Justice: a heaven and hell question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Poseidon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s not as much about whether or not one has been “good” or “bad”, it’s more about acceptance or rejection. One could lived a hundred years and if they, in their last second of life, repented and accepted Christ, they would spend eternity with them. If with one’s dying breath they reject him, nice knowing ya.

There also is the matter of culpability for one’s sin; we are assuming that Diana willingly and persistantly rejected Christ.
 
Has anyone else noticed that this is a work of fiction? The OP has defined the story and then demanded that someone else defend what happened in his story! I think it is UNJUST and unreasonable that this uncaring author did this to his own characters!
 
No, my point is that ultimately what decided their fate was the time of their death, not their actions. If both of them had been hit by cars a year earlier then their ultimate fates would have been reversed, and if they had both lived a year longer then their fates could have been different again. Maybe they both would have gone to heaven, or maybe they both would have gone to hell. It seems that it was a fluke of chance that decided where they would spend eternity.
From 1Sam15…22 But Samuel replied:

“Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
as much as in obeying the Lord?
To obey is better than sacrifice,
and to heed is better than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is like the sin of divination,
and arrogance like the evil of idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
he has rejected you as king.”

The Lord values obedience too…and this verse indicates this is valued more than one’s sacrifices.

And the God will take into account your life and works…we do not know how this works…God looks at the heart, not what is outside.

And suffering…did Mike suffer for what he did?

There are two ways of suffering — to suffer with love, and to suffer without love. The saints suffered everything with joy, patience, and perseverance, because they loved. As for us, we suffer with anger, vexation, and weariness, because we do not love. If we loved God, we should love crosses, we should wish for them, we should take pleasure in them. . . . We should be happy to be able to suffer for the love of Him who lovingly suffered for us. Of what do we complain?

saints.sqpn.com/catechism-on-suffering-by-saint-john-vianney/
 
The Catholic Church officially teaches that hell exists but does NOT teach that anyone is there for sure. So…Both of your examples may be in heaven and to speculate is to try and know the mind of God. We are bound by His commands but He is not.
 
The Catholic Church officially teaches that hell exists but does NOT teach that anyone is there for sure. So…Both of your examples may be in heaven and to speculate is to try and know the mind of God. We are bound by His commands but He is not.
Regarding whether anyone is actually in hell, I recall reading an article regarding the Fatima miracle where one or all three of the children said they were shown visions of souls in hell by Mary. She told them that most of them were there for sins of the flesh.
 
Interesting analogy, but it seems to fall short to me for a couple of reasons. In a racing scenario, it is your overall performance that is what matters. You can run a brilliant first half of your race and a miserable second half, but in the end neither of those halves is what matters - it’s your overall time that makes all the difference. You can fall flat on your face at the end, but if you have enough of a lead you may be able to get up and cross the finish line before someone passes you.

If I were to turn Mike and Diana’s lives into a race, then Diana would be out ahead from the very beginning. She’s pretty much sprinting along, and runs an amazing race until the last few meters, where she trips, sprains her ankle and has to crawl across the line.

Mike runs a lousy race. He barely even jogs, and walks most of the time. However when he sees the finish line up ahead he sprints, and finishes strong.

Who “won” this race? By any racing standards Diana clearly won, because she crossed the finish line first, because her average speed over the course of the race was much faster than Mike’s. However, the judges in this race don’t care about any part of the race except the finish, and they rule that Mike won because he was running faster when he crossed the finish line.

I hope you can see the connection between the race and Mike and Diana’s lives. Diana’s “average goodness” over her life was far greater than that of Mike, but none of it mattered because she was being bad (running slowly) when she died (end of the race). Mike was terrible for his whole life, but because he was being good (sprinting) when he died, he won the cosmic jackpot of heaven.
Wrong wrong wrong.

If Diana sinned BUT then repented of that sin, interiorly at least if not able to make an effort to go to confession or do any outside act, then THAT would be analogous to her ‘crawling over the finish line’.

But she didn’t repent.

Her not repenting makes your analogy wrong. It makes her situation akin to my Runner X tripping, then just laying there like a beached whale on the track a couple of yards short of the finish line and just lying there, refusing to even crawl towards the finish line, let alone actually making it over. And remember she must actually make it over in order to win.

Or worse still, running 300 metres of the 400 metre race, then turning round and running in the wrong direction - back towards the start line - instead of in the right direction towards the finish line.

Surely you’re not saying that runners who do such silly things deserve to win?
 
Mike is a guy who’s rotten through and through. He was raised a Catholic and was baptized, had first communion and Reconciliation, but he left all that behind at a young age. He’s been in a gang since he was a teenager, and has taken part in all sorts of criminal activity. He’s helped his gang rob homes, stores, and people, sell drugs to adults and children, has personally killed several people, and has helped with the deaths of dozens of other people. He is 35.

Diana is by all measures an upstanding citizen and overall a great person. She works hard, attends church and is involved in all sorts of church activities, gives a large percentage of her income to charity, volunteers at soup kitchens, helps the poor, and is constantly on the lookout for other good things to do. She is also 35.

However, over the course of a few months Diana becomes unsatisfied with her life, and wants to start living a little more “wildly.” She experiments with drugs, and soon becomes addicted to cocaine. While under the influence she sleeps around, and one of the people she sleeps with is Mike. They get into an argument, which becomes violent, and that night Mike kills Diana. She dies in a state of mortal sin, and thus goes straight to hell. Here is both the answer and the core of your dilemma. You DO NOT KNOW whether Diana died ‘in the state of mortal sin which is UNREPENTED.’ Thus, even though Diana engaged in a mortal sin and even though she was probably doing so with full knowledge, you DO NOT KNOW that she did not, in the last seconds of her life, repent, and be forgiven.

After killing Diana Mike becomes extremely remorseful, and sees how despicable his life has been. He decides he wants to turn his life around, and starts out by going to Church. A few weeks later he begins talking to the Priest, and after a week of that decides that he wants to go to Confession. He does so, and confesses all his crimes and his evil lifestyle. The priest absolves him, he makes his confession, and walks outside, where he is immediately shot and killed by a member of his gang who is there to prevent him from giving them away. Since he dies in a state of grace he goes immediately to heaven.

My question is how is this just in any way? Over the course of their lives Diana was a much better person than Mike, but because she died at a time when she was sinning she went to hell. Mike, overall, was a horrible person, but he managed to save himself because he died during a time when he was repentant. Essentially, the only point in their lives that mattered was the moment of death. How is that just?
This is actually very Scriptural Check out Ezekiel for the Lord Himself speaking on these very circumstances . . .those of a ‘good person’ who chooses evil, and those of an "evil person’ who chooses good.

Mike did not ‘manage to save himself’. ONLY GOD SAVES. Mike was saved because at the end of his life, which IS THE TIME WHEN THE QUESTION IS ASKED, He repented.

We DO NOT, CANNOT, ‘merit" salvation. That means that in a sense, we don’t rack up ‘brownie points’ for doing ‘good things’ during our lives, or get’ demerits’ for doing evil. What we do can have an impact on our ‘destination’ if at the time of death we have chosen, say, to obey God and have spent our lives in preparation by doing God. But we could also have been rotters and then by God’s GRACE just before our death ‘seen the light’ , repented, and been saved. Scripture speaks of the JOY IN HEAVEN over the ONE who repents as opposed to the NINETY NINE righteous.

Shouldn’t you REJOICE that Mike repented??? Are you upset that God was ‘generous’ with Mike just as He was with the laborers who only worked one hour by giving them the ‘same pay’ as those who worked all day??

And I repent, DO NOT WRITE OFF DIana. You do not know that she is lost. But even if she were, she should not be ‘saved’ because of earlier good acts. If anything, a person who has lived righteously all his/her life sins even more deeply if he/she ‘goes off’ at the end. After all, Scripture tells us that "To he who is given much, much will be demanded of him’. But again, you DO NOT KNOW that Diana was not saved.

And if Diana DID NOT REPENT, then her ‘good works’ do not and CANNOT ‘cancel out’ her final impiety, her final rejection, of God. So yes, IF Diana did not repent, her self-damnation is PERFECTLY JUSTIFIED.

Do you really think God is so UNJUST that He deliberately ‘waited’ until Diana 'slipped?" That He ‘should have’ taken into account those good things and, even if she DID NOT REPENT at death (which is the only way that she WOULD be damned), He should ‘let her get to heaven anyway???’
 
First of all absolution of sin doesn’t make us go straight to heaven. We first go to purgatory and this is where we will pay the “price” of sin. Therefore, justice would be served in purgatory for Mike before he can enter Heaven.

Diana decided to reject God and if knowingly committed mortal sin then she goes straight to hell, no purgatory for her.

Check the parable of the prodigal son.

Hope this answers your question on Justice.
 
Wrong wrong wrong.

If Diana sinned BUT then repented of that sin, interiorly at least if not able to make an effort to go to confession or do any outside act, then THAT would be analogous to her ‘crawling over the finish line’.

But she didn’t repent.

Her not repenting makes your analogy wrong. It makes her situation akin to my Runner X tripping, then just laying there like a beached whale on the track a couple of yards short of the finish line and just lying there, refusing to even crawl towards the finish line, let alone actually making it over. And remember she must actually make it over in order to win.

Or worse still, running 300 metres of the 400 metre race, then turning round and running in the wrong direction - back towards the start line - instead of in the right direction towards the finish line.

Surely you’re not saying that runners who do such silly things deserve to win?
Extending the analogy a bit more, it would seem to me that Diana didn’t choose to not crawl over the finish line, but was disqualified immediately after tripping (when she died in real life). This brings in a whole new question about why God would permit her to die when she could probably have been saved if she lived a little longer. However, even the best analogy can only be taken so far, and I think we may be stretching this one to its limits here. 🙂
 
First of all absolution of sin doesn’t make us go straight to heaven. We first go to purgatory and this is where we will pay the “price” of sin. Therefore, justice would be served in purgatory for Mike before he can enter Heaven.

Diana decided to reject God and if knowingly committed mortal sin then she goes straight to hell, no purgatory for her.

Check the parable of the prodigal son.

Hope this answers your question on Justice.
Even if he spent a long time in purgatory, the question still stands (because no matter how long he spends in purgatory he still has an infinite amount of reward in heaven, while Diana has an infinite punishment in hell).

The question about justice is really more about Diana, because it seems extremely unjust for her to be infinitely punished simply because she happened to die while going through a bad period of her life.
 
Extending the analogy a bit more, it would seem to me that Diana didn’t choose to not crawl over the finish line, but was disqualified immediately after tripping (when she died in real life). This brings in a whole new question about why God would permit her to die when she could probably have been saved if she lived a little longer. However, even the best analogy can only be taken so far, and I think we may be stretching this one to its limits here. 🙂
Of course it wasn’t ‘immediately after tripping’. It takes a split second to mentally say sorry to God for one’s sins and resolve not to sin again. Everyone has that split second - there’s a famous story of St John Vianney consoling the wife of a man who suicided with the notion that he could have repented even in the moment between the bridge and the water!

And someone who cares would take that split second, and feel that sorrow at hurting God, immediately after sinning. There’s no being caught unawares here.

Just like someone who loves and cares about their husband or wife would apologise to them immediately after knowing they have hurt their spouse, and not waste any time about it.
 
Of course it wasn’t ‘immediately after tripping’. It takes a split second to mentally say sorry to God for one’s sins and resolve not to sin again. Everyone has that split second - there’s a famous story of St John Vianney consoling the wife of a man who suicided with the notion that he could have repented even in the moment between the bridge and the water!

And someone who cares would take that split second, and feel that sorrow at hurting God, immediately after sinning. There’s no being caught unawares here.

Just like someone who loves and cares about their husband or wife would apologise to them immediately after knowing they have hurt their spouse, and not waste any time about it.
Not necessarily. You can certainly die without having the chance to be repentant, or without a final moment to ask God for forgiveness. You can be hit by a car and die instantly, or die in such a way that your mind is totally elsewhere (for example if you were murdered you’d probably be spending your last moments trying to fight off the murderer, not ask God for forgiveness).

And even if she did have that chance and didn’t take it, it still strikes me as both very unjust and unfair. She might not have repented in the two seconds she had to make a choice, but if she had been given a day to think it over she might have thought better of her decision. She wasn’t given that chance though.
 
I think the only person who is judging unjustly here is you.

You created a scenario where you really do not know the outcome. You do not know what grace happened at the moment of their death, whether either of them repented or not, and what was the state of their hearts.

God’s mercy is greater than ALL! …even greater than our imaginative scenarios that would sentence persons to hell.

You are getting yourself all worked up and angry at God and (essentially) calling Him unjust for no logical reason. The only person who is being unjust, frankly, is you.

God’s mercy is infinite. He sees every minute detail that you are unaware of. He sees not just the drugs and the gangs, but the depths of each persons heart.
And don’t forget…

“Prostitutes and tax collectors are entering the kingdom of God before you.” - Matthew 21:31
 
I think the only person who is judging unjustly here is you.

You created a scenario where you really do not know the outcome. You do not know what grace happened at the moment of their death, whether either of them repented or not, and what was the state of their hearts.

God’s mercy is greater than ALL! …even greater than our imaginative scenarios that would sentence persons to hell.

You are getting yourself all worked up and angry at God and (essentially) calling Him unjust for no logical reason. The only person who is being unjust, frankly, is you.

God’s mercy is infinite. He sees every minute detail that you are unaware of. He sees not just the drugs and the gangs, but the depths of each persons heart.
And don’t forget…

“Prostitutes and tax collectors are entering the kingdom of God before you.” - Matthew 21:31
Nothing actually happened, because the scenario is made up. Therefore I say what happened. The fact that according to Catholic theology this scenario could happen is enough. I’m not questioning what actually happened to fictional characters, I’m questioning an unjust scenario that could happen to real people.
 
It’s not really important. Mike could have had his conversion while in prison, and then been executed or died some other way. The point is that he was horrible for 99% of his life and good for 1% and was saved, while Diana was good 99% of her life and bad for 1% and was damned.
I was pointing out the silliness of hypotheticals. You say the details aren’t important, but they are when it comes to cases. God would have all the details & facts. There’s no possible way you would know if she was unrepentant/contrite or damned/not damned. God would be the only one who’d know the real answer to this unreal situation.
 
Nothing actually happened, because the scenario is made up. Therefore I say what happened. The fact that according to Catholic theology this scenario could happen is enough. I’m not questioning what actually happened to fictional characters, I’m questioning an unjust scenario that could happen to real people.
Keep in mind that Catholic theology is based on what God has revealed to us. It provides us with what is necessary to achieve salvation, but does not tell us everything about God (such would be impossible) or how He acts in the world…or His final actions in judging each soul.

That this scenario *could *happen is based only on this limited view (yes, the Catholic faith is a limited view, although sufficient for the salvation of each of us). As others have noted, the Catholic Church teaches on the reality of hell, but does not state that anyone is there. There is always hope.

Each person has the opportunity to accept God’s graces or to reject them. If Diana freely chooses to reject God (which is fundamentally different from making some bad choices such as a drug habit), with a full understanding of Him and what rejecting Him involves, then would it be fair for God to make her spend eternity with Him? Is it not more fair that He allow her the choice?
 
“I’m not questioning what actually happened to fictional characters, I’m questioning an unjust scenario that could happen to real people.”

I know your situation is made up, but that’s just my point.

If the woman you describe, did indeed go to hell, it was because ultimately, she rejected God’s will.

Do you think that God, who is Mercy itself, would not grant that woman every amount of grace necessary to enter into heaven? God loves us and cannot not love us. He wants us in heaven far more than we do… so much so that He became incarnate and died for us. God will do anything to bring us to heaven, but He will not invade our free will.

God knows the moment of our death. He could have stopped her from dying. He would not allow that woman to die if she, had she been given the opportunity to live/survive, would repent and turn back to Him. If she died in the state of mortal sin, then that was her eternal “no” to God.

Why are some “saved” from suicide attempts and others not? My guess is the mercy of God and our free will. Those that were saved and got a second chance at life were those who God knew would repent with His grace. We also don’t know what happens in the moment of their deaths - if their hearts are converted and saved by some grace.

God could have prevented Judas from committing suicide, but God does not interfere with our free will because doing so would be contrary to love. To love is to be absolutely free. So, by saving those from from suicide, somehow, in their free will, they said or will say “yes” to God.

“Oh, what a mystery!―[Christ] who, out of love, lets Judas hang himself!” - Thierry de Roucy

Each lost soul is excruciatingly painful to God beyond our comprehension. God loves us, so much so that He lets us choose away from Him.

You are right, that in “Catholic theology” this scenario “could” happen, but it would be entirely that woman’s free-will choice to do so. You make it sound like she is being sentenced to hell, when she freely chose it. That said, if there was even the smallest possibility and openness to God’s will, God’s grace would suffice and she would be saved.

Does this mean we can walk around in the state of mortal sin with the expectation that God’s grace will come in and rescue us at the last minute? No! That’s a dangerous place to tread, and that way of thinking is more dangerous and more contrary to God’s will than even the mortal sin in question. What we human’s often see as the graver sin is not as grave as some of the sins we overlook - such as not trusting in God’s mercy, or taking His mercy for granted. Thinking we can get away with not confessing is routed in pride, which is worse than having given into a sin of bodily weakness - such as drugs, adultery, etc.

The moment we commit a mortal sin, we need to confess it as soon as possible. If we don’t, our hearts are choosing hell at that moment. If one wants to confess and dies on the way to the confessional, God sees that person’s heart and intention. If that drug-addicted person dies in a terrible state without being freely able to choose to go to confession because their addiction was so terrible, their free-will was compromised, then they possibly aren’t in the state of mortal sin. In order for a sin to be mortal, one of the conditions is that it has to be made with our free will. If our free-will is compromised because of mental illness, addiction, etc. then the degree of the sin is lessened.
 
It’s not really important. Mike could have had his conversion while in prison, and then been executed or died some other way. The point is that he was horrible for 99% of his life and good for 1% and was saved, while Diana was good 99% of her life and bad for 1% and was damned.
The classic mistake of thinking we can earn our way to heaven. The supposed “good” person hasn’t necessarily taken Jesus into their heart, accepting Him as their Savior. We also make the mistake of condemning people. The Bible says God’s judgments are righteous, He knows whether the "good"person really believes.
 
Let’s put it this way.

You’re watching the finals of the 400 metre hurdles at the Olympics. Runner X is the unbackable favourite - having been totally unbeatable in the year leading up to the Olympics and just getting better and better in the heats and semi finals.

Runner Y has had a poorer preparation, injuries, a short suspension for drugs, one or two poor showings. Just scraped in to the next round at each stage of the Olympics. Understands that the finals is the only race that matters and resolves to give the race everything she can summon up.

Runner X is having a fantastic race in the final and is well ahead of all her competitors -that gold medal is practically in her hand. Runner Y is a place or two back. Until the very final hurdle. The hurdle that she’s been taught in all her years of practice is the one that will win or lose her the race.

At that last hurdle Runner X trips and falls flat on her face, enabling half the other finalists
to pass her. Ultimately in spite of her fantastic early form and fantastic 80% of that final race she wins no prizes, no acclaim, nothing.

Runner Y, equally appreciating the importance of that last hurdle, and seeing X fall, gathers together all her stamina and concentration and jumps it brilliantly - so much so that she sails into the lead on that very hurdle. In spite of everything, she has persevered to the end and the gold is hers.

Is that fair?

Of course. To win that medal it’s not enough to win ALMOST all your races or jump ALMOST all of your hurdles. Perseveringly to the end means to the end. Be in the right place when it counts. If you fail, even slightly, at that critical time you’re done for. And if you make extra effort at that critical time it can do marvels.

The kicker is that we know the end of our particular race can come at any moment. So? We need to be on top of our game at all times, racing to win at all times, because when the crunch comes it will stand us in good stead and we won’t stumble, or not badly enough so as to lose the race.
Is it valid to compare a life and the eternal state of a soul to the 400m hurdles? How is life reducable to this sort of cold analogy? It is senseless anyway ; in a race there can be no winner without losers.
 
The position of the Catholic Church is that we go to heaven or hell based on our relationship with God the moment we die. In any real or fictional story, we have no way of knowing the state of someone else’s soul the moment they die.

Also, the Church does not teach that God is trying to trip people up, to snare them in a technicality. God is not a lawyer.

I will use another story. Suppose a 17-year old is generally a good kid, but for the past few weeks has been consistently breaking his curfew or 11pm. To teach him a lesson, his father tells him that he will be locking the front door at 11pm. If the son is not home, he will be on his own for the night. 11:00 comes and goes, so the father locks the door as he said. The son walks up the walk at 11:40 to find the door locked. It breaks the father’s heart, but doesn’t open the door. The father is unable to sleep through the night, and a few hours later hears more people outside his home with his son. They begin beating his son and the father sees someone take out a gun. His son bangs on the door again, begging his father to let him in. Would any loving father let his son perish based on a technicality that was designed to help him? Of course not, the father would unlock the door as fast as he could and drag his son inside himself. However, if I’m using the logic in the first story, the father would say, “I’m sorry you’ve been beaten and might get shot, son. But I told you I would lock you out of the house at 11, and I’m not unlocking it.” Earthly fathers are not like that, and our Father in Heaven is not like that either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top