain what is desired rejoice according to the measure of their desire, and those who fail to obtain it are pained according to the measure of their desire.” (Against the Manicheans, 75, source: https://catholiclibrary.org/library/view?docId=/Fathers-Synchronized-EN/John_of_Damascus__Contra_Manichaeos.en.html;chunk.id=00000047 )

The Damascene also echoes the idea that Hell is ‘separation from God’:

“And this one must know, that God does not punish anyone in the future, but each one makes himself receptive of participation in God. And participation in God is delight, but non-participation in him is punishment; and here God does not bring on temptations to punish, but to discipline and to heal evil, so that we may know him and turn back and attain his holiness. “For the discipline of the Lord opens my ears.”” (Against the Manicheans, 44, source: https://catholiclibrary.org/library/view?docId=/Fathers-Synchronized-EN/John_of_Damascus__Contra_Manichaeos.en.html;chunk.id=00000029 )

Compare with the Catechism:

“We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren. To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."” (CCC 1033)

 

 


[5] “As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them, allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.”

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 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 An updated version of this post can be found here:  https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/03/on-presence-of-universalism-in-east.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 Ch...
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