Trent's Answer on CAL Atheism May 20 - Trent please see this

[Gorgias]

Let’s face it, if God wanted to He could have given all of us the grace He gave to Mary

Umm… He did. He gives everyone ‘sufficient grace’.

The dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church is that some receive more grace than others.

Hmm… no, that doesn’t sound correct. Efficacious grace isn’t “more grace” than sufficient grace.

Perhaps you can point to what you’re referring to, so that I can understand better what you’re claiming?

To begin the discussion assuming that an all-loving God can give up on me one day is bad theology.

Your take on things is just as bleak as what you claim Augustine’s is. We don’t say that “an all-loving God can give up on” us. Rather, we have a finite time to accept God. If, at the end of that time, we choose not to accept God’s offer, it’s not that he rescinds it – it’s that He respects our decision. But, we’ve been around and around on this one before, so I doubt we’ll come to any resolution. Maybe, this time around, I can just leave it with “your take on things sounds as ridiculous to some as you think Catholic theologians’ take on things sounds”…

for the West, there has been a resurgence of interest in Origen among Latin-rite Catholics, at least in the last 50 years or so.

Given how screwy the state of catechesis has been in the West over the past 50 years, that’s not an assertion that should comfort you.

This statement may have meant that the knowledge of future good or evil actions of a person logically proceeds from God’s decision to create that person.

Ding ding ding!

the unified church of the first millennium, very little is codified regarding Hell, either from the perspective of conciliar decrees or the great creeds. So there is plenty of room for speculation.

That’s an interesting perspective. The Church only “codifies” what is in contention or requires an official intervention. That is well-known. To say “no codified statement == no belief” betrays a misunderstanding of how the Church has operated throughout its history, wouldn’t you say?

 

[Magnanimity]

But again, it’s not like an eternal hell was invented by Augustine.

His contemporary in the east (Chrysostom) seems to have advocated a similar view, true enough. However, the bleak view could not said to be a majority view prior to the late 4th century/early 5th. If anything, it was the other way around (universalist-leanings).

Paul saying certain actions will “not inherit the Kingdom of God” can benefit the idea of an eternal hell as much as universalism, if not more.

On my exposure to universalists, they draw on St Paul quite readily and with no hesitation (eg, the great eschatological passage in 1 Corinthians 15). And those of the Augustinian perspective tend to rely more heavily on the synoptic gospels and Revelation.

My point here is to not think so poorly of Augustine

I’ve read his Confessions in its entirety and it’s truly wonderful stuff. No one poo-poo’s the great saint so much as appreciates his manichean background and how this can easily lead to an us v them (team heaven vs team Hell) eschatological vision. And not to be underappreciated is the enormous influence that St Augustine had on the greatest minds in the Middle Ages in the West. That much cannot be denied. So his great ideas and his less-than-great ideas held much sway over the West for a millennium.

look forward to David Bentley Hart’s book, because at the very least, hopefully it will propel traditional Catholics to consider the topic more deeply

Perhaps. He could be written off as just another Orthodox universalist. Honestly, I continue to find it completely bizarre that some on CAF are adamant to be apologists for the Augustinian vision (which they don’t recognize as so—they just call it “the church’s teaching” on Hell). But I’m glad you’re hopeful. We press on…

 

[RealisticCatholic]

Perhaps. He could be written off as just another Orthodox universalist. Honestly, I continue to find it completely bizarre that some on CAF are adamant to be apologists for the Augustinian vision (which they don’t recognize as so—they just call it “the church’s teaching” on Hell). But I’m glad you’re hopeful. We press on…

If it is true that the A vision does not amount to church teaching, then I at least do not blame the ones on CAF who say so, because even official church teaching documents like the Catechism suggest hell is eternal, etc.

 

[RealisticCatholic]

@Magnanimity

Perhaps your deep interest in this subject is a sign God is calling you to offer your research and knowledge to the church.

Ever consider writing something on this topic from a Catholic perspective? Even a book?

 

[Magnanimity]

That is true. The more reliant one is on the CCC for all of your theological beliefs, the more understanding I am of that person holding to the CCC as the “church teaching.”

Most of what I have tried to do on these forums in every thread on Hell is simply to expose people to the wider picture. I want people to see the heavily Universalist leanings of the patristics end of the major catholic theologians of the 20th century and of the orthodox. My interest is in learning more myself but also in helping others to see the wide variety of perspectives up and down the centuries, east and west on this issue.

In fact, Saint Gregory of Nyssa’s view was so radically different from Saint Augustine‘s That it almost sounds like two different religions. The anthropology and the eschatology of Gregory looks almost nothing like that of Saint Augustine. But who really knows this besides the Orthodox? The Catholic Church, to include myself, have been under exposed to these alternate views. Most of us have simply towed the line of Saint Augustine. I certainly did for many years. I was a good little Thomist.

 

[RealisticCatholic]

I’ll forever have a glass of Thomism. He’s helped me tremendously.

But on hell, hmmm… Maybe there’s more to learn. However, maybe weirdly, I still think Aquinas is on point with his view of human action. But maybe he just didn’t reach the right consistent conclusion, when it comes to someone willingly choosing hell?

Are you aware of anything from the magisterium that suggests a universalist teaching more than the other (“Augustinian” or eternal hell, etc.)?

 

[Magnanimity]

Ever consider writing something on this topic from a Catholic perspective? Even a book?

Let’s write one together! There’s nothing quite like writing to force a person into doing responsible research. Half-measures of research just wont cut it for a publication, you know?

 

[Magnanimity]

I’ll forever have a glass of Thomism. He’s helped me tremendously

Right there with you! :+1:t3:

Are you aware of anything from the magisterium that suggests a universalist teaching more than the other (“Augustinian” or eternal hell, etc.)?

Not the magisterium, per se, but it’s plain to me that recent popes are, if not leaning in a universalist direction, at least advocate something closer to CS Lewis’ vision of Hell (the door is locked from the inside). For example, when writing as Joseph Ratzinger, we read “Christ allocates ruin to no one: he himself is pure salvation, and whoever stands by him stands in the sphere of salvation and grace. The calamity is not imposed by him but exists wherever man has remained distant from him; it arises by continuing to abide with oneself.” J. Ratzinger, Eschatology, CUA Press, p. 205.

 

[Vico]

…

Vico:

The dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church is that some receive more grace than others.

Hmm… no, that doesn’t sound correct. Efficacious grace isn’t “more grace” than sufficient grace.

Perhaps you can point to what you’re referring to, so that I can understand better what you’re claiming?
…

• The degree of justifying grace is not identical in all the just (De fide.)
  (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott, p. 262)
• each one according to his own measure

Council of Trent, Chap. 7. In What the Justification of the Sinner Consists, and What are its Causes

… Finally the unique formal cause is the “justice of God, not that by which He Himself is just, but by which He makes us just” * [can. 10 and 11], that, namely, by which, when we are endowed with it by him, we are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and not only are we reputed, but we are truly called and are just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the “Holy Spirit distributes to everyone as he wills” [1. Cor. 12:11], and according to each one’s own disposition and cooperation.

Can. 10. If anyone shall say that men are justified without the justice of Christ by which He merited for us, or that by that justice itself they are formally just: let him be anathema.

Can. 11. If anyone shall say that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of grace and charity, which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Spirit and remains in them, or even that the grace by which we are justified is only the favor of God: let him be anathema.