Hell is a place, right?

[MarMax]

Post is too long says the CAF… post again says I. I added nothing in the previous.

Intended addition to previous post:

Common: place, somewhere beneath the earth as best as Scripture and Tradition bring forth; Corporeal, and experienced as such. Corporeal states of being are still states of being. A mere state of being is not some out-of-body experience once the soul is reunited. People seem to be describing some sort of Limbo state more than Hell as defined by Scripture and Tradition. Hell IS a place. There IS fire. It WILL be experienced by the body. As St. John Chrysostom says, we shouldn’t be so concerned with where, but how to escape it!

 

[Sirach2]

Dear MarMax,

Could I make a suggestion from this stickie? As soon as I saw your post #19 and the first part of #20, my mind went “tilt”. It is very true that we resist reading lengthly lumped-together print.
Marian Carroll:

1. When creating a post, use white space and paragraphing for easier reading. One large “lump” of text does not encourage heavy readership among other posters.

Thanks!

 

[MarMax]

Dear MarMax,

Could I make a suggestion from this stickie? As soon as I saw your post #19 and the first part of #20, my mind went “tilt”. It is very true that we resist reading lengthly lumped-together print.

Thanks!

This would not render it a true quote, and it would do disservice to the Angelic Doctor’s work. The sticky is in regards to actual writing, not quotes. I suspect that one who is not willing to read a mere quotation, as tedious as it might be, will likely rebuff the Summa’s larger necessity of reading the full questions-- as this is the style of the Summa and not my doing.

Grudgingly… with gritted teeth, I shall try to parse it up for easier reading without killing it. Unfortunately, I cannot edit the originals due to apparent editing restrictions.

Will post below.

 

[MarMax]

From Post #19, for Sirach2’s request to add paragraph breaks (you people are killing me!) whaddaya mean “you people”… well, you people here. )

I answer that, There have been many opinions about the fire of hell. For some philosophers, as Avicenna, disbelieving in the resurrection, thought that the soul alone would be punished after death. And as they considered it impossible for the soul, being incorporeal, to be punished with a corporeal fire, they denied that the fire whereby the wicked are punished is corporeal, and pretended that all statements as to souls being punished in future after death by any corporeal means are to be taken metaphorically.

For just as the joy and happiness of good souls will not be about any corporeal object, but about something spiritual, namely the attainment of their end, so will the torment of the wicked be merely spiritual, in that they will be grieved at being separated from their end, the desire whereof is in them by nature.

Wherefore, just as all descriptions of the soul’s delight after death that seem to denote bodily pleasure–for instance, that they are refreshed, that they smile, and so forth–must be taken metaphorically, so also are all such descriptions of the soul’s suffering as seem to imply bodily punishment–for instance, that they burn in fire, or suffer from the stench, and so forth.

For as spiritual pleasure and pain are unknown to the majority, these things need to be declared under the figure of corporeal pleasures and pains, in order that men may be moved the more to the desire or fear thereof. Since, however, in the punishment of the damned there will be not only pain of loss corresponding to the aversion that was in their sin, but also pain of sense corresponding to the conversion, it follows that it is not enough to hold the above manner of punishment. For this reason Avicenna himself (Met. ix) added another explanation, by saying that the souls of the wicked are punished after death, not by bodies but by images of bodies; just as in a dream it seems to a man that he is suffering various pains on account of such like images being in his imagination.

Even Augustine seems to hold this kind of punishment (Gen. ad lit. xii, 32), as is clear from the text. But this would seem an unreasonable statement. For the imagination is a power that makes use of a bodily organ: so that it is impossible for such visions of the imagination to occur in the soul separated from the body, as in the soul of the dreamer. Wherefore Avicenna also that he might avoid this difficulty, said that the soul separated from the body uses as an organ some part of the heavenly body, to which the human body needs to be conformed, in order to be perfected by the rational soul, which is like the movers of the heavenly body–thus following somewhat the opinion of certain philosophers of old, who maintained that souls return to the stars that are their compeers. But this is absolutely absurd according to the Philosopher’s teaching, since the soul uses a definite bodily organ, even as art uses definite instruments, so that it cannot pass from one body to another, as Pythagoras is stated (De Anima i, text. 53) to have maintained.

As to the statement of Augustine we shall say below how it is to be answered (ad 2). However, whatever we may say of the fire that torments the separated souls, we must admit that the fire which will torment the bodies of the damned after the resurrection is corporeal, since one cannot fittingly apply a punishment to a body unless that punishment itself be bodily. Wherefore Gregory (Dial. iv) proves the fire of hell to be corporeal from the very fact that the wicked will be cast thither after the resurrection. Again Augustine, as quoted in the text of Sentent. iv, D, 44, clearly admits (De Civ. Dei xxi, 10) that the fire by which the bodies are tormented is corporeal. And this is the point at issue for the present. We have said elsewhere (70, 3) how the souls of the damned are punished by this corporeal fire.

 

[LilyM]

Hell is no doubt a physical as well as spiritual experience - since, as has been pointed out, both body and soul will exist eternally after the Last Judgement.

That is not to say that Hell has to be a discrete physical location.

Imagine two people sitting on opposite sides of the same hospital room.

One is a nurse enjoying a well-deserved lunch break - she has her iPod blasting her favourite music, cup of tea or coffee and delicious meal to hand, and no work to do.

The other is a patient with an incredibly painful injury that has not been seen to, and he has been waiting there for many hours. He is not allowed any pain relief, nor anything to eat or drink, because he may have to go into surgery under anaesthetic. He cannot move in any way without it causing extreme pain, but sitting still is also extremely painful.

Now I would not go so far as to say that Hell or Heaven are ‘everywhere’. Clearly, to use my analogy, Heaven is NOT where that patient is, and Hell is NOT where that nurse is. Yet they are physically both in the same or similar location. And the patient doesn’t have to physically relocate to be in ‘Heaven’, probably just has to get food and drink, sufficient painkillers, and to be seen by a doctor and reassured that he will fully recover.

 

[MarMax]

Post #20’s “Answer” section (excepting replies which shall remain in place, needing no spacing)

I answer that, As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xv, 16), “I am of opinion that no one knows in what part of the world hell is situated, unless the Spirit of God has revealed this to some one.”

Wherefore Gregory (Dial. iv) having been questioned on this point answers: “About this matter I dare not give a rash decision. For some have deemed hell to be in some part of the earth’s surface; others think it to be beneath the earth.” He shows the latter opinion to be the more probable for two reasons. First from the very meaning of the word. These are his words: “If we call it the nether regions (infernus [The Latin for ‘hell’]), for the reason that it is beneath us [inferius], what earth is in relation to heaven, such should be hell in relation to earth.” Secondly, from the words of Revelation 5:3: “No man was able, neither in heaven, nor on earth, nor under the earth, to open the book”: where the words “in heaven” refer to the angels, “on earth” to men living in the body, and “under the earth” to souls in hell.

Augustine too (Gen. ad lit. xii, 34) seems to indicate two reasons for the congruity of hell being under the earth. One is that “whereas the souls of the departed sinned through love of the flesh, they should be treated as the dead flesh is wont to be treated, by being buried beneath the earth.” The other is that heaviness is to the body what sorrow is to the spirit, and joy (of spirit) is as lightness (of body). Wherefore “just as in reference to the body, all the heavier things are beneath the others, if they be placed in order of gravity, so in reference to the spirit, the lower place is occupied by whatever is more sorrowful”; and thus even as the empyrean is a fitting place for the joy of the elect, so the lowest part of the earth is a fitting place for the sorrow of the damned. Nor does it signify that Augustine (De Civ. Dei xv, 16) says that “hell is stated or believed to be under the earth,” because he withdraws this (Retract. ii, 29) where he says: “Methinks I should have said that hell is beneath the earth, rather than have given the reason why it is stated or believed to be under the earth.”

However, some philosophers have maintained that hell is situated beneath the terrestrial orb, but above the surface of the earth, on that part which is opposite to us. This seems to have been the meaning of Isidore when he asserted that “the sun and the moon will stop in the place wherein they were created, lest the wicked should enjoy this light in the midst of their torments.” But this is no argument, if we assert that hell is under the earth. We have already stated how these words may be explained (91, 2).

Pythagoras held the place of punishment to be in a fiery sphere situated, according to him, in the middle of the whole world: and he called it the prison-house of Jupiter as Aristotle relates (De Coelo et Mundo ii). It is, however, more in keeping with Scripture to say that it is beneath the earth.

 

[Sirach2]

Well, back in St. Thomas’ day, they probably did not have good english classes.
I think if he knew better, he would agree. It is tedious to read and my mind just won’t focus in huge lumps. For all we know, it could have been a problem with the formatting of Newadvent’s copy of his work.

But if you grit your teeth and grudge along rather than make changes, I’ll just move on down the road. True quotes CAN be paragraphed.

 

[MarMax]

Hell is no doubt a physical as well as spiritual experience - since, as has been pointed out, both body and soul will exist eternally after the Last Judgement.

That is not to say that Hell has to be a discrete physical location.

Imagine two people sitting on opposite sides of the same hospital room.

One is a nurse enjoying a well-deserved lunch break - she has her iPod blasting her favourite music, cup of tea or coffee and delicious meal to hand, and no work to do.

The other is a patient with an incredibly painful injury that has not been seen to, and he has been waiting there for many hours. He is not allowed any pain relief, nor anything to eat or drink, because he may have to go into surgery under anaesthetic. He cannot move in any way without it causing extreme pain, but sitting still is also extremely painful.

Now I would not go so far as to say that Hell or Heaven are ‘everywhere’. Clearly, to use my analogy, Heaven is NOT where that patient is, and Hell is NOT where that nurse is. Yet they are physically both in the same or similar location. And the patient doesn’t have to physically relocate to be in ‘Heaven’, probably just has to get food and drink, sufficient painkillers, and to be seen by a doctor and reassured that he will fully recover.

This is essentially a rendering of the Orthodox notion of Hell, being co-located with God in Heaven, though “not” due to *perception *or experience within that location.

I am reminded of notes I took at a Michael Voris conference. These are my notes, and I tried my best to get them verbatim but Mike just talks so fast and covers so much material.

"No soul who has not just strived to unite to that here on earth would want to be united to it in Eternity. God’s Radiance is a torture for the indisposed and He will not force a soul to be tortured by His Love and Glory.

Ven. Abp. Fulton Sheen: If you imagined a beautiful meadow on summer day, leaves, breeze, sunlight, etc. Walking by beautiful brook, splashing, this is “heavenly”. But then you come across a fish, for whatever reason is out of water, flopping, trying to get his life back: for him, this “heaven” is “hell”."

It seems you’re approaching the explanation of Ven. Abp. Fulton J. Sheen but somehow missing its full implication. It would begin to function if you understood the room as eternal existence, the space between locations as the huge chasm which separates them, and the experience, or being, of the respective characters as being located in their places in Heaven and Hell. But this requires much in the way of mental gymnastics and still doesn’t stand up to Sacred Scripture, Tradition, or the explanations as provided by St. Thomas Aquinas.

 

[MarMax]

Well, back in St. Thomas’ day, they probably did not have good english classes.
I think if he knew better, he would agree. It is tedious to read and my mind just won’t focus in huge lumps. For all we know, it could have been a problem with the formatting of Newadvent.

But if you grit your teeth and grudge along rather than make changes, I’ll just move on down the road. True quotes CAN be paragraphed.

He was Italian, and English of his day was fledgling and resembled nothing as we see today. The original Biblical texts often had no spaces or even punctuation. Don’t be so Protestant about it. Just kidding, I understand. Summa ain’t exactly “redlight reading”. It definitely takes some concentration. I literally cannot make changes. It won’t let me edit. I’ve re-posted the sections which drew your protest per the formatting of the request.

Happy now!?!?! ()

 

[Alfonsus]

The Church, in the Catechism and in the audience of Pope John Paul II, said that Hell is a reality, but first of all it is a state of being. The Church never said that Hell (also Heaven) is never a place. But first of all, Hell is state of being.

Why? Per definition, Hell is the eternal separation from God. Even if Hell is a “place”, it is a “place” where persons separated from God eternally resides.
You don’t get to the “place” first then getting separated from God. The very reason you are in Hell is because you are separated from God in the first place.
Thus, primarily, Hell is a state of being.

Now, about Hell as a “place”. What we know, the current material realities will ceased to exists. A new reality will come. But that new reality is beyond our comprehension at the moment. Yes, bodies will be resurrected. But the resurrected body is totally different from current material one. Paul said, bodies will be spiritualized for lack of a better word.
Jesus’ body after resurrection no longer constrained by space for instance, no longer need for bodily sustenance, no need to go to toilet anymore.

And also, in Hell we find the fallen angels, which from the very beginning are bodiless powers, purely spiritual realities.

So if we talk about Hell as a “place”, it is gonna be a very different from our current definition of place. We don’t know what it is like. The Church too are refrained from defining it safe saying that it is not gonna be like what we experienced now.
But we know for sure, Hell is an eternal separation from God. This is where the Church anchor her definition.

 

[edwest2]

bible.cc/luke/16-23.htm

bible.cc/luke/16-24.htm

bible.cc/luke/16-25.htm

bible.cc/luke/16-26.htm

Peace,
Ed

 

[Skye_Ariel]

I can understand the idea of hell being a state of being, that makes sense, but it also has to be somewhere. Everything exists somewhere and hell has to be somewhere. Separation from God has to be somewhere. Even when someone’s soul is in a state of torment and separation from God, the soul has to be somewhere while in that state. So I say hell is a place and a **state **of being. The soul has to be somewhere while in that state of torment.

 

[Skye_Ariel]

What about the verses in the Bible where Jesus says I go to prepare a place for you, and in my Father’s house there are many mansions etc. Heaven is a real place. When the fallen angels were cast from Heaven they were cast from a **place **after entering a fallen **state **of being. Heaven is a place and **state **of being and so is hell.

 

[Skye_Ariel]

bible.cc/luke/16-23.htm

bible.cc/luke/16-24.htm

bible.cc/luke/16-25.htm

bible.cc/luke/16-26.htm

Peace,
Ed

Thank you! And this too:

bible.cc/john/14-2.htm

New International Version (©1984)
In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
“There are many lodgings in my Father’s house, and if not, I would have told you, because I go to prepare a place for you.”

GOD’S WORD® Translation (©1995)
My Father’s house has many rooms. If that were not true, would I have told you that I’m going to prepare a place for you?

American Standard Version
In my Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.

Douay-Rheims Bible
In my Father’s house there are many mansions. If not, I would have told you: because I go to prepare a place for you.

Darby Bible Translation
In my Father’s house there are many abodes; were it not so, I had told you: for I go to prepare you a place;

English Revised Version
In my Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.

Webster’s Bible Translation
In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

Weymouth New Testament
In my Father’s house there are many resting-places. Were it otherwise, I would have told you; for I am going to make ready a place for you.

World English Bible
In my Father’s house are many homes. If it weren’t so, I would have told you. I am going to prepare a place for you.

Young’s Literal Translation
in the house of my Father are many mansions; and if not, I would have told you; I go on to prepare a place for you;

 

[theistgal]

This reduction of the horror of hell as some never-ending nightmare, totally without the coinciding punishment of the body, at least in the future, is at odds with Tradition.

I’m curious as to why you think a “never-ending nightmare” is a REDUCTION of horror? It sounds even worse than the worst bodily suffering imaginable!!

Have you ever had a really awful nightmare? Imagine it going on and on, forever and ever, with no hope of ever waking up …

 

[iloveangels]

Hi all

I was recently watching Fr. Robert Barron’s series on Catholicism, and I must say it was a joy to watch our faith so well explained and many misconceptions being addressed. I would recommend it to all if you haven’t watched it yet. But yesterday, I was viewing one of Fr. Barron’s video’s from WordonFire.org, and he said hell is a state of being, one you freely choose, whereby you alienate yourself from God and are lonely because of it. Life “becomes hell” for you. He stressed that it’s not so much a place, but that all those symbols of fire and punishment are describing the state you’re in because you have rejected God… Now I greatly respect Fr. Barron, but I can’t reconcile this with with Catholic Tradition that believes in the existence of heaven and purgatory, and surely if those places exist, so does hell!? How could hell not be a place? Even the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima proved it. What exactly is our position on this? Is there a place called hell or is it simply a predicament?

Catechism of the Catholic Church #1035:
"The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs. "
[Footnote 617: 617 Cf. DS 76; 409; 411; 801; 858; 1002; 1351; 1575; Paul VI, CPG § 12.]

The footnote probably has exactly what you’re looking for.

The real truth of the matter is that it’s not EITHER/OR. It’s BOTH.

 

[MarMax]

I’m curious as to why you think a “never-ending nightmare” is a REDUCTION of horror? It sounds even worse than the worst bodily suffering imaginable!!

Have you ever had a really awful nightmare? Imagine it going on and on, forever and ever, with no hope of ever waking up …

It reduces the corporeal nature of the experience, and thus, is a reduction of the horror. We cannot separate the soul and body in hell, just as we cannot say the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament are separate.

Upon the soul’s reuniting to its body, both will suffer in hell.

 

[Alfonsus]

I can understand the idea of hell being a state of being, that makes sense, but it also has to be somewhere. Everything exists somewhere and hell has to be somewhere. Separation from God has to be somewhere. Even when someone’s soul is in a state of torment and separation from God, the soul has to be somewhere while in that state. So I say hell is a place and a **state **of being. The soul has to be somewhere while in that state of torment.

Simply put, the Church chose to refrain to define the “where”-ness of it. It defines what makes Hell a hell, that is foremost the state of separation from God and stop defining the rest. You may fill it with pious believe or theological and philosophical arguments, but none is obliged to believe because she does not make it definitive.

I think it is prudent, because while the Bible gave us plenty of spatial verses about the other world, its reality is not known at the present moment. It is gonna be very different, defies the definition of space and time as we know today. Can that new reality be defined (perhaps analogously) as space as we know today? Perhaps, I don’t know.

 

[theistgal]

It reduces the corporeal nature of the experience, and thus, is a reduction of the horror. We cannot separate the soul and body in hell, just as we cannot say the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament are separate.

Upon the soul’s reuniting to its body, both will suffer in hell.

Yes, but I guess my point is, we primarily suffer from our THOUGHTS. After all, when we hear that a person has been in a terrible accident, isn’t it a bit of a relief to also hear that they went unconscious almost immediately and thus didn’t really feel the bulk of the pain?
And haven’t you ever known a disabled person who was in constant, chronic pain yet maintained a cheerful, positive outlook on life?

Attitude is everything! That’s why Purgatory and Hell, though they contain similar types of suffering, are so different - those in Purgatory rejoice in their sufferings because they know they’ll eventually get out - they have hope, so they can endure the bodily suffering and torment. Those in Hell have NO hope, and they know it, which makes the exact same bodily suffering and torment so much worse.

 

[Patrick_George]

Catechism of the Catholic Church #1035:
"The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs. "
[Footnote 617: 617 Cf. DS 76; 409; 411; 801; 858; 1002; 1351; 1575; Paul VI, CPG § 12.]

The footnote probably has exactly what you’re looking for.

The real truth of the matter is that it’s not EITHER/OR. It’s BOTH.

:thumbsup:Thanks! I think that sums it up pretty well.