www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Reality of Hell

Mr. Horvath:

This is a religious forum and, as such, one expects a certain decorum. Kindly refrain from scatological terminology in future posts.

Thank you.

Edward, deacon, sinner and moderator.

But I think the terminology was eschatological

May the Lord God have mercy upon me a sinner!

Humbly begging forgiveness.

Sincerely,


Mr. Horvath

And I apologize for being provocative.

I remain interested, however, in learning about the perception that other Eastern Catholics/Orthodox (cathechumens) have, substantively, on this issue. AFAIK from checking out Orthodox cathechisms on-line, the teaching is pretty clear on the reality of hell -eternal and torment-filled. It is, at the same tikme, easy to find lots of Universalist essays, full of patristic quotes. Their view is the entire church - except Rome - was universalist, and that the absolute authority of the Pope (ca. 550!) led to the the non-univesalist development of doctrine.

What is the traditional Eastern teaching? What has it been from say, 600 to 1900? Is there presently some neo-patristic wave that is altering this tradition?

Dear djs,

One problem with comparing RC teaching on hell with that of Orthodoxy's is the difference between the experience of hell PRIOR to the Second Coming of Christ.

As Meyendorff commented extensively on the Council of Florence, the big shocker for the Greeks there was that the Latins had a number of categories of the afterlife such as heaven, hell, purgatory and limbo.

So if, according to Latin teaching, one was assigned to hell following the Particular Judgement that occurs after one's personal death, then that is where one would be for all eternity, without any hope of recourse.

But such a finality of judgement for the Orthodox Church would only come at the SECOND coming of Christ when we will be judged as the composite beings we are: body, soul and spirit reunited.

Until such time, everyone in the afterlife has a chance to come closer to God and Christ via purification and the prayer of the Church within the context of the Communion of Saints.

This is, I believe, what Origen meant by "apokatastatis" - not the universal salvation "nomatter what."

Is it possible that, at the end of time, all souls will be saved?

Of course it is, but we cannot know that.

We do know that God allows us the opportunity in this life to achieve union with Him through Christ in the Spirit. We know that the constant prayer of the Church for the dead also avails them.

But no one goes to hell or indeed can go to hell until the Second Coming of Christ.

And then, we shall see . . .

Alex

Alex,

I think the issue is more complex than that. The Latin teaching is that there are two judgements, but both produce the same results. There is the "immediate judgement" which takes place immediately after judgement, and the general judgement which takes place after the parousia.

The general judgement corresponds most closely with the Eastern understanding while the immediate judgement fits the juridic mind of the West.

However, since the West also teaches that God exists outside of time -- there is no difference between the two! The name God used to identify himself to Moses was "I AM" -- an indication of His timelessness. If this is the case (and I believe it is) then God exists in the eternal NOW and, as a consequence, all things are happening NOW for God. This means that the end of time and the creation of the universe are simultaneous events as is the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus. Given this, it follows that there can be no difference between the immediate and the final judgement -- they are the same for they happen simultaneously!

Edward, deacon and sinner

Father Deacon Ed:

Christ is Risen!

Could you explain the final paragraph in your last post again? Your point escapes me (almost) entirely.

In Christ,
Theophilos

Bless me, Father Deacon!

But the point remains, I believe, that there is a finality about the Latin view of the immediate judgement that just doesn't exist in the Orthodox view.

This is why there never was a need in Orthodoxy to develop a doctrine of purgatory.

This is also why, by not understanding the full range of Orthodox eschatology, the Latin West sought to impose its own eschatology, Purgatory et al. on the East.

While there is no time with God, yet there is a sense of "progression" and of deepening union with God through a process in the afterlife by which sinfulness and egotism are progressively stripped off of souls.

That doesn't require "time," but it does require readiness on the part of the soul to accept ever greater degrees of God's love in communion with Him.

As for your last statement, I'm glad I'm not a Roman Catholic . . .

Alex

Christ is Risen!

One other question: Why is it that the possibility of universal salvation is so irksome to many (Western) Christians? Why does the idea of apokatastasis, to which I am most sympathetic, elicit such (for lack of a better term) fundamentalist protestations of "it's in the Bible, for crying out loud!"?

I'm not denying the reality of hell. I'm just wondering why the Creator, who loves his creatures so very much, wouldn't give them every chance -- and then some -- to choose to love Him in return.

1 Cor. 15.21-28: � For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam ALL die, so also in Christ shall ALL be made alive... When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.�

In Christ,
Theophilos

Theophilos:

The final paragraph is an ontological examination of the reality of God. God is timeless, He is not bound by time. We, on the other hand, tend to define much by time -- birth, death, age of maturity, and so on. Things tend to happen in a particular sequence for us -- again, a reference to time.

God, however, created time and so is not bound, or even influenced by time. Thus, the Latin teaching that there is an "immediate judgement" and a "final judgement" is from our POV and not a theological reality for God. God is, ultimately, infinitely simple. This means that for God there is only NOW. No past, no future, just NOW. Therefore, both the "immediate judgement" and the "final judgement" are the same -- how could they be different since both require God's action and God has only NOW?

Edward, deacon and sinner

Alex,

I submit that we are simply dealing with two different expressions of the same reality. What you have called "...a process...by which sinfulness and egotism are...stripped off" is, in fact, what the Latins call Purgatory. These are the same concepts expressed differently.

Yes, the West has "imposed" a view on the East of an exchatalogical reality. Yet, at least with this pope, that imposition seems to be mitigated. There is an understanding that the East has an equally valid theology that is offered to the Universal Church.

Edward, deacon and sinner