Privatio boni and hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter jesusmademe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jesusmademe

Guest
Augustine said that evil is “privatio boni”. Did he say anything how persons could exist in hell. Existence is good and the deprivation of good means no existence.
Did he say anything about this?
 
Well, I don’t know about this, but I disagree with his proposition “being Himself supremely good, would never permit the existence of anything evil among His works” If God wouldn’t permit the existence of anything evil, it simply wouldn’t happen. But he does permit it.

If evil is simply the lack of good, then why is it personified by the father of lies? I.E. Lucifer. Look at it this way. Good things can come out of my mouth. I can also say things that are completely neutral, neither good or bad (such as I prefer orange sherbet over rainbow sherbet). I can also truly make it the lack of anything by staying silent. In order for an evil thing to come out of my mouth, I have to think it and will it. The same with an evil action. You can’t shoot anyone by simply doing nothing.

I don’t know of him saying anything about this, but I also haven’t looked very hard. Though I argue he’s wrong in the first place.
 
jesusmademe said:
Existence is good and the deprivation of good means no existence.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn’t. I think you’re misusing the terminology.

By calling evil “privatio boni”, Augustine is asserting that evil isn’t a thing in itself, but rather, the absence of something – namely, “the good”.

So, we’re not talking about a something that you can set up in a syllogism in the way you’ve attempted to do.
 
jesusmademe said:
Augustine said that evil is “privatio boni”. Did he say anything how persons could exist in hell. Existence is good and the deprivation of good means no existence.
Did he say anything about this?
Click to expand...
The souls in hell aren’t deprived of all good literally, as they do remain in existence, and insofar as they exist they are good. It’s what the people in hell will with their hearts and minds that is evil.
 
Did Augustine only talk about bwing deprived morally good? If so please quote him.
But the problem is that if we are only talking about morally good why do people in hell have ugly bodies or less nice bodies? There must actually be some beauty in hell. Seriously, the fire in hell is said to be Gods love and it is hard for someone who hate Him seeing His love.
So what good is there in hell?
 
People in hell don’t have bodies; the resurrection of the dead has not yet occurred.
 
jesusmademe said:
The fire in hell is said to be Gods love and it is hard for someone who hate Him seeing His love.
Click to expand...
This isn’t really Catholic teaching. It’s something circling around the Orthodox communities.

Insofar as the people in hell exist, they are ontologically good. It’s their morality that is lacking.
 
jesusmademe said:
Augustine said that evil is “privatio boni”. Did he say anything how persons could exist in hell. Existence is good and the deprivation of good means no existence.
Click to expand...
"It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Matt 26:24).
  • Non-existence is better than hell.
  • Annihilation is better than hell.
  • God does not renege.
    * The annihilation of immortal souls is impossible.
  • Hell is the worst possible outcome for immortal souls.
 
“o_mlly said:
It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Matt 26:24).

Yes, Christ did say it would be better if he had never been born; He did not say it would be better if he had never been conceived.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Isearch said:
It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Matt 26:24).

Yes, Christ did say it would be better if he had never been born; He did not say it would be better if he had never been conceived.
Click to expand...
And your point is?
 
Not Church teaching? Has any pope condemn such teaching?
What’s wrong with it?
What then is the fire?
 
o_mlly said:
"It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Matt 26:24).
  • Non-existence is better than hell.
  • Annihilation is better than hell.
  • God does not renege.
  • The annihilation of immortal souls is impossible.
  • Hell is the worst possible outcome for immortal souls.
Click to expand...
Wow, so pithy. Very well said. I would only add a Cappadocian line of reasoning to it:
  • To reach God, who is without limitations, after aeons spent in Hell and to be restored to a state of mere knowledge of God, rather than participating in His gifts, is better than (neverending) hell
 
As Wesrock noted, the bad angels and human souls in hell are not deprived of all good for they exist and this is a good. But, they are deprived of the good of sanctifying grace and communion with God, the Supreme Good. Evil as the privation of good can only exist in good. For example, blindness is a kind of evil in things that normally have sight since it is the privation of sight. But, blindness does not destroy the whole animal or human. Human beings exist who are blind and as human beings existing they are good. Evil does not exist on its own or it would simply be nothing or non-existent which is not even a privation but simply non-being.
 
jesusmademe said:
Did Augustine only talk about bwing deprived morally good? If so please quote him.
But the problem is that if we are only talking about morally good why do people in hell have ugly bodies or less nice bodies? There must actually be some beauty in hell. Seriously, the fire in hell is said to be Gods love and it is hard for someone who hate Him seeing His love.
So what good is there in hell?
Click to expand...
The fires of hell are portrayed in the Holy Scriptures as a source of God’s punishment in hell coming from His justice, not really as God’s love, for burning with physical fire hurts.
 
Wesrock said:
The souls in hell aren’t deprived of all good literally, as they do remain in existence, and insofar as they exist they are good. It’s what the people in hell will with their hearts and minds that is evil.
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing this, I find it very interesting. It seems to me that if what you say is correct, then the misery or sufferings associated with the damned in Hell could arguably be said to be a result of their willing or desiring something evil but being unable to actually perform it. I think if that turns out to be correct, then a lot of objections about the Christian belief in the existence of Hell, with the possibility of souls being there for all eternity, might be lessened if not totally removed.
 
Richca said:
The fires of hell are portrayed in the Holy Scriptures as a source of God’s punishment in hell coming from His justice, not really as God’s love, for burning with physical fire hurts.
Click to expand...
In God, we believe God’s justice and charity are identities, completely in harmony. God is Love, God is Justice. He gave us the wheelbase to understand charity but, unfortunately, not so much to understand His justice.
 
What if the punishment is to see the Love but hating it?
God is present in Hell as well…He is omnipresent you know.
 
Actually Pope Benedict expresses this teaching in his encyclical on Christian Hope. So I assume it’s compatible with Catholic theology.
 
Magnanimity said:
40.png
o_mlly:
"It would be better for that man if he had never been born” (Matt 26:24).
  • Non-existence is better than hell.
  • Annihilation is better than hell.
  • God does not renege.
  • The annihilation of immortal souls is impossible.
  • Hell is the worst possible outcome for immortal souls.
Click to expand...
Wow, so pithy. Very well said.
Click to expand...
And, as it were, completely at odds with philosophical / theological tradition. Non-existence isn’t better than existence, regardless of how the particular existence turns out. Annihilation isn’t better than hell, since it would be ‘non-existence’ and a taking back of the gift of life from God.
40.png
Magnanimity:
I would only add a Cappadocian line of reasoning to it:
  • To reach God, who is without limitations, after aeons spent in Hell and to be restored to a state of mere knowledge of God, rather than participating in His gifts, is better than (neverending) hell
Click to expand...
Apokatastasis was formally condemned as a teaching by the Council of Constantinople. Just sayin’… 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top