Gandhi in hell?

[porthos11]

If indeed he said he likes Christ but not Christians because they are so unlike Christ, then I would assume he may have known more of Christ than we originally thought.

I for one think he did not know what he was really talking about.

But then, he may have rejected Christ and his Church.

In any case, as an unbaptized Hindu, he had no sanctifying grace, which is required for heaven. Without having been baptized, he was unable to merit anything, no matter how nice or good he was.

It is therefore a foolish mistake to say that Gandhi is in heaven because of this or that. Being good and peaceful gets no one to heaven.

It is just as foolish to say he is in hell, because we do not know the dispositions of his soul at the last instant of his life. Who knows what actual graces God may have given him to move him to conversion before his soul departed?

 

[Schultzz]

You are all entitled to your opinion. Here is mine. I do not need to know whether Ghandi is in Heaven. I do not need to compare myself with his works or anyone else’s except Jesus. Ghandi was a very spiritual man. You might interpret this to mean he was very “Zen” or perhaps you have your own definition of what spirituality means to you. To me it means a deep understanding of holiness through being predominantly in the “present”. When we allow our ego to die, our true self has room to be recognized. We become more spiritual. I meet Jesus in the present moment, not in my memories of the past, or my worries of the future. This “present” is where I suspect Ghandi met the Holy Spirit. For that is where the Holy Spirit can be found; in the quietness and stillness of the heart of a little child. We still have that little child inside us. Doesn’t Jesus ask us to be like little children? What do you think He meant by that?
If Ghandi met the Holy Spirit and followed God’s will according to his state of life do you not think he would be in Heaven? Sometimes different philosophies frighten people who need rules and structure to stabilize them.
I am not speaking out against the word of God, but we tend to put God in the same “box” that we put ourselves. If that’s you, that’s fine. The God I choose to believe in is a merciful God. He must also be a just God. But I do not pass judgement on the souls of others. I feel that God alone has that right. Besides, there may be levels of Heaven where you would be as happy as any other soul in any other level. It is all up to God, not us.

 

[Church_Militant]

As a Jew I will try and answer your question about who is in Hell.

The answer to your question is that no one is in Hell as the Catholic concept of Hell not only does not exist in Judaism it would be contrary to Jewish precepts. Human beings are not born in sin (original or otherwise) but rather with the free choice to choose between good and evil. A certain and severe devine punishment for every transgression would negate such free choice.

Judaisim does have a concept of “gehenom” which is somewhat similar to the Catholic concept of “purgatory” and which can last up to a period of twelve months where the soul is made ready for the world to come.

Can you please look at this blog article of mine and perhaps offer anything that I may have missed. If you would PM your comments to me I will edit them into the article as you suggest. I appreciate your candor and knowledge in this matter. Thanks in advance!

Jews also believe that it is actually easier for the gentile to get to the world to come then for Jews as they have only to adhere to the seven Noahide commandments.

Wow! Intriguing! I didn’t know that and have never heard that before. Can you elaborate upon that in your PM to me please? Fascinating!

So basically the Jewish answer to your question to who is in Hell (in the sense you mean) is: no one.

I understand.

As for the supposed references to Yehoshua bar Yosef “boiling in excrement for his hersey(sic)”. By the Jewish Torah I presume you are refering to the first five books of the Bible. The passage does not exist. Nor does such a passage exist either in the Babylonian or the Jerusalem Talmud. Such passages do exist on several antisemitic websites along with fictitious and impossible citations to pages or books not found in the Talmud.

How well we Catholics know how that sort of thing goes. May Ha Shem judge between you and those who do such malicious things to you. (1st Samuel 24:13-14 & 16)

 

[rwoehmke]

Well, I shall not exhalt this man as being perfect. Gandhi did support Hitler in Germany at one time.

He did hear the Christian Gospel but he rejected it.

He was found outside of the church, which alone has salvation.

Ganghi was an Indian under the rule of the British Empire. Like the people of Ireland during WW II there was a lot of sympathy to Germany in its attempts to throw off the terms imposed by the armistice of WW I. Many countries under British Rule wanted out. Many of them attained self rule and ceased being English colonies, only after the war was over. Some have done well, others still struggle with dictatorial rule, now by their own countrymen.

He did hear the Christian Gospel, but was not impressed because of the way he saw Christians around him living. Someone said, and I don’t recall if it was Gandhi, something to the effect that Christianity seemed a good thing, but that it seemed nobody had tried it.

I note that you list yourself as a protestant. Does that mean you consider yourself outside of the Catholic Church?

 

[rwoehmke]

Does the Catholic Church now teach that we are saved by works?
…

No Atemi, I think what looks to you guys as salvation by works, is a recognition in our Church that good works and attitudes toward others is a good indication that a person is a crypto-christian a term I use to denote a person who does not personally know Jesus Christ, but lives his life in a manner resembling someone who explicitly follows Christ. Someone above mentioned a recent document issued by the then Cardinal Ratzinger, titled Dominus Iesus that explains this. It is not the works that save, but rather the fact that they recognize the call to live as God would have us all live. Is it a guarantee of Salvation? No, but it is the trusting hope expected of Catholics.

 

[Teflon93]

Ganghi was an Indian under the rule of the British Empire. Like the people of Ireland during WW II there was a lot of sympathy to Germany in its attempts to throw off the terms imposed by the armistice of WW I. Many countries under British Rule wanted out. Many of them attained self rule and ceased being English colonies, only after the war was over. Some have done well, others still struggle with dictatorial rule, now by their own countrymen.

He did hear the Christian Gospel, but was not impressed because of the way he saw Christians around him living. Someone said, and I don’t recall if it was Gandhi, something to the effect that Christianity seemed a good thing, but that it seemed nobody had tried it.

I note that you list yourself as a protestant. Does that mean you consider yourself outside of the Catholic Church?

Gandhi might have been better off fighting against practices of his own people such as burning widows on their husband’s pyres or the caste system or exposing female children to avoid paying dowries before decrying Christians.

Anyone interested in the Christian view of this practice can check out this anecdote concerning Sir Charles Napier under “India.”

 

[Pope_Noah_I]

**Gandhi might have been better off fighting against practices of his own people such as burning widows on their husband’s pyres or the caste system or exposing female children to avoid paying dowries before decrying Christians. **
Anyone interested in the Christian view of this practice can check out this anecdote concerning Sir Charles Napier under “India.”

That’s exactly what he did. He tried to stop widow-suicide, untouchability and child marriage. Research helps. Also, he was very justified in criticizing Christians, they were horrendous in their actions in India. Much like they were in the sacking of Constantinople.

 

[Teflon93]

That’s exactly what he did. He tried to stop widow-suicide, untouchability and child marriage. Research helps. Also, he was very justified in criticizing Christians, they were horrendous in their actions in India. Much like they were in the sacking of Constantinople.

How hard did he try?

Perhaps it’s easier to convince those horrible, hypocritical Christians to leave a foreign land than to convince one’s own people to stop slaughtering widows and treating the poor as lepers?

Moral equivalence doesn’t really cut it when we’re talking of such things, as fashionable as it may be to trash the West on behalf of the East.

Thank God India’s finally begun to emerge from the shadow of the Gandhis.

 

[IvanKaramozov]

The Catholic Church has not definitively declared any specific person to be in Hell, except Satan, period. While the Church does canonize saints, she does not canonize un-saints or anti-saints.

The Council of Florance.
“It (the council) firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.”

That’s fairly specific:shrug:

 

[elt1956]

Well, I shall not exhalt this man as being perfect. Gandhi did support Hitler in Germany at one time.

It is true that He was good among men but he turned the truth of God clearly displayed in creation into an idol. He served creature rather than God. His acts did not glorify God. They were apart from God. Believing to be wise, Gandhi was a fool. Read Romans one.

He did hear the Christian Gospel but he rejected it. He was a man born under original sin. He was not perfect when God asks for such in his judgment. God lives in unapproachable light. That is why Christ is necessary even for Mother Teresa to be in heaven. Christ must step in to supply grace to bridge this gap since no man but Christ is perfect. He does so only in this life. It is better to be a living dog than a dead lion. There is hope when someone is still alive.

Gandhi lacked grace. It remains up to God to judge but it stands that he is likely in hell. It is a place that every man deserves but not every man goes. Grace exists apart from doing some good works. Mercy does too. Man is still guilty for not being in the right relationship with God. Christ, as only God could, must take the punishment ment for us. Otherwise, the wrath of God remains on those who are born objects of wrath. Gandhi was outside of Christ. He was found outside of the church, which alone has salvation.

“Greater love has no man than to lay down his life for his friends” /brothers, John 15:13. Peace

 

[JTBT]

The Council of Florance.
"It (the council) firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels,
That’s fairly specific:shrug:

What is the Catholic Church’s offical teaching on this now?

BTW interesting name “Ivan”; do you Identify yourself with him?

 

[Pope_Noah_I]

How hard did he try?

Perhaps it’s easier to convince those horrible, hypocritical Christians to leave a foreign land than to convince one’s own people to stop slaughtering widows and treating the poor as lepers?

Moral equivalence doesn’t really cut it when we’re talking of such things, as fashionable as it may be to trash the West on behalf of the East.

Thank God India’s finally begun to emerge from the shadow of the Gandhis.

Such ignorance is inexcusable. How hard did he try, you ask? Gandhi massaged lepers, ate with untouchables, *cleaned their latrines *and never stopped compelling others to do so. He fought child marriage, and every other form of violence. Towards the end of his life, he would not condone a marriage unless one party was an untouchable. He adopted an untouchable orphan as his own daughter. Besides that, he commited fasts unto death to stop inter-religious slaughter and untouchability, but, perhaps that is not enough for you? The Church recognizes that that which is good outside the Church comes from God. I have not seen a more radiant soul outside of Judeo-Christianity than Mahatma Gandhi. I mean, come on, as he was shot, for insisting that Moslems and Hindus were to be loved equally and his opposition to the caste system, his last words were an invocation of God. There is so much more I could post so much more in his defense, but I will not further waste my time. I’m not saying the man was a Saint, though I personally believe he is, but at the very least you could admit he was a great man. Is it the Holy Father’s fault that Europe is practically spiritually bankrupt? The answer would be a definative no. Is it Gandhi’s fault that the masses of India did not respond to his message of love and non-violence? Answer that question yourself. India has not even come close to Bapu’s aspirations and beliefs, let alone emerge from his “shadow”.

 

[Exalt]

Well, I shall not exhalt this man as being perfect. Gandhi did support Hitler in Germany at one time.

I don’t think Catholics are in any position to be critical over stuff like this. After all, without the votes of the Centre Party (the Catholic Party, which made up the last few votes that Hitler needed to become Chancellor) and Reichskonkordat (a treaty signed between Pius XI/Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli and Hitler that essentially muted major protest by German Catholics in exchange for German Catholic churches and schools not being targeted), the story of Germany would have been very different. Hitler may not have risen to the power that he did if the major Catholic base had fought against him. After all, they had done so before; they dethroned Otto von Bismarck and stopped the Kulturkampf.

There are rational explainations for the Church’s behavior, but it does mean that Catholics aren’t really in a place to criticize Ghandi on this particular issue.

 

[nsper7]

i dont really see how he could be in hell, i mean, he did nothing but embrace everyone, but someone on this site told me he is probably in hell. the person who told me this probably wasnt catholic though, because he says that, “if your not christian, you will go to hell”. i dunno…

This is one of the things that really irritates me about some-to-many Evangelical/Fundamental/Baptist Protestants. They judge Roman Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy (and, to a lesser degree, Anglicanism) for having proclaimed named Saints (outside of the whole asking-Saints-for-intercession issue, isn’t the idea of the Church naming Saints simply its declaring that so-and-so is now in Heaven), yet these same groups loudly proclaim who is in Hell.

In the end, wherever Gandhi (or anyone else for that matter) spends their eternity is up to God. Although I have my own beliefs on Salvation (specifically, I lean towards Free Grace theology, check out www.faithalone.org if you are interested), in the end, its up to God.

Perhaps the ‘Jesus Prayer’ (we actually have pamphlets on it at the Episcopal chapel I attend) puts it best:

“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”

 

[Exalt]

the Catholic Party, which made up the last few votes that Hitler needed to become Chancellor.

Clarification: Those votes were not to become Chancellor but to give Hitler, who was already Chancellor, the power to pass laws on his own. This was the Enabling Act.

 

[jimmy]

Based on the opinion, it appears that Coleraine does not have the truth if there is a belief that we earn salvation through works. The only loving thing to do would be to correct Coleraine with regard to biblical salvation…one who does not have Christ but has an external “righteousness” alone has nothing…works without faith in Christ is nothing because the God we know (I AM) was not glorified by his mouth/words. Who was he glorifying?

Do you not realize that you sound just like the pharisees that condemned the woman in John8? You do not know the judgement of God and therefore you can not speak on the issue.

 

[Teflon93]

Such ignorance is inexcusable. How hard did he try, you ask? Gandhi massaged lepers, ate with untouchables, *cleaned their latrines *and never stopped compelling others to do so. He fought child marriage, and every other form of violence. Towards the end of his life, he would not condone a marriage unless one party was an untouchable. He adopted an untouchable orphan as his own daughter. Besides that, he commited fasts unto death to stop inter-religious slaughter and untouchability, but, perhaps that is not enough for you? The Church recognizes that that which is good outside the Church comes from God. I have not seen a more radiant soul outside of Judeo-Christianity than Mahatma Gandhi. I mean, come on, as he was shot, for insisting that Moslems and Hindus were to be loved equally and his opposition to the caste system, his last words were an invocation of God. There is so much more I could post so much more in his defense, but I will not further waste my time. I’m not saying the man was a Saint, though I personally believe he is, but at the very least you could admit he was a great man. Is it the Holy Father’s fault that Europe is practically spiritually bankrupt? The answer would be a definative no. Is it Gandhi’s fault that the masses of India did not respond to his message of love and non-violence? Answer that question yourself. India has not even come close to Bapu’s aspirations and beliefs, let alone emerge from his “shadow”.

Such hagiography is inexcusable. It was apparently okay for Gandhi to condemn Christians for not living up to Christ, but Hindus and Muslims could not be expected to live up to Gandhi?

Christ is God, sir. Gandhi was merely a man, no matter how great you believe him to be.

Perhaps the spiritual bankruptness in Europe stems in part from not being able to tell God from man?

 

[Pope_Noah_I]

Such hagiography is inexcusable. It was apparently okay for Gandhi to condemn Christians for not living up to Christ, but Hindus and Muslims could not be expected to live up to Gandhi?

Christ is God, sir. Gandhi was merely a man, no matter how great you believe him to be.

Perhaps the spiritual bankruptness in Europe stems in part from not being able to tell God from man?

1. But, I suppose hagiography of, say, St. Augustine is perfectly fine, despite the fact that he fathered an illegitmate child and such? ( That is in no way meant to degrade St. Augustine) Listen, Gandhi had every right to criticize bad Christians, and he did criticize them, alongside bad Hindus and bad Muslims. They didn’t live up to Gandhi, no. That’s not his fault. It’s theirs.
2. I know Christ is God, sir. I know that His Church is the Catholic Church. I also know that Gandhi was but a fallible man. If you are accusing me of idol-worshipping Gandhi, you are mistaken.
3. The spiritual bankruptness of Europe is because of cowards who want no morality forced upon them.

 

[donmaximuso27]

No one can say the state of his soul. Who knows where he is.

As far as the post that only people who beleive in Christ go to heaven, what about everyone who lived at the same time in other places? Are all native Americans in hell because they were on the wrong continent?

The Church is very clear in the doctrine of invincible ignorance, meaning those such as the Native Americans, who by some other force other then their will could not hear the Gospel, can indeed be saved, as long as they are good in accordance to natural law. As regarding Ghandi, we cannot of course judge the state of one’s soul. But it is important to keep in mind two things:

1. We know that Christ is the only way to the Father, as told by Christ in today’s Gospel reading.
2. One is saved by grace, not by his own merit or works. Faith and works are mystically unite to bring one closer to God. As St. James wrote, faith without works is dead. Ghandi clearly expressed his denial of the Gospel and simply focused on the pacifism of Christ. Many of Ghandi’s works were Christ-like, but from what we can see he did not have faith in the Son of God.

Still, it is important to remember that we should always pray for the salvation of all souls and we cannot judge the state of one’s soul.

 

[Ignatius]

i dont really see how he could be in hell,

What misconception drives you to decide that he’s in hell?