From an Eastern Catholic perspective, is hell empty until final judgment?

[Aramis]

Can I move to Alaska so I can have your confessor? Mine are always wimpy.

Find your local Dominicans…

 

[Cecilianus]

I just read an interesting pamphlet in a bookstore the other day, entitled Orthodox Eschatology: A Discourse on the Four Last Things, by a Fr. George Nedrikoff, with an introduction and declaration of orthodoxy given by a Bulgarian Orthodox bishop. Though like all Orthodox theologians he rejects purgatory while accepting prayers for the dead, Fr. Nedrikoff states that there are two judgements - a particular judgement immediately after death which settles one’s fate irrevocably, and a general judgement at the parousia which reveals the meaning of salvation history for the whole world.

Unfortunately the pamphlet did not give a publisher, so I cannot give a more detailed reference. I read it at Loome Theological Bookstore in Stillwater, MN, if anyone in the area cares to verify it for themselves. (As it was $15 for a 20-some page booklet I did not purchase it.)

 

[Vico]

I just read an interesting pamphlet in a bookstore the other day, entitled Orthodox Eschatology: A Discourse on the Four Last Things, by a Fr. George Nedrikoff, with an introduction and declaration of orthodoxy given by a Bulgarian Orthodox bishop. Though like all Orthodox theologians he rejects purgatory while accepting prayers for the dead, Fr. Nedrikoff states that there are two judgements - a particular judgement immediately after death which settles one’s fate irrevocably, and a general judgement at the parousia which reveals the meaning of salvation history for the whole world.

Unfortunately the pamphlet did not give a publisher, so I cannot give a more detailed reference. I read it at Loome Theological Bookstore in Stillwater, MN, if anyone in the area cares to verify it for themselves. (As it was $15 for a 20-some page booklet I did not purchase it.)

I wonder what he disagreed with regarding purgatory? The Catholic Catechism states:

**III. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY **
1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. **1031 **The Church gives the name *Purgatory *to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. …

 

[Cecilianus]

I wonder what he disagreed with regarding purgatory? The Catholic Catechism states:

**III. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY **
1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. **1031 **The Church gives the name *Purgatory *to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. …

He gave the usual argument that the term is not found in Scripture. Whenever I read that it immediately pops to mind that the term “Trinity” isn’t either. I personally believed in Purgatory when I was still a Lutheran, so now that I’m Catholic I’m certainly not stopping just because I’m Greek instead of Roman.

 

[mardukm]

Title says it all. I was reading some Orthodox teachings on the matter and I wonder what the authentic teaching in the Eastern Catholic Church is? Because sometimes I feel Eastern Catholics adopt some Latin teachings because a) they are Latinized even in theology, or b) they want to emphasize they are not in complete disagreement with Latin theology so as not to shake the roots of the union. So I want to be clear, what is a genuine and authentic Eastern Catholic teaching on this matter? Do all those who are not deserving of paradise go into a “prison” where we pray for them until the end of times when God will judge if they are made worthy to enter heaven through our prayers, or condemned to hell?

Alls I know is that when I was not yet in the Catholic Communion, I, and many of my OO brethren, understood that one of the distinctions between the Orientals and the Easterns was that the Easterns believed in the “Particular Judgment.”

Alls I know for certain is that neither the Catholic nor the Orthodox Churches have ever defined “Hell.” For all we know, the forecourt of suffering in Hades for those destined for “Hell” may actually be a part of Hell. It’s just a matter of definition.

Alls I know for certain is that both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that whether one is in “Hell” now, or one is merely getting a foretaste of the eternal punishment, the full reality of this punishment will not be realized until souls are reunited with their bodies at the Final Judgment.

If one understands “Hell” to be the full reality that will only be experienced at the Final Judgment (as Oriental Orthodox do), I fail to see how this is particularly opposed to the Catholic/Eastern Orthodox belief in the Particular Judgment. Even Orientals obviously do not deny that some sort of judgment is going on after death before the Final Judgment - otherwise we would not admit that souls get a foretaste of their eternal lot.

The differences (or distinctions) between the Western, Eastern and Oriental beliefs are a matter of mere terminology, as far as I’m concerned. Despite these differences, we are all united in the same basic dogmatic Faith regarding the afterlife.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Vico]

Alls I know is that when I was not yet in the Catholic Communion, I, and many of my OO brethren, understood that one of the distinctions between the Orientals and the Easterns was that the Easterns believed in the “Particular Judgment.”

Alls I know for certain is that neither the Catholic nor the Orthodox Churches have ever defined “Hell.” For all we know, the forecourt of suffering in Hades for those destined for “Hell” may actually be a part of Hell. It’s just a matter of definition.

Alls I know for certain is that both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that whether one is in “Hell” now, or one is merely getting a foretaste of the eternal punishment, the full reality of this punishment will not be realized until souls are reunited with their bodies at the Final Judgment.

If one understands “Hell” to be the full reality that will only be experienced at the Final Judgment (as Oriental Orthodox do), I fail to see how this is particularly opposed to the Catholic/Eastern Orthodox belief in the Particular Judgment. Even Orientals obviously do not deny that some sort of judgment is going on after death before the Final Judgment - otherwise we would not admit that souls get a foretaste of their eternal lot.

The differences (or distinctions) between the Western, Eastern and Oriental beliefs are a matter of mere terminology, as far as I’m concerned. Despite these differences, we are all united in the same basic dogmatic Faith regarding the afterlife.

Blessings,
Marduk

There are de fide dogmas on the immediacy:

1. The souls of the just which, in the moment of death, are free from all guilt of sin and punishment for sin, enter into Heaven.
2. The souls of the just which, in the moment of death, are burdened with venial sins or temporal punishment due to sins, enter Purgatory.
3. The souls of the unjust, in the moment of death, enter Hell.

The Council of Florence (on baptism): “The effect of this sacrament is the remission of every sin, original and actual, also of every punishment which is due to the sin itself. Therefore, no satisfaction must be enjoined for past sins upon those who immediately attain to the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God.” (Denz. 696)

Council of Trent, 25th Session, (1563 A.D.): DS 1820 – Decree Concerning Purgatory: “Since the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Spirit, in conformity with the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers in sacred councils, and very recently in this ecumenical Synod, has taught that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are assisted by the suffrages of the faithful, and especially by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar, the holy Synod commands the bishops that they insist that the sound doctrine of purgatory, which has been transmitted by the holy Fathers and holy Councils, be believed by the faithful of Christ, be maintained, taught, and everywhere preached. Let the more difficult and subtle “questions,” however, and those which do not make for “edification” [cf. 1 Tim 1:4], and from which there is very often no increase in piety, be excluded from popular discourses to uneducated people. Likewise, let them not permit uncertain matters, or those that have the appearance of falsehood, to be brought out and discussed publicly. Those matters on the contrary, which tend to a certain curiosity or superstition, or that savor of filthy lucre, let them prohibit as scandals and stumbling blocks to the faithful.”

The Council of Lyons II: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin, or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.” (Denz. 464)

The Council of Florence: “But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Sixth Session, 6 July 1439, Pope Eugenius presiding; Denz. 693)

 

[mardukm]

Yes, that Hell exists and that there are those who are there today is dogmatic. But neither does the Catholic Church claim to know who is in Hell. That is why one of the Eucharistic Prayers of the Latin Catholic Church contains a general prayer for the dead, and not merely for those who died in the righteousness of Christ.

In any case, all I’m saying is that the non-Latin perspective does not necessarily contradict the dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church for there is much room for interpretation in the non-Latin phrenoma.

So it’s a bit of a straw man for someone to say, “ALL you Easterns and/or Orientals DEFINITELY teach this, and you are wrong.”

Blessings,
Marduk

There are de fide dogmas on the immediacy:

1. The souls of the just which, in the moment of death, are free from all guilt of sin and punishment for sin, enter into Heaven.
2. The souls of the just which, in the moment of death, are burdened with venial sins or temporal punishment due to sins, enter Purgatory.
3. The souls of the unjust, in the moment of death, enter Hell.

The Council of Florence (on baptism): “The effect of this sacrament is the remission of every sin, original and actual, also of every punishment which is due to the sin itself. Therefore, no satisfaction must be enjoined for past sins upon those who immediately attain to the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God.” (Denz. 696)

Council of Trent, 25th Session, (1563 A.D.): DS 1820 – Decree Concerning Purgatory: “Since the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Spirit, in conformity with the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers in sacred councils, and very recently in this ecumenical Synod, has taught that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are assisted by the suffrages of the faithful, and especially by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar, the holy Synod commands the bishops that they insist that the sound doctrine of purgatory, which has been transmitted by the holy Fathers and holy Councils, be believed by the faithful of Christ, be maintained, taught, and everywhere preached. Let the more difficult and subtle “questions,” however, and those which do not make for “edification” [cf. 1 Tim 1:4], and from which there is very often no increase in piety, be excluded from popular discourses to uneducated people. Likewise, let them not permit uncertain matters, or those that have the appearance of falsehood, to be brought out and discussed publicly. Those matters on the contrary, which tend to a certain curiosity or superstition, or that savor of filthy lucre, let them prohibit as scandals and stumbling blocks to the faithful.”

The Council of Lyons II: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin, or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.” (Denz. 464)

The Council of Florence: “But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Sixth Session, 6 July 1439, Pope Eugenius presiding; Denz. 693)

 

[Julia_Mae]

Yes, that Hell exists and that there are those who are there today is dogmatic.

I don’t think so, but if you have a reference for the bolded part, I’d appreciate seeing it.

 

[Vico]

I don’t think so, but if you have a reference for the bolded part, I’d appreciate seeing it.

From Vico, did you read my post?

The Council of Lyons II: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin, or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.” (Denz. 464)

The Council of Florence: “But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Sixth Session, 6 July 1439, Pope Eugenius presiding; Denz. 693)

 

[Julia_Mae]

From Vico, did you read my post?

The Council of Lyons II: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin, or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.” (Denz. 464)

The Council of Florence: “But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Sixth Session, 6 July 1439, Pope Eugenius presiding; Denz. 693)

I did read your post, did I forget to thank you? Probably, sorry. I was asking just about the bolded part that said it was dogma that there are souls in hell right now. It was my understanding that the Church has never declared anyone to be in hell. That it may be empty for all we know.

 

[mardukm]

Dear sister Julia,

I don’t think so, but if you have a reference for the bolded part, I’d appreciate seeing it.

You are correct. Sorry I misspoke. My sentence should have run:
“Yes, that Hell exists and that there is a possibility that there are those who are there today is dogmatic.”

Those who die in mortal sin definitely go to Hell right now, but the Church does not know who dies in mortal sin. It is certainly possible that anyone (and even everyone) who we think died in mortal sin actually made a silent act of contrition before God at the point of death. We’ll never know in this lifetime. That is why, as noted, one of the Eucharistic Prayers of the Latin Church contains a general prayer for the dead, and not simply for those who have died in the righteousness of Christ.

However, I think the position you have expressed (unless I misunderstood you) that absolutely everyone will eventually be saved is skirting the realm of heterodoxy.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Ahimsa]

However, I think the position you have expressed (unless I misunderstood you) that absolutely everyone will eventually be saved is skirting the realm of heterodoxy.

But, it’s true that absolutely everyone might be saved.

 

[Vico]

I did read your post, did I forget to thank you? Probably, sorry. I was asking just about the bolded part that said it was dogma that there are souls in hell right now. It was my understanding that the Church has never declared anyone to be in hell. That it may be empty for all we know.

Do you suppose that The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is only symbolic?

Luke 16:22: Then it happened that the beggar died, and he was carried by the Angels into the bosom of Abraham. Now the wealthy man also died, and he was entombed in Hell.

Luke 10:13-16

Reproaches to Unrepentant Towns.
“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty deeds done in your midst had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would long ago have repented, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. And as for you, Capernaum, ‘Will you be exalted to heaven? You will go down to the netherworld.’” Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”

 

[Cecilianus]

Do you suppose that The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is only symbolic?

Luke 16:22: Then it happened that the beggar died, and he was carried by the Angels into the bosom of Abraham. Now the wealthy man also died, and he was entombed in Hell.

Luke 10:13-16

Reproaches to Unrepentant Towns.
“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty deeds done in your midst had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would long ago have repented, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. And as for you, Capernaum, ‘Will you be exalted to heaven? You will go down to the netherworld.’” Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”

It’s a parable, not a literal history. Dives and Lazarus never existed; parables are always allegories, and nobody reading it or listening in Jesus’ audience would have thought otherwise (until Protestant fundamentalism was invented, when that obvious understanding of a common literary technique suddenly became a little less obvious in some peoples’ minds…).

Same way that Pilgrim’s Progress is just fiction.

The reproaches against unrepentant towns are warnings - just like God’s threats against Nineveh given by Jonah. I find it unlikely to the point of absurd to think that every unrepentant sinner (Bin Laden and Hitler included) made mental acts of perfect contrition before their soul separated from their body, but it is not heretical to assume the possibility of such.

 

[Julia_Mae]

However, I think the position you have expressed (unless I misunderstood you) that absolutely everyone will eventually be saved is skirting the realm of heterodoxy.

Blessings,
Marduk

My dear brother in Christ,

Thank you for your response. Yes, I understand about the heterodoxy. It isn’t that I think it’s the way it is, as much as I hope it is that way. My wish is that when God says He wants all to be saved, He has some plan whereby that can happen, somehow, without violating free will.

If the Eastern view is correct, then perhaps there is immediate judgement by God: “You’re going to Hell.” And they have no way of their own volition to escape because they have, through their own choices, destroyed their own wish to God. They cannot pray themselves out of their fate. They cannot even pray. But they aren’t actually there yet.

But I can pray. And because I don’t know, not for a fact, that anyone is down there, or maybe not yet, I feel it’s okay to pray for them. For all of them, the despised. I wonder sometimes if there are demons in human form on earth, born without souls. I don’t pray for them, if there are.

But it takes a monster to make a monster, and some people hardly had a chance to choose to be not-monster, I think. I don’t understand it. I just wish for Grace and Mercy that outrageous. Maybe I just wish it for me.

jm

 

[Julia_Mae]

Do you suppose that The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is only symbolic?

Well, I think “only” would not be my choice, because speaking in Parables was Jesus’ choice to convey deep Truths to us. And while I think it’s a parable, I also think it’s closer to literal than most. That is, I don’t think it describes a situation in that moment literally factual, but describes the way things work pretty closely. Your translation is a bit different than mine and the NABRE website is now all messed up, so this is from the KJV:

16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

The word translated hell is of course Hades, the Greek word referring to the after life in the underworld generally, rather than the word that would correspond to hell which is tartarus.

I think what we can all agree on is that any state of purification, what I’d call Purgatory, is going to be very unpleasant for some and a lot less unpleasant for others. So he is not necessarily in what I would call hell. But he could be.

16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

16:26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

And this is true even if he is in Purgatory and not hell, as he cannot get out until he has paid the last penny. I’m not saying my interpretation is correct, but it’s within the language of the text.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

The East might look at this and ask if the “hell” mentioned is of the eternal variety from which one cannot escape before the Second Coming of Christ. I’ve seen translations of the word which refers to it as “hades” which, in the East, resembles the word for “purgatory.” In other words, one can be liberated from hades.

I believe Marduk and Cecilianus are entirely correct. A future reunion council between East and West might even revisit the affirmations of the later Latin Councils on hell as well.

Alex

 

[Julia_Mae]

The East might look at this and ask if the “hell” mentioned is of the eternal variety from which one cannot escape before the Second Coming of Christ. I’ve seen translations of the word which refers to it as “hades” which, in the East, resembles the word for “purgatory.” In other words, one can be liberated from hades.

I believe Marduk and Cecilianus are entirely correct. A future reunion council between East and West might even revisit the affirmations of the later Latin Councils on hell as well.

Alex

Reunion would be wonderful. And I don’t see how they can without reconciling the most basic dogmas and I think this is pretty basic.

 

[Vico]

Well, I think “only” would not be my choice, because speaking in Parables was Jesus’ choice to convey deep Truths to us. And while I think it’s a parable, I also think it’s closer to literal than most. That is, I don’t think it describes a situation in that moment literally factual, but describes the way things work pretty closely. Your translation is a bit different than mine and the NABRE website is now all messed up, so this is from the KJV:
16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
The word translated hell is of course Hades, the Greek word referring to the after life in the underworld generally, rather than the word that would correspond to hell which is tartarus.

I think what we can all agree on is that any state of purification, what I’d call Purgatory, is going to be very unpleasant for some and a lot less unpleasant for others. So he is not necessarily in what I would call hell. But he could be.
16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

16:26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
And this is true even if he is in Purgatory and not hell, as he cannot get out until he has paid the last penny. I’m not saying my interpretation is correct, but it’s within the language of the text.

That makes sense. Also those quotes of Luke are not really about Hell, Gehenna, which only occurs in the New Testament in Matt. 5:22, 29, 20; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk. 9:43, 45, 47; Lk. 12:5; Jas. 3:6.

So can we say that there may be some in Gehenna now?

 

[Julia_Mae]

That makes sense. Also those quotes of Luke are not really about Hell, Gehenna, which only occurs in the New Testament in Matt. 5:22, 29, 20; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk. 9:43, 45, 47; Lk. 12:5; Jas. 3:6.

So can we say that there may be some in Gehenna now?

In point of fact, the Greek word for hell appears nowhere in the Gospels. But it does appear in the NT.

It is quite possible to make the argument that Jesus never said anyone was going to hell, in the way we understand it. Gehenna, as a parable, was not a place no one ever got out of. When Jesus speaks of “eternal fire” or “eternal punishment” the word eternal, the adjective, modifies the nouns fire and punishment. Aionios can mean no beginning, no end, or no beginning or end.

Therefore, Jesus is easily saying: “This is the punishment that has always and will always exist - the punishment of the eternal state.” He is not necessarily saying, “This punishment will last forever.” Which would be more likely of “eternal” was an adverb.

There’s nothing in the Gospels that necessitates the view that hell is a permanent condition. BTW, I’ve spent a few years translating rather a lot of the Gospels and every single instance of any reference to punishment in any form. Which doesn’t make me the world’s leading expert, but it does mean I do not say things lightly or by some shallow reading of the text.

It’s my opinion that the east had this right originally and ended up compromising with the west over the issue at some point. But I can’t prove it.