Can we hope that nobody is in hell?

[Greg27]

I have not read Van Balthasar, but can not agree with this conclusion.

Jesus descended to Limbo Patrum, which is a part of Hell, but not the Hell of torment. If Jesus was to descend to the Hell of torment it wouldn’t be Hell anymore; the Hell of torment being defined by the absence of God for all eternity. No one in this Hell can ever see God, once he is condemned.

Therefore it is a logical impossibility for Jesus to go there.

I appreciate the charity of those wishing salvation for all, but it is not consistent with Catholic dogma or the Bible. Frankly, I think we will all be suprised on Judgement Day by who goes where. Many who were viewed as great humanitarians will be with the goats, and many who are surly miosanthropes will be with the sheeps. I would not be suprised at all to see many of our modern secular “saints” like Gandhi or MLK headed in the wrong direction. I don’t wish this on them; I hope they recognized Christ’s truth before the end, but I wouldn’t be suprised.

God Bless

It is interesting the writer of the Cloud of Unknowing makes similar comments to these.

I have to say I side with Balthasar so far as this is concerned; I agree with him Christ descended into the inferno of the damned, not simply the abode of the righteous in sheol. This makes more logical and theological sense to me in terms of God’s love and mercy, though I don’t believe this means we can say for sure hell is empty or there will be a universal restoration at the end of time.

 

[Jacafamala]

It is interesting the writer of the Cloud of Unknowing makes similar comments to these.

I have to say I side with Balthasar so far as this is concerned; I agree with him Christ descended into the inferno of the damned, not simply the abode of the righteous in sheol. This makes more logical and theological sense to me in terms of God’s love and mercy, though I don’t believe this means we can say for sure hell is empty or there will be a universal restoration at the end of time.

The idea that Christ descended to hell seems to me, to be a contradiction in terms. Because if by definition, hell is the absence of God, then it would be theoretically impossible for God to descend to it. If God is in hell, then it isn’t hell. But it’s true enough that the Catechism seems to be a little bit vague here.

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p122a5p1.htm

CHAPTER TWO
I BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST, THE ONLY SON OF GOD

ARTICLE 5
“HE DESCENDED INTO HELL. ON THE THIRD DAY HE ROSE AGAIN”

631 Jesus "descended into the lower parts of the earth. He who descended is he who also ascended far above all the heavens."475 The Apostles’ Creed confesses in the same article Christ’s descent into hell and his Resurrection from the dead on the third day, because in his Passover it was precisely out of the depths of death that he made life spring forth:

Christ, that Morning Star, who came back from the dead, and shed his peaceful light on all mankind, your Son who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.476
Paragraph 1. Christ Descended into Hell

632 The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was “raised from the dead” presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection.477 This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ’s descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.478

633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.479 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”:480 "It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell."481 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.482

[Edited by Moderator]

 

[Nick]

Martin Luther King, while a great man, did fall into mortal sin and apparently did so quite often if the FBI tapes of him are any indication.

You will note that Gandhi in this statement merely identifies Christ as a great teacher whom TO HIS FOLLOWERS was the only begotten son of God. That to me shows implicit rejection with full knowledge, of the divinity of Christ

You have no way of discerning wether or not someone’s sin was mortal, and it is not charitable to speculate on it. You cannot know if anyone had full knowledge of the gravity of their actions. I don’t see any good in discussing the faults of other’s in regards to King that could not be learned in other ways.

 

[palmas85]

You have no way of discerning wether or not someone’s sin was mortal, and it is not charitable to speculate on it. You cannot know if anyone had full knowledge of the gravity of their actions. I don’t see any good in discussing the faults of other’s in regards to King that could not be learned in other ways.

Hi Nick. Mortal Sin consists of three things, grave matter, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will.

Let me see if I have this right. A man has sex with a woman, actually many women, not his wife. This man is very well educated, he received the B. A. degree in 1948 from Morehouse College, a distinguished college in Atlanta from which both his father and grandfather had graduated. After three years of theological study at Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania where he was elected president of a predominantly white senior class, he was awarded the B.D. in 1951. With a fellowship won at Crozer, he enrolled in graduate studies at Boston University, completing his residence for the doctorate in 1953 and receiving the degree in 1955.

He was the Pastor of a Christian(Baptist) church and a national leader. Yet somehow, someway he may have been unaware of the gravity of his actions, which violate all common laws of decency AND is explicitly forbidden in the very scripture of which he was a teacher and acknowledged expert. Christ also specifically condemned such activity, a fact of which I’m sure Dr King was well aware.Yet you maintain that maybe he didn’t know it was wrong

**GIVE ME A BREAK **

But thanks for pointing out that I was uncharitable in my speculation:thumbsup:

Its been a while since someone though tthat particular tag would bother me.

 

[Nick]

Hi Nick. Mortal Sin consists of three things, grave matter, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will.

Let me see if I have this right. A man has sex with a woman, actually many women, not his wife. This man is very well educated, he received the B. A. degree in 1948 from Morehouse College, a distinguished college in Atlanta from which both his father and grandfather had graduated. After three years of theological study at Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania where he was elected president of a predominantly white senior class, he was awarded the B.D. in 1951. With a fellowship won at Crozer, he enrolled in graduate studies at Boston University, completing his residence for the doctorate in 1953 and receiving the degree in 1955.

He was the Pastor of a Christian(Baptist) church and a national leader. Yet somehow, someway he may have been unaware of the gravity of his actions, which violate all common laws of decency AND is explicitly forbidden in the very scripture of which he was a teacher and acknowledged expert. Christ also specifically condemned such activity, a fact of which I’m sure Dr King was well aware.Yet you maintain that maybe he didn’t know it was wrong

**GIVE ME A BREAK **

But thanks for pointing out that I was uncharitable in my speculation:thumbsup:

Its been a while since someone though tthat particular tag would bother me.

You still have no way of determining someone’s culpability. There could be all sorts of mitigating circumstances that could diminish somebodies culpability, and we have no way of judging that. Leave the judging to God and you will do well. I am not saying that we should go around saying that sin is okay or that we shouldn’t speak out when something wrong is being done in a public situation. But we have no way of determining whether or not someone has committed mortal sin, and I don’t think it is polite or charitable to discuss the secrets faults of others, even if they have been made public and they are or were public figures.

 

[Potato1]

and I don’t think it is polite or charitable to discuss the secrets faults of others, even if they have been made public and they are or were public figures.

Only someone from socal… Bill Clinton, Paris Hilton Brittany Spears, Mel Gibson, Don Imus, Alan Iverson Snoop dog, We shoul never even TALK about them or condemn them??? Laughable, idiodic and abusive to our children not to.

 

[Nick]

Only someone from socal… Bill Clinton, Paris Hilton Brittany Spears, Mel Gibson, Don Imus, Alan Iverson Snoop dog, We shoul never even TALK about them or condemn them??? Laughable, idiodic and abusive to our children not to.

Condemn their actions when they are inappropriate. Fine. But do not ever condemn the person. Love the sinner, hate the sin. I do not think it is healthy that we in this society tend to be so hyper-focused on the faults of others, even if they are public figures.

 

[palmas85]

You still have no way of determining someone’s culpability. There could be all sorts of mitigating circumstances that could diminish somebodies culpability, and we have no way of judging that. Leave the judging to God and you will do well. I am not saying that we should go around saying that sin is okay or that we shouldn’t speak out when something wrong is being done in a public situation. But we have no way of determining whether or not someone has committed mortal sin, and I don’t think it is polite or charitable to discuss the secrets faults of others, even if they have been made public and they are or were public figures.

Well, I believe in the truth. If the truth hurts then that is just the way it is. Some actions don’t require a lot of analysis to determine whether or not they are right or wrong.

I have not written anything here that is not the documented truth. A religious expert such as Dr King was, would certainly know about Catholic Theology, required coursework during his time in college actually, they studied Comparitve Christian Theology. More than that, he would have known that illicit sexual activity was a sin and nothing you can say or do will in any way mitigate that fact.

But of course true liberal religious thinking often ignores facts and replaces them with feelings.

I do hope that Dr King will make it to heaven one day, I just don’t think he’s made it yet, if ever.

But that is just my opinion.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

In his commentary on the book of Acts (specifically Acts 3:21 which states in part, “Whom heaven must keep till the universal restoration comes which God proclaimed…”) the great Orthodox theologian Jaroslav Pelikan quoted a “nineteenth century maxim” as follows:

“Anyone who does not believe in the universal restoration is an ox, but anyone who teaches it is an ***<—read: common three-letter word for ‘donkey’].”

I think that about says it all with regard to the apocatastasis.

Regarding whether or not we can hope that hell is empty, I think it is entirely consistent with Christian hope, as well as the recognition that God’s Justice and God’s Mercy are not two separate things but one, which is most clearly revealed in the mystery of the Incarnation. This does not mean that hell actually is empty, or that it actually is full. In the face of this hope which clearly expresses the depth of true Christian hope founded on charity, the population of hell is no hindrance to this particular expression of love and holy compassion.

I would add to this discussion these questions to those who maintain that hell must be populated:

1–Is hell eternal in the same way that God is eternal?
2–Two-parter re: the Harrowing of Hell: A–Did Jesus harrow hell at a point in time, or a point outside time? B–Assuming it happened in time, did the very presence of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Logos of God, have any discernible impact on the nature of hell, or was it able to escape his radiance and remain unchanged by the encounter? C–Assuming it happened outside time, would it not be possible, if a soul by some horror found its way to hell, for it to be confronted there by the Lord of All smashing the gates of iron asunder and beckoning to it, “come with me!”?

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

You have no way of discerning wether or not someone’s sin was mortal, and it is not charitable to speculate on it. You cannot know if anyone had full knowledge of the gravity of their actions. I don’t see any good in discussing the faults of other’s in regards to King that could not be learned in other ways.

The rules are slightly different is someone is presented as an example to aspire to, or as a model for others to follow, even to the extent of having public holidays for them.

As Catholics we should probably have nothing to do with commemorations of King’s life. However it is a difficult one. There wouldn’t be a problem with commemorating Einstein, for example, because his moral character was irrelevant to his work. You could say the day is celebrating King’s political achievements without judging his life. However, in reality, the truth about King is not too popular, and his achievements were largely hollow.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Just wanted to write a quick word re: hell as the absence of God.

As an image of extreme privation, it makes sense, but when one considers that a creature’s being is wholly contingent on God’s good will, the maintenance of that being (even in a state of wretchedness, as being is in itself a good) is therefore a revelation of grace and indicates the presence and work of the Author of Grace, even if no one appreciates that work as such.

Or, put another way, because we depend on God’s Being in order to be, insofar as we continue to be, we are never wholly absent from God. If we were, we would cease to be.

Also, consider that the idea that there is a “place” which is absent of God limits God’s omnipresence and also contradicts the Psalmist who writes that God is even in the depths of Pit.

Hell must therefore be a condition of radically rejecting God and all of God’s graces such that one’s very being (as it is a sign of grace) becomes a source of torment. The soul in such a condition seeks to remove itself from the cause of its torment–seeks, in other words, to annihilate itself. But because only God can truly destroy (because only God can truly create), the soul is incapable of the self-destruction it desires and continually, over and over and over and over again through indefinite ages attempts to rip its very being to shreds.

The fire in which a soul in torment dwells is nothing other than the shining cataract of graces which it refuses and which become for him a source of pain rather than bliss. The soul in hell is drowning in flame–and that flame is the love which it insists on refusing, but because it is love, it is implacable and all-consuming.

Hell as the absence of God must be taken as metaphorical or glossed thus: Hell is the absence of God insofar as Hell represents a state of being in which the soul refuses to recognize God’s presence and actively seeks to flee from it into the void of its own sin.

Just a couple extra thoughts.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!

 

[Nick]

Well, I believe in the truth. If the truth hurts then that is just the way it is. Some actions don’t require a lot of analysis to determine whether or not they are right or wrong.

I believe in the truth too. But we must be careful in revealing the things about others even if they are true. See Detraction. I am not saying that you are committing the sin of detraction here since it sounds like this is a common knowledge news story, but it is something I think we all need to be aware of.

I have not written anything here that is not the documented truth. A religious expert such as Dr King was, would certainly know about Catholic Theology, required coursework during his time in college actually, they studied Comparitve Christian Theology…

This is all speculation. It is impossible for us to KNOW what Dr. King knew

 

[Renton405]

None of the visions from Fatima, or of any of the numerous, numerous saints throughout the ages are binding upon the consciences of believers. That having been said, when you hear about the 3 kids at Fatima [or any viosionary] recount their story of seeing souls in hell, you have to conclude one of two things: either there are no souls in hell and the three children were deluded, or there is a hell with souls of the damned in it.

Again I say, why even toy around with such a dangerous hypothetical? You don’t see people promoting the hypothetical idea that everyone is in hell and no one is in heaven, do you? Hmmmmmm, now that’s interesting

Yea apparently after the children saw the vision of hell they were so scared stiff that they immediatly changed their ways…

I have a feeling if people saw what hell was like we would be running through those doors to get to mass. lol

 

[palmas85]

I believe in the truth too. But we must be careful in revealing the things about others even if they are true. See Detraction. I am not saying that you are committing the sin of detraction here since it sounds like this is a common knowledge news story, but it is something I think we all need to be aware of.

This is all speculation. It is impossible for us to KNOW what Dr. King knew

Well then if I am wrong I have committed yet another mortal sin, that is of course if I fulfilled all the requirements for mortal sin. Unlike many on this board, perhaps even you, I freely admit that I have committed hundreds of them, maybe thousands. I take no pleasure in that but it is a fact. In fact, I’ve seen people on this very board say that it is almost impossible to commit a mortal sin.

So you can certainly accuse me and thats fine. Not the first or the last. It is interesting though that you apparently searched for a sin to obliquely tag me, a self admitted traditionalist with, and ignore the public and well known sins of another. I think it quite possibly points out your true motives.

 

[palmas85]

Grace & Peace!

Just wanted to write a quick word re: hell as the absence of God.

As an image of extreme privation, it makes sense, but when one considers that a creature’s being is wholly contingent on God’s good will, the maintenance of that being (even in a state of wretchedness, as being is in itself a good) is therefore a revelation of grace and indicates the presence and work of the Author of Grace, even if no one appreciates that work as such.

Or, put another way, because we depend on God’s Being in order to be, insofar as we continue to be, we are never wholly absent from God. If we were, we would cease to be.

Also, consider that the idea that there is a “place” which is absent of God limits God’s omnipresence and also contradicts the Psalmist who writes that God is even in the depths of Pit.

Hell must therefore be a condition of radically rejecting God and all of God’s graces such that one’s very being (as it is a sign of grace) becomes a source of torment. The soul in such a condition seeks to remove itself from the cause of its torment–seeks, in other words, to annihilate itself. But because only God can truly destroy (because only God can truly create), the soul is incapable of the self-destruction it desires and continually, over and over and over and over again through indefinite ages attempts to rip its very being to shreds.

The fire in which a soul in torment dwells is nothing other than the shining cataract of graces which it refuses and which become for him a source of pain rather than bliss. The soul in hell is drowning in flame–and that flame is the love which it insists on refusing, but because it is love, it is implacable and all-consuming.

Hell as the absence of God must be taken as metaphorical or glossed thus: Hell is the absence of God insofar as Hell represents a state of being in which the soul refuses to recognize God’s presence and actively seeks to flee from it into the void of its own sin.

Just a couple extra thoughts.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!

Well that all sounds very modern and non judgemental. However, since I believe in the reality of sin, Satan, Lucifer, demons, Hell, Heaven and Purgatory, I really cannot agree with it. Sorry. I think that Hell is a place of punishment for those who freely rejected God, Jesus Christ the Holy Spirit and the Holy Church and livedtheir lives outside of the rules that He laid down for us.

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Well that all sounds very modern and non judgemental. However, since I believe in the reality of sin, Satan, Lucifer, demons, Hell, Heaven and Purgatory, I really cannot agree with it.

Palamas, I think “modern and non judgmental” must be code for something here, because I can’t understand in what way a description of hell as freely willed and limitless conscious self-annihilation is non-judgmental or modern.

Look at Origen on sin (which he describes as the conscious removal of the creature from the remembrance of God–in other words, annihilation)–that’s not modern. Sin, Satan, Lucifer, demons, heaven, hell, purgatory can all exist–just because hell may not be a place of everlasting barbecue presided over by grinning demons ala folklore or Dante does not mean that the reality of hell as a state of being (is heaven a place? is God circumscribed by space and time?) is not equally (though I would argue that it is more) hellish.

There is such a thing as metaphor. We can stop at it and take it for the real, or we can seek to understand the reality which it attempts to describe. That’s neither moder, nor non-judgmental. Those two terms have nothing to do with the process.

Not everything that you don’t agree with is de facto an artifact of unholy modernism. Perhaps you just don’t agree, or are unwilling to consider it.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!

 

[bilop]

You have no way of discerning wether or not someone’s sin was mortal, and it is not charitable to speculate on it. You cannot know if anyone had full knowledge of the gravity of their actions. I don’t see any good in discussing the faults of other’s in regards to King that could not be learned in other ways.

I don’t think this is correct. We can not discern the state of a person’s soul, because we don’t know if they have repented. Therefore, we can’t say anyone is definitively in Hell.

However, when it comes to natural law sins, adultery, murder etc. we can judge a sin as mortal. Knowledge that these sins are wrong is imprinted on our souls. Dr. King needed no particular learning to know adultery was wrong.

God Bless

 

[palmas85]

Grace & Peace!

Palamas, I think “modern and non judgmental” must be code for something here, because I can’t understand in what way a description of hell as freely willed and limitless conscious self-annihilation is non-judgmental or modern.

Look at Origen on sin (which he describes as the conscious removal of the creature from the remembrance of God–in other words, annihilation)–that’s not modern. Sin, Satan, Lucifer, demons, heaven, hell, purgatory can all exist–just because hell may not be a place of everlasting barbecue presided over by grinning demons ala folklore or Dante does not mean that the reality of hell as a state of being (is heaven a place? is God circumscribed by space and time?) is not equally (though I would argue that it is more) hellish.

There is such a thing as metaphor. We can stop at it and take it for the real, or we can seek to understand the reality which it attempts to describe. That’s neither moder, nor non-judgmental. Those two terms have nothing to do with the process.

Not everything that you don’t agree with is de facto an artifact of unholy modernism. Perhaps you just don’t agree, or are unwilling to consider it.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!

It is what it is. It is not code for anything. Many people seem to feel that for whatever reason a true Hell does not exist. I remember going through catechist training that point was specifically hammered home. All the pain and suffering that the soul experiences there are not real, only metaphors. I don’t buy that.

 

[Nick]

I don’t think this is correct. We can not discern the state of a person’s soul, because we don’t know if they have repented. Therefore, we can’t say anyone is definitively in Hell.

However, when it comes to natural law sins, adultery, murder etc. we can judge a sin as mortal. Knowledge that these sins are wrong is imprinted on our souls. Dr. King needed no particular learning to know adultery was wrong.

God Bless

Remember the three conditions that are necessary for a sin to be mortal. Grave matter, full knowledge, and full and deliberate consent. It is impossible for anyone to know whether or not the conditions have been met except for the person committing the sin himself. Since we cannot know it is certainly not charitable to assume the worst.

 

[Mijoy2]

It doesn’t really fit the fire and brimstone idea of hell, but C.S.Lewis’ rendition of hell in his book “The Great Divorce” makes one understand how there certainly can be a hell where individuals elect to be.

That being said though the hell of Lewis’ book is not souls and bodies burning in an eternal fire. It is more of an eternity of self inflicted misery upon oneself.

Augustine seems to paint a different picture in “City of God”, where he spends a great deal of effort describing how a body can in fact burn for eterninty in horrifying pain and torment. Where the fire is real fire and the worm is a real worm.

Two different respected people, two drastically differing ideas.

Two things are for certain.

1. we do not know.
2. we will not know throughout our lifetime. (short of a private revelation of course)

We can pray and ask for a deeper understanding. We can trust that justice and mercy will prevail and we will be satisfied with what we discover after our earthly life is over. But we will debate hell until our last breath.