Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved 9781586179427

Citation preview

DARE WE HOPE "THAT ALL MEN BE SAVED"?

HANS URS VON BAL THASAR

DARE WE HOPE "THAT ALL MEN BE SAVED''? With a SHORT DISCOURSE ON HELL Translated by Dr. David Kipp and Rev. Lothar Krauth Second Edition

With a Foreword by the Very Rev. Robert Barron

IGNATIUS PRESS

SAN FRANCISCO

Titles of the German originals: Was durfen wir hoffen? © 1986 Johannes Verlag, Einsiedeln and Kleiner Diskurs uber die Holle © 1987, 1999 Schwabenverlag AG, Ostfildem Kleiner Diskurs uber die Holle Apokatastasis: Gastvorlesung an der Theologischen Fakultiit Trier am 1 R. April 1y88 © 1999 Johannes Verlag, Einsiedeln. Freiburg

Cover art: Christ's Descent into Hell (detail) Andrea di Bonaiuto ( 1346-1379) Fresco (post-restoration 2003-2004) Spanish Chapel, S. Maria Novella, Florence, Italy © Scala/ Art Resource, New York Cover design by Roxanne Mei Lum

Foreword© 2014 by I gnatius Press, San Francisco

© 1988, 2014 by Ignatius Press, San Francisco All rights reserved ISBN 978-1-58617-942-7 Library of Congress Control Number 2014939098 Printed in the United States of America @

Dedicated to the Institute for Transitional Studies (ISTRA) in gratitude

EPILOGUE: APOKATASTASIS: UNIVERSAL RECONCILIATION 1. 2.

Definition and Context Possible Responses

I8I 190

FOREWORD by the Very Rev. Robert Barron

It is cunous indeed that a text so often characterized as advocating an easy "universalism" in regard to salvation actually commences with a clear statement that all men stand .under the divine judgment. Whatever else Hans Urs von Balthasar says in this book, the one thing he is quite clearly not saying is that we have certain knowledge that all people will be saved. But he will insist-in fact, it is the gravamen of his argument-that we are. permitted to hope that hell might be empty of men. That this propo­ sition is controversial was evident from the moment this book was published, and it remains evident today. Take even the most cursory look at the extensive and vehe­ ment Internet conversation surrounding this issue if you doubt me._ In the opening pages of his book, Balthasar himself mentions a number of theologians and journalists who dismissed his speculations out of hand, some even questioning his orthodoxy. In very recent times, certain theologians have opined that Balthasar's "universalism" has contributed mightily to the decline of the Church's influence in the West and to an attenuating of her mis­ sionary impulse. In the more popular forums of discussion, one hears that Balthasar's point of view runs counter to the explicit teaching of Jesus and to the witness of many of the saints. lX

X

DARE WE HOPE

How does Balthasar (and how can his advocates today) respond to these criticisms? His first · move is to remind defenders of a crowded hell that the biblical witness in regard to this issue is, to say the least, complex. Along­ side the many references to hell and those who will suffer therein, there are at least as many biblical evocations of universal salvation. To cite simply a few of the best known: "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself " (Jn 12:32); and "He has made known to us . . . the mystery of his will .. . as a plan for the fulness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth" (Eph r:9-10); and of course, "This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (r Tim 2:3-4). That these passages rule out the cer­ titude that many are in hell and justify at least the hope that hell might be empty strikes Balthasar as self-evident. The testimony of the Fathers is, he convincingly shows, just as multivalent and textured. To be sure, Augustine and many of his colleagues in the Christian West advo­ cated the harsh view that the vast majority of men-the massa damnata-will find their way to hell. However, this teaching was countered by many weighty Fathers in the Christian East, including Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus the Confessor and especially Origen of Alexandria, all of whom taught universal salvation, or something quite close to it. It is, therefore, simply not the case that a clear patristic consensus exists around the issue of a crowded hell. Furthermore, practically all the Fathers, both East and West, reject the view that hell-empty or not-is cre­ ated by God. Rather, they hold that it is brought about by sinners themselves, whose resistance to the divine love

FOREWORD

Xl

produces suffering in them. In this context, Balthasar cites C. S. Lewis, who famously argued that the door to hell is locked from the inside by those who, from the bottom of their hearts, want to be left alone. I believe it is fair to say that the recovery of these ele­ ments, brought about through the nouvelle theologie's thorough-going ressourcement, both biblical and patristic, contributed to a development of doctrine in regard to the issue under consideration. Without ever embracing Origen's apokatastasis panton, Balthasar effected a sort of Origenizing of Augustine, a nuancing of the massa dam­ nata . theology that, by the early twentieth century, was found increasingly incredible and, indeed, unscriptural. This development has been rather clearly confirmed in the magisterial teaching of the Church, especially in the Vatican II document Lumen Centium and Pope Benedict's encyclical Spe Salvi, both of which offer interpretations of our question that are infinitely more generous than any­ thing in the Augustinian tradition. The most striking and original contribution that Balthasar makes to this discussion, I believe, is his critique of Thomas Aquinas's view-shared widely in the classical tradition-that part of the joy of heaven is to witness the sufferings of the damned. To this he contrasts the approach of a surprising number of saints and mystics who declared a willingness to suffer · on behalf of a denizen of hell or even, at the limit, to take his place as a gesture of love. The prototype here is Saint Paul himself, who says in the ninth chapter of Romans: "I could wish �hat I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my breth­ ren, my kinsmen according to the flesh" (Rom 9:3). The possibility that his fell ow Jews might be separated from

Xll

DAili WE HOPE

Christ does not awaken in Paul anything even vaguely resembling gloating self-satisfaction, or ·even delight in the divine justice, but rather a mercy that conduces to utter self-sacrifice. Balthasar draws our attention to a number of female mystics who share this Pauline attitude: Mechtilde of Hackeborn, Angela Foligno, Therese of Lisieux and Cath­ erine of Siena. A conversation between Christ and Cath­ erine is especially illuminating. Fired by the hope that all people might be saved, Catherine said to Jesus, "How could I ever reconcile myself, Lord, to the prospect that a single one of those whom you have created in your image and likeness should become lost and slip from your hands." The answer that the Lord gives her, confided to her spir­ itual director Raymond of Capua, is breathtaking: "Love cannot be contained in hell; it would totally annihilate hell." In other words, the love that Catherine is exhibit­ ing, precisely through her hope that all be saved, functions as an antidote to the poison, or, according to her own metaphor, an obstacle to the entrance of hell. She tells her Lord, "If I could remain united with you in love while, at the same time, placing myself before the entrance of hell and blocking it off in such a way that no one could enter, that would be the greatest of joys for me." Stated abstractly and dispassionately-are there many or few :who are saved?-the question remains finally unan­ swerable, and Balthasar acknowledges this. However, Christ's own journey to the limits of godforsakenness, to which the saints just mentioned bore witness, provides ample ground for the hope that all might come to sal­ vation. Because of God's acrobatic display of love-the Son going all the way down to the very bottom of sin

FOREWORD

Xlll

and death and then being drawn back to the Father in the power of the Holy Spirit-we may reasonably hope that even those who have wandered farthest away. from God will be drawn into the dynamics of the divine life. Edith Stein-still another female saint who vibrantly envisioned the possibility of universal salvation-said that human freedom can, in principle, stand definitively athwart God's love; but given what God has accomplished in Christ, it can be, so to speak, "outwitted". I should like to conclude with just a word about the implications of Balthasar's position for mission and evan­ gelization. As I suggested above, some hold that the lively hope for universal salvation would conduce to indifferent­ ism: If all will be saved anyway, why bother with preach­ ing, teaching, going on missionary journeys and so on? But this is so much nonsense. The God of the Bible delights in working through secondary causes. Therefore, the ardent witness of deeply committed evangelists, teachers and mis­ sionaries might well be precisely the means by which God deigns to bring his people to eternal life. The hope for the salvation of all ought not to dampen the missionary spirit but, rather, to stir it up. This is why I believe that this text, much debated from the time of its publication, will prove indispensably important to the task that all of the postconciliar popes have placed before th� Church, namely, the work of the new evangelization.

DARE WE HOPE "THAT ALL MEN BE SAVED"?

Too often we think of hope in too individualistic a· manner as merely our personal salvation. But hope essentially bears on the great actions of God concerning the whole of creation. It bears on the destiny of all humanity. It is the salvation of the world that we await. In reality hope bears on the salvation of all men-and it is only in the measure that I am immersed in them that it bears on me. Jean Cardinal Danielou, S.J. Essai sur le mystere de l'histoire (1953), p. 340 Neither Holy Scripture nor the Church's Tradition of faith asserts with certainty of any man that he is actually in hell. Hell is always held before our eyes as a real possibility, one connected with the offer of conversion and life. The Church's Confession of Faith: A Catholic Catechism for Adults published by the German Bishops' Conference English edition San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1987, p. 346

1.

THE ISSUE AND THE CHARGE

All of us who practice the Christian faith and, to the extent that its nature as a mystery permits, would also like to understand it are under judgment. By no means are we above it, so that we might know its outcome in advance and could proceed from that knowledge to further spec­ ulation. The apostle, who is conscious of having no guilt, does not therefore regard himself as already acquitted: "It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor 4:4). Still, in standing trial, we are not left helpless and disheartened; rather, as that same apostle constantly tells us, we can have confi­ dence ( parrhesia) and hope, since our judge is he who­ as dogm a says-has borne the sins of everyone. Are we therefore quite untroubled in the certainty of our salva­ tion? Surely not, for which man knows whether, in the course of his existence, he has lived up to God's infinite love, which chose to expend itself for him? Must he not, if he is honest and no Pharisee, assume the opposite? In attempting to respond to grace, did he allow God to act through him as God pleased, or did he presume to know better than God and act according to his own pleasure? 1 This section was translated by Dr. David Kipp. 1 In Philippians 2:12-13, Paul says: "Therefore, my.beloved, as you have always obeyed, ... work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." "Fear and trembling" is an Old Testament expression, taken over and used

5

DARE WE HOPE

On the basis of this reverential state of being under judgment, the question arises of just which form and scope Christian hope may, or may not, take. For judg­ ment can be "without mercy" and ominous for those who themselves have been without mercy in life (J as 2: 1 J) but will be merciful (for the Judge is the Savior) for those who, in their own lives, have tried to respond to God's mercifulness: "Mercy triumphs over judgment." That both of these possibilities are kept before our eyes is consistent with God's strategy since the beginning of his Covenant with us: "See, I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil" (Deut 30: I 5); "Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death" (Jer 21:8); "In the path of righteousness is life, but the way of error leads to death" (Prov 12:28 LXX). By way of the New Testament (Mt 7:r3f.; 2 Pet 2:15), this pattern of alternatives found its way into the earli'est Christian writings (Didache I: r; Barn. I 8-20). Man is under judg­ ment and must choose. The question is whether God, with respect to his plan of salvation, ultimately depends, and wants to depend, upon man's choice; or whether his freedom, which wills only salvation and is absolute, four times in the New Testament, for the attitude of the slave or servant before the Lord. Immediately preceding it, there is talk of Christ's taking the form of a servant, so what we have here is a "parenetic application of the Psalm of Christ" (Ernst Lohmeyer, Der Brief an die Philipper, 103). The "obedience" and the "subservience" are most highly motivated, as it is God himself who effects everything in us, both willing and acting, "for his good pleasure". What is spoken of here is deepest reverence, and by no means fearfulness, for the apostle goes on, in the following verses, to urge that all things be done "without grumbling or questioning", so that "you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish" (2:14-15).

THE ISSUE AND THE CHARGE

7

might not remain above things human, created and, therefore, relative. One can also approach this in another way, and we will see that Anselm does so: assuming that men can be divided into those who are just and those who are unjust, can one likewise, then, divide the divine qualities in such a way as to leave mercy on one side and (punitive) justice on the other? And since the two cannot, as on Calderon's stage, enter into noble competition with each other, it will prob­ ably have to be as described in a Spanish work on dogmat­ ics: "A healing punishment issues from sheer mercy" (this probably refers to Purgatory); "a vengeful punishment [poena vindicativa] from pure justice, and this corresponds strictly to the offense" (this refers to hell). 2 Thus, where God's mercy (which is obviously taken as finite here) wears thin, it remains for "pure justice" to exert itself Now, since precisely this sort of assumption that" divine qualities are finite is not acceptable, a dispute arises about whether one who is under judgment, as a Christian, can have hope for all men. I ventured to answer this affirmatively and was, as a result, call�d to order rather brusquely by the editor of Fels (G. Hermes);3 in Theologisches, Heribert Schauf and Johannes Bokmann added their voices to this reprimand; 4 Jose F. Sagiies, De Novissimis, in Sacrae Theologiae Summa, vol. 4 (Madrid, 1953), p. 930. J Gerhard Hermes, "1st die Holle leer?", Der Fels I 5 (Sept. I 984): 350-56; "Hoffimng auf das Heil aller? Bei H. U. von Balthasar nichts Neues", Der Fels (Nov. 1984): 3 16-20. I will use a, band c to identify the page columns. 4 Heribert Schauf, "Die ewige Verwerfung in neueren und alteren kirchlichen Verlautbarungen", Theologisches 178 (1985): 6253-58; "Selbst­ verzehru ng des Bosen? Einige Fragen an H. U. von Balthasar und seinen 2

8

DARE WE HOPE

the concerns of these latter two will be considered mainly in the next-to-last chapter here. At a · press conference in Rome, besieged about the question of hell, I made known my views, which led to gross distortions in the news­ papers ("L'inferno e vuoto"), whereupon I published, in fl Sabato, that Kleine Katechese uber die Holle (Short Discourse on Hell), which was reprinted in L ' Osservatore Romano without my knowledge and aroused the ire of the right­ wing papers.5 Kommentar zur Apokalypse des hl. Johannes", Theologisches 1 78 ( 1985): 6394-96 (cols. a, b). The most energetic representative of the position taken by both journals is probably Wilhelm Schamoni (already in "Die Zahl der Erwahlten", 1965; most recently, "Gehen viele verloren?", in Theologischer Ruckblick (Abensberg: Verlag ]. Kral, 1980), pp. 39-54. Here, on the basis of a huge number of colorfully varied authors, it is claimed that: ( r ) hell is an incomprehensible mystery of faith and cannot be under­ stood by reason; (2) the Church, "from her earliest days onward", has said that "the greater portion of men are lost", and, although "in the last centuries" the opinion has been pennitted that "the greater portion of mankind are saved", the proposition that "by far the greater portion are saved" has been "wholly and utterly rejected". Schamoni rightly says that "divine righteousness [manifests] exactly the same infinite worth as does his love"-1 will return to this question in my final chapter-but to draw on I Corinthians r : I 9 in concluding from this that God's "folly", which is wiser than "the wisdom of the wise'' , refers not only to "the word of the Cross but also to a crucifying word like Matthew 7= r 4'' is probably not in keeping with Paul's view. 5 Schauf, "Die ewige Verwerfung", 62586: " It was surprising that L' Os'servatore Romano published this questionable article by von Balthasar. Did that happen with the agreement of the Sacred Congregation?" Bok­ mann expresses the same surprise "that a Church authority that has, up to now, functioned commendably in presenting good material should issue this problematical commentary" (ibid. , 63946). There is a reference to the "very apposite" article by Hermes in Fels. The eye of the Inquisition remains fixed upon me: "We will be giving further attention to the topic and the arguments of von Balthasar" (63946). The surprise of both these

THE ISSUE AND THE CHARGE

9

Bokmann is perfectly correct: "If one were certain of attaining the ultimate goal no matter what, a quite essential motivation to conversion and absolute Chris­ tian resolve would be lost. " 6 However, I never spoke of certainty but rather of hope. The three critics, by con­ trast, possess a certainty, and G. Hermes expresses it with matchless force: "Such a hope does not exist, because we cannot hope in opposition to certain knowledge and the avowed will of God" (3 1 8b). It is impossible that "we can hope for something about which we know that it will certainly not come about" (ibid.). Therefore, the closing sent�nce of the essay declares tersely: "There is no hope for the salvation of all" (320a). If I speak "no less than five times" of the fully real possibility, which confronts every person, of forfeiting salvation, the retort I get is that the matter is "not" treated "seriously by putting on a stern face but by stating the entire and full truth. And the full truth about hell is not stated if one only speaks of its possibility . . . and not of its reality. " At this point, a first paradoxical statement occurs: "If we once admit that it is really and seriously possible, even considering all the opposing _ arguments, that men are damned, then there is also no convincing argument against men's really being damned" (320a). This is not comprehensible to me: if God sets the "two ways" before Israel, does it necessarily follow that Israel will choose the way of ruin? There was certainly no lack of seriousness behind the presentation of

journals shows that they have never given any attention to my lengthier publications, in which they could surely have long since found hundreds of pieces of firewood for my stake. · 6 Theolog isches 1 78 (1985): 6394b.

DARE WE HOPE

IO

the two ways . But G. H ermes, of course, knows that the possibility is reality; he is not the only one , as we will see, who knows this . Just how will become evident from what follows here . But first one other regrettable thing: as a consequence of not sharing in this secure knowledge-and R . Schnack­ enberg, for instance, does not share in it when he says of Judas Iscariot that it "is not certain that he is damned for all eternity"7-one is then numb ered among those "average Catholics" (2 5 6a) who veil the hereafter in a "rose-red fog" and "wishful fancies" (2 5 2a) , participate "irresponsibly and cruelly" in " operation mollification" (2 5 6c) through their "salvation-optimism" (2 5 6b) , adopt the " dull and colorless garrulousness of present-day Church discourse" (2 5 3 a) , practice " modernistic theology" (2 5 0b) and call for "pre­ sumptuous trust in God's mercifulness " (2 5 3 a) . So be it; if I have been cast aside as a hopeless conservative by the tribe of the left,- then I now know what sort of dung-heap I have been dumped upon by the right. But -back to mat­ ters of substance. We are not allowed to have hope for all men . But perhaps for certain individuals, and if so, for which ones? Now comes a second paradox from G . H ermes: "We can well . . . hope for every [!] individual [!] man and pray that he attains salvation, because [?] we do not know what j ud�ent God will pass upon him. But we cannot hope that all men will enter heaven, b ecause that is expressly excluded through revelation" (3 I 8b) . Let us, however, leave the paradoxical admission aside and attend s olely to the end of the sentence, which at last reveals the s o urce of 7

LThK, 2nd ed., 8:662.

THE lSSUE AND THE CHARGE

II

the critic's "certain knowledge". It is, of course, the texts in the New Testament, which in fact contain sufficiently abundant talk of hellfire (Mt 5: 22, 29f; 10: 28; 23:33), of the "outer darkness" (Mt 8: 12; 22: 11ff.; 25:30), of eter­ nal punishment (Mt 2 5 : 46), of the unquenchable fire (Mk 9: 43) and, abundantly in Revelation, of the lake of fire (19: 20, 20: 10; 21 :8). Not only are there threatening words from Jesus-such as those against the unrepentant cities (Mt 1 l : 2 off.), the blasphemers against the Holy Spirit (Mt 12:31), the unmerciful servant, the evil vineyard-tenants and the worthless servant (Mt 18: 21ff.; 21:33ff.; 25:30)­ but also, it would appear, a correct account of what will take place at the Last Judgment, when the Judge, with a Michelangelesque gesture (in the Sistine Chapel), sends the evildoers away from him: "Depart from me . . . into the eternal fire, . . . into eternal punishment" (Mt 25:41, 46); and finally: "I never knew you" (Mt T 23; 25:12). Does not all that suffice for providing "certain knowledge" ? Now there is, of course, in the same New Testament, another series of statements, to be discussed later here, statements that appear to hold out the prospect of univer­ sal redemption. With as much clarity as could be desired, it is said that God's will for salvation applies to all men; that the Church should therefore pray for all men, especially since Christ gave himself as a ransom for all (1 Tim 2:1-6); that the Johannine Jesus who has "power over all flesh" (17: 2), raised on the Cross, "will draw all men" to him­ self (12: 3 2); that the grace of Christ takes clear precedence over the transgression of Adam (Rom 5: 12-21); that "God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all" (Rom 11 :32); and so forth. I will return to these passages later.

12

DARE WE HOPE

For the moment, only two things. I � ave (as every reader can establish) brought out that the threatening remarks are made predominantly by the pre-Easter Jesus, and the uni­ versalist statements (above all in Paul and John) with a view to the redemption that has occurred on the Cross ( that there are post-Easter remarks of a threatening nature-for exam­ ple, 2 Thess 1 : 6(; Heb 4:5ff.; 1 0:26ff.; and so forth-is not surprising: the "two ways" are always before man). What we have here are two series of statements that, in the end, because we are under judgment, we neither can nor may bring into synthesis. In view of this situation, I am accused of speaking about a "progressive revelation even within the New Testament" (317b), and this "auxiliary construct" is therefore found "unworkable and inappropriate" (3 I 8a), because, it is said, the words of the pre-Easter Jesus are reflected in the post-Easter situation and possess the same inspired dignity as the statements of Paul and john. I have never even dreamed of denying this. But what is at issue here is not at all the question of inspiration but rather the simple insight that the pre-Easter Jesus lives toward his "hour", when his earthly downfall will be transformed into the full "overcoming of the world" (see Jn 1 6:33) and whe_n, for the first time, through the Passion and Resurrec­ tion of the Son, the Father will have spoken all of his Word to the end, which only then, through the Holy Spirit, will become understandable to the disciples and subsequently to the entire believing Church. In no way does this mean that the words and deeds of the pre-Easter Jesus are deval­ ued; but, rather, they are given their proper place within the totality and unity of the Word of God. And this leads to the second thing. I spoke of leaving open the cleft between the two series of statements. It is

THE ISSUE AND THE CHARGE

13

not for man, who is under jud gment, to construct syntheses here, and above all none of such a kind as to subsume one series of statements under the other, practically emascu­ lating the universalist ones because he believes himself to have "certain knowledge" of the potency of the first. If he does this, then those frightful theological speculations arise of which we are given an example in G. Hermes: certain "passages could, however, be understood in the sense of hope for all" if we did not have the texts of the first series. "The Church has always distinguished between God's conditional will for salvation, which 'wants all men- to be blessed'-under certain conditions !-and his absolute will for salvation, which assuredly destines cer­ tain individual men, post praevisa merita, for salvation. In this sense, and in it only, are the two seemingly opposed statements of revelation to be harmonized" (3 r 7c-3 r8a). But who, then, has asked you to harmonize here? And the "Church" that "has always distinguished" is not the Magisterium, but theologians of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, admittedly on the basis of a certain Tradition, which, as we will see, has long thought itself to know too much about the outcome of judgment. We might, how­ ever, make quite clear to ourselves how outrageous it is to blunt God's triune will for salvation, which is directed at the entire world ("God wants all men to be blessed"), by describing it as "co�ditional" and calling absolute only that divine will in which God allows his total will for sal­ vation to be thwarted by man. The theologians will have no rest until, having fragmented God's _will for salvation, they press on to the notion of a "twofold predestination" (namely, of men to heaven and to hell, post, or ultimately also ante, praevisa merita) as something already split from

I4

DARE WE HOPE

the beginning, whose truly tragic, if no� grotesque, history occupied a host of medieval provincial councils (Orange 2 , Quiercy 1 , Lyons, Valence, Quiercy 2 , Langres, Savon­ nieres, Toucy; Valence had to confess that "many brothers" "took no slight offense" at the question of predestination: DS 62,5), then became obscured behind a thicket of dis­ tinctions in High Scholasticism� but reemerged overpow­ eringly in the age of the Reformation and J ansenism and was beaten down as insolvable in the Catholic disputations de auxiliis (on the ways in which God's grace works). And that happened quite rightly so. How little, to be sure, the situation was brought to an end by this cessation of Scholastic disputation, how exis­ tentially the rending of God's will for salvation into two parts-or, if one likes, the splitting of the divine quali­ ties into "sheer mercy" and "sheer justice"-was able to torture the most profound Christian souls, is shown by the tragic picture that G. Hermes paints, quite truly, of the great and estimable Cardinal Newman. Newman, too, stands in the tradition that, on the one hand, wants to be unconditionally true to God's Word-with respect to both its highest promises and its most serious threats­ yet, on the other hand, nevertheless already knows the outcome of judgment and therefore struggles to achieve a synthesis that cannot be brought about. As long as he struggles in existential uncertainty for his own salvation, everything is all right, although this struggle clothes itself in the formulas of predestination: "Thou hast seen me, 0 my God, from all eternity. Thou seest distinctly, and ever hast 8

See the short summary by Johann Auer, "Pradestination", LThK, 2nd ed., 8:662-68.

THE ISSUE AND THE CHARGE

I5

seen, whether I am to be saved or to be lost. Thou seest my history through all ages in heaven or in hell. O awful thought! My God, enable me to bear it, lest the thought of Thee confound me utterly; and lead me forward to sal­ vation" (252c). 9 At bottom, this struggle is authentically Christian, but it is already clouded over with knowing too much about God's judgment. This already finds expression in the lament: "In vain does Christ Himself declare, that broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be that go in thereat" (252b); 1 0 the destruction is, of course, hell. What, now, does Newman know? We are but a few in number, and they are many; . . . 0 misery of miseries! Thousands are dying daily; they are waking up into God's everlasting wrath, . . . and their companions and friends are going on as they did, and are soon to join them. As the last generation presumed, so does the present. The father would not believe God could punish, and now the son will not believe; the father was indignant when eternal pain was spoken of, and the son gnashes his teeth, and smiles contemp­ tuously . . . myriads . . . like the herd of swine, falling headlortg down the steep ! 0 mighty God! 0 God of love! it is too much! (256ab) 1 1 9John Henry Cardinal Newman, "The Infinite Perfection of God", Meditations and Devotions of the Late Cardinal Newman (London: Longmans Green, 1893), p. 415. 10 John Henry Cardinal Newman, "Faith and the World", Sermons Bearing on Subjects of the Day (London, Oxford and C�mbridge: Rivingtons, I 873), p. 92. 11 "Neglect of Divine Calls and Warnings", Discourses A ddressed to Mixed Congregations, Birmingham Oratory Millennium Edition, vol. 6 (Notre Dame, Ind. : Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 2003), p. 43-

DARE WE HOPE

16

Of course it is too much. But if someone thus sees man­ kind as a massa damnata from the outs�t, how can he still adhere to the effective truth of Christ's statement that, on the Cross, he will draw all men to himself ? The result, therefore, can only be a sort of despairing squirm at the sight of the Cross. The interrupted text goes on to say: "It broke the heart of Thy sweet Son Jesus to see the misery of man spread out before His eyes. He died by it as well as for it. " 1 2 (How does Newman know this-that Jesus died on the Cross not only for all sinners, which is dogma, but also because he was incapable of redeeming them, since .hell was and will remain stronger than he is?) "And we · too, in our measure, our eyes ache, and our hearts sicken, and our heads reel, when we but feebly contemplate it. 0 most tender heart of Jesus, why wilt Thou not end, when wilt Thou end, this ever-growing load of sin and woe? When wilt Thou chase away the devil into his own hell, and close the pit's mouth, that Thy chosen may rejoice in Thee, quitting the thought of those who perish in their wilfulness?'' 1 3 (Should, then, the chosen be able to rejoice in heaven because they have been relieved of the memory of their friends-and which man is not my friend?-who are languishing in hell?) And when Newman closes his ser­ mon with the prospect of joy and, with the Psalm, calls all peoples to rejoice because God " [doth] judge the people in equity, and [doth] direct the nations" : 1 4 Are not here broken threads tied unconvincingly together with words from Scripture? After this kind of theology of the Cross, Ibid. , pp. 43-44. Ibid. 14 Ibid.

12 1

J

THE I SSUE AND THE CHARGE

I7

where is any room left for rejoicing? On his earthly pil­ grimage, man is, of course, placed between fear and hope, simply because he is under judgment and does not know; I will return to this later. But precisely the knowing (about the ultimate futility of the Cross) renders impossible this state of suspension of those on pilgrimage. The solution is presented with great clarity by Josef Pieper in his book on hope: "There are two kinds of hope­ lessness. One is despair; the other, praesumptio. Praesump­ tio is a perverse anticipation of the fulfillment of hope. Despair is also an anticipation-a perverse anticipation of the nonfulfillment of hope: 'to despair is to descend into hell' (Isidore of Seville)", 1 5 or simply: knowing in advance that despair will be something final. This double praesump­ tio, as anticipation of judgment, will be the great shadow that, from a certain point in time onward, will cast itself over the history of the Church and of theology. The chap­ ter after the next will deal with that, but first it is necessary to take a brief look at the New Testament-a look that makes no claim to completeness, since exhaustive studies are sufficiently available. 1 6

s Fai th, Hope, Love, trans. Richard and Clara Winston and Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S. N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1 997) , p. I 1 3. (Praesumptio is usually translated as presumption, although translation as anticipation not only is more literal but also catches the sense quite precisely.�TRANS . ) 16 It suffices to refer to the comprehensive monograph by Karl Matthaus Woschitz, Elpis, Ho.ffnung: Geschichte, Philosophie, Exegese, Theologie eines Schlusselbegriffs (Vienna, Freiburg and Basel: Herder, 1 979); 773 P - with a comprehensive bibliography, but unfortunately lacking an index. 1

2.

THE NEW TESTAMENT

It is generally known that, in the New Testament, two series of statements run along side by side in such a way that a synthesis of both is neither permissible nor achiev­ able: the first series speaks of being lost for all eternity; the second, of God's will, and ability, to save all men. Before approaching particular texts, it is necessary to consider the fact that particular words of Jesus can be attributed with a high degree of probability to the pre-Easter Jesus, because in them he uses a language and images that were familiar to the Jews of that time (which does not mean, of course, that these texts, which have been preserved by the synoptic evangelists, are of lesser significance to us), whereas certain reflections by Paul and John clearly look back upon all that happened to Jesus-to his life, deat_ h on the Cross and Resurrection-and, in so doing, consider and formulate this totality from a post-Easter perspective. That this distinction can be drawn only with caution, and not categorically, is obvious from the well-known fact that the synoptics, too, present Jesus' words and deeds in the religious light shed by the post­ Easter situation, from a clear awareness that all the words of Jesus that were preserved-even those that are very hard to understand-will remain relevant to the Church throughout all time. 18

THE NEW TESTAMENT

I9

The Jesus who spoke of God's judgment to the Jews always represented this, in keeping with their understand­ ing, as a trial with a twofold outcome. This is clearly evident from the great portrayal of jud gment in Matthew 2 5 , with which the evangelist concludes Jesus' sayings, although it should be noted that the Old Testament framework (that of the distinction between "my Father's kingdom" and "the eternal fire prepared for the devil") encloses an image that is fully of the New Testament, namely, the identifica­ tion of Jesus with the least of his brethren. From the stand­ point of this new motif, however, the Old Testament and late J �wish images also take on a far more radical hue than they had even for the Jews: insofar as Jesus (in place of the traditional Sheol) opens up the prospect of heaven as an eternal abiding with God, the opposed notion, for which he uses traditional images like that of "gehenna" and the "worm [that] shall not die" (a later addition in Is 66:24), becomes far more frightening. And Jesus' threat that the sin against the Holy Spirit will not be pardoned even in the life to come (this sin can have different motivations in Mark 3:29 and in Luke 12:r of.) points to something deeper than the agonies expressed in physical images, such as the oft-repeated one by Matthew of the "outer dark­ ness" in which "weeping and gnashing of teeth" prevail (Mt 8:12; 13:42, 50; 22:51; 25:30). Since Jesus is concerned with a wholly different love than the previously under­ stood kind-the love with which God the Father loves men and which should be taken as a model for men­ anyone who describes his brother as "godless" and wishes, in so doing, to exclude him from communion with God is consigned to the "fire of hell" . The same thing is threat­ ened for the unrepentant cities that scorn Jesus' miracles

DARE WE HOPE

20

(Mt I 1 :2 1 ff), and the same for him who does not forgo his bodily members in order to avoid' offense or sin. The prison into which the unmerciful man is thrown until he has paid all that he owes (Mt 5:25f; 1 8:34) need not be eternal hell. But before the God who conclusively forces the believer to choose, and who therefore has the power to cast him, body and soul, into gehenna-before him, men should feel holy fear (Mt I 0:28 par). Everywhere in the writings of the. synoptic evangelists, the main concern is the requirement for sympathetic understanding and for emulation of absolute and unrelenting love as Jesus himself exemplifies this in his love of God and of his neighbor, indeed, as he conclusively formulates it in a central, two­ fold command (Mt 22:3 7-40 par); as I said, the closing portrayal by Matthew (25:31-46) is at heart nothing but the definitively valid requirement behind this command, and indeed, in the sense that love for Christ' the "King" (v. 34) is measured by love as shown in practice for our fel­ lowmen, who stand in need of help and love in many and varied respects (vv. 40, 45). Even if this scene is described, in line with OId Testament images of trial and on the basis of the unrelentingness of the New Testament either-or, as a judgment with a twofold outcome, it is "not to be read as a preview of something which will exist some day. Insofar as it is a report, it is rather a disclosure of the situation in which the persons addressed are actually to be found. They are placed before a decision of which the consequences are irrevocable. They can be lost for ever if they reject God's offer of salvation." 1 The late text that is appended to the Karl Rabner, "Hell", in Encyclopedia of Theology, the Concise Sacramen­ tum Mundi (New York: Seabury Press, 1975), p. 603 (emphases mine). 1

THE NEW TESTAMENT

21

Gospel according to Mark will have to be understood no differently: " He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" (Mk 1 6 : 1 6). That, too, is not a report but, rather, reflects one's final placement in the position of having to decide. 2 That the second, more "post-Easter" series of texts might be able to be separated cleanly from the first is refuted by-in addition to what was said above-the fact that Paul repeatedly speaks of judgment by Christ or God ( 1 Cor 4: 1 ff. ; Rom 1 4: 1 0) , which every individual must pass through as through fire and whose outcome Regarding Matthew 25, it should be added that Jesus is speaking to Jews who know no other form of divine jud gment than one with a two-sided outcome, which means that it is not the framework of the parable that is new, but, above all, the picture that it frames: the basis of judgment. New Testament morality means that doing or not doing to one's neighbor is acting or not acting with respect to Christ himself 2 Even less will it do to read the visionary images of Revelation as a "report" on God's historical and end-historical judgments (as is done by H. Schauf). It also cannot simply be designated-as is done by Gerhard Hermes in "Ist die Holle leer?" , Der Fels 1 5 (Sept. 1984): 319b-as "post­ Easter" in nature, for, although it is the "Book of the Lamb" , Old and New Testament somehow have equal weight in it. This is not only because the requisites for the temple are in heaven; because two times twelve elders stand before God (twelve tribes, twelve apostles, and again in the structure of the heavenly Jerusalem); but primarily because the form of vision found in Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Zechariah is integrated into and fulfilled through that of the seer on Patmos. And certainly everything negative that is found in creation-whether it be symbols, like the three beasts or the whore of Babylon; or universal realities, like "Death and Hades" (Rev 20: 14); or negatively characterized living beings (he whose "name was not found written in the book of life", 20: 15; 2 1 :8)-is consigned in common to the "second death"; but precisely this comprehensive extirpation of all that stands opposed to God should warn of the need for utmost caution and forbid any application to the ultimate fate of particular individuals. The eighth chapter of this book will return to this point.

22

DARE WE HOPE

is not simply fixed even for Paul: although he himself is not conscious of having any blame·, he is still not justi­ fied because of that: "It is the Lord who judges me" (1 Cor 4: 3-4). That I Corinthians I I : 32 ("But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened so that we may not, be condemned along with the world") implies, not a final separation between good and evil, but rather a judg­ ment of grace and one of "wrath" alludes to the situation at the beginning of the Letter to the Romans, in which Gentiles and Jews are subject in common to a judgm ent of wrath (Rom 3:9), something that does not preclude God's ultimately having "consigned all men to disobe­ dience, that he may have mercy upon all" (Rom I I :32). The enduring gravity of the situation emerges perhaps most clearly in the threats contained in the Letter to the Hebrews, which seems to despair of salvation for those who are not satisfied with the faith of Christ and fall away from it-however, after the offering up of his Son, God has no other grace to confer (6:4-8; rn:26-3 1), although a word of consolation and encouragement is always added to these most extreme threats (6:9ff.; 10:32ff.). The same thing must be said about the passage on judgment in the Gospel according to John (5:28f.), which supplements other, opposing words-to be discussed shortly here­ and yet, in the logion about condemnation not by Jesus but by his word on the Last Day (12:48), both are left hanging in the balance. Now, this does not hinder the fact that the universalist series of texts possesses an ineradica­ ble gravity. The "all" that recurs again and again in them cannot be limited to a merely "objective redemption" that would simply leave open the matter of acceptance by particular subjects. If it is said of God that: "God our

THE NEW TESTAMENT

23

Savior . . . desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:4-5), then this is the reason for the fact that the Church should make "supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanks­ givings . . . for all men" (1 Tim 2:1), which could not be asked of her if she were not allowed to have at least the hope that prayers as widely directed as these are sensible and might be heard. 3 If, that is, she knew with certainty 3A

few litu rgical prayers can clarify the C hurch 's understanding:

Fath er, y o u sent y ou r angel to C o rnelius, t o show him the way to salvati o n. Help u s to w o rk genero usly for the salvati o n o f the wo rld so that y o ur C hu rch may bring us and all mankind into your pres­ ence. Grant this thr o ugh C hrist o ur L o rd. Liturgy o f the H o urs, Tuesday, Week III, Midaftemo o n Prayer Father, y o u are the source o f the life that your So n, Jesus Christ, secured for us in his death and his Resurrecti o n. Receive us and all men into th e sacrifice o f redempti o n and sanctify us in the blo od o f y o ur S o n, wh o lives with yo u and h as d omini o n in all eternity. Offerto ry Prayer 8 L o rd, accept the o ffering of yo ur C hu rch; and may what each indi­ vidual o ffers up to the ho n o r o f y o ur name lead to the salvati o n o f all. F o r this we pray t o y o u thro ug h C hrist our L o rd. Weekday Mass I, Tuesday, Offert ory Prayer L o rd our G o d, at the altar we co mmemorate the immeasurable love o f yo ur S o n. Let his redemptive w o rk bec o me fruitful t hrou gh the service of the C hurch for the entire wo rld. For this we pray thro ugh Christ o ur Lord. Weekday Mass IV, Wednesday, Offert o ry Prayer Hidden G o d, . .. we thank y o u for y our patience. . . . Make us recep­ tive to y ou . Let the whole o f forl orn mankind find its way to you. F o r this we pray throug h Jesus Christ . .. Co llect 22

24

DARE WE HOPE

that this hope was too widely directed, then what is asked of her would be self-contradictory." The same letter says once again, in verse 4: 1 o, "We have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially Lord, holy Father, almighty and eternal God. For just as through your beloved Son you created the human race, so also through him with great goodness you formed it anew. Weekday Preface III There are theological truths and circumstances-in this case, the situations of the "lost" [apollumenoi]-that cannot be subjects of dogmatic statement but only contents of prayer. Nothing prevents one from beseeching in prayer that those who have rejected Christ might themselves not be rejected, that their histories might continue together with God in eternity, and that the boundlessness of eternal love should not draw back even before them. Only in that case can the speculative question about the how-whether it is answered through the Descensus ad inferos or however-be left out of consid­ eration, while any attempt to formulate a dogmatic proposition here would immediately lead to a profusion of supplementary hypotheti­ cal theses. At the next moment, we would already find ourselves in the midst of fantasy and the manipulation of heavenly-hellish stage sets. But prayer for the apollumenoi can leave the legitimacy of the requested goal and the means to its attainment up to the hands to which this request has been entrusted. For this request, like all oth­ ers, is included under the general proviso: "Thy_ will be done." This - proviso is a declaration of trust. Helmut Thielicke, Der evangelische Glaube vol. 3, Theologie des Geistes (Tiibingen, 1978), pp. 6 1 0f. To the question of whether we may pray, not only liturgically but also as individuals, for all men, Suarez at first gives the traditional answer: "Yes, certainly, since on earth we cannot distinguish the electi from the rep robi. But what if God should reveal to someone that a certain person is damned?" (One would like to ask Suarez whether there has ever been, or will ever be, such a revelation.) Then it would still have to be asked whether God's decision was taken ante p raevisa demerita (which does not obtain) or, again,

THE NEW TESTAMENT

25

[ malista] of those who believe" , which expresses a univer­ sal law of which those belonging to the house of God may assure themselves in a special way. The already cited con­ cluding statement from the Pauline theology of history points in the same direction, announcing God's mercy to all sinners, whether they be Christians, Jews or Gentiles. " For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men" (Tit 2 : 1 1 ) , according to God's will "to recon­ cile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven" (Col I : 20) , since God has decided "to unite all things in him" (Christ) as the head (Eph 1 : 1 0). The same tendency is present in the texts that proclaim that, because Christ died for all out of divine love, therefore "all have died" , with the result that no one may live any longer for himself (2 Cor 5 : 1 4f) , indeed, objectively put: "None of us lives in a way such that the one concerned would, in accordance with his pres­ ent condition, have to meet ruin. "We may pray for him out of the simple disposition to love, in which, as far as we are able, we yearn and plead that God might grant him every assistance that, if God so wishes, will lead him to salvation. " But does God so wish? That is demonstrated sufficiently by I Timothy 2: "God . . . desires all men to ·be saved. " Here we see that God's disposition to love aims at the salvation of all men without exception, and therefore our prayer, which arises from the same disposition to love, aligns itself with the divine will. And thus each prayer, for this assistance, is always appropriate, even in the face of any revelation no matter what its content. Christ himself gives us the example indicating that all men must be prayed for; it was, after all, for all men that he died. Love obliges us to love all those who are in serious distress and stand in need of God's help, for all are in this situation and can avail themselves of this help as long as they are in this life. And God, for his part, is prepared to grant it to all. De oratione, treatise 4, I, 1, c. 1 5; vol. 14 of the Vives edition (Paris, 1 859), pp. 57-6 1

DARE WE HOPE

to himself, and none of us dies to himself ", for, through his Passion and Resurrection, Christ became Lord "both of the dead and of the living" (Rom 14:7-9); he pos­ sesses, as "the Alpha and the Omega", "the first and the last, and the living one . . . the keys of Death and Hades" (Re¥ 2 2 : 1 3; 1 : 1 8). As the reason for God's patience with man, through which jud gment is delayed, the following is given: God does not wish "that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Pet 3:9). In any case, Christ's redemptive act is universal: just as surely as "it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment", so surely did Christ once sacrifice himself to take away the sins of all . Once again, distinctions could be brought in here: between an absolute and a conditional will for salvation on the part of God, between an objective redemption through Christ and its subjective acceptance. But at least two texts remain above and beyond such dis­ tinctions. The- first is the Pauline series of texts, repeated in a litanylike way, in which all men stemming from the old Adam sinned and were destined to death and damna­ tion, whereas, through the expiatory death of the second Adam, "the grace of God . . . abounded" much more for all. The word "all" is repeated seven tim_es,4 and the pre­ dominance of grace is further emphasized by the fact that law led to an increase in trespass, while grace "abounded" all t_he more through this added hindrance (Rom 5 : 1 22 1 ) . The whole passage gradually intensifies into a true hymn of triumph in which, through a continual "much

The word "all" is repeated seven times in the German translation of Scripture being used by von Balthasar; it is repeated five times in the English translation of the second Catholic edition of the Revised Standard Version.-TRANS. 4

THE NEW TESTAMENT

27

more", the surpassed state of balance that distinguished the previous, two-sided judgment rises to a perduring "all the more", "above and beyond everything" . If one casts a glance over to John from here, what dominates for him is the ring of the universal words: "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself " ( 1 2:32). At first, this "all" seems to be restricted to those whom the Father has given to the Son: "All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day" (6:37-39). But can this "all" really be restricted if the high-priestly prayer stresses that the Father has given the Son ''power over all flesh" ( 1 7:2)? Certainly man's believing response, and along with this the crisis that runs through the whole of the Gospel according to John, is always tied into this uni­ versality of the divine will for salvation (3: 1 6; 5:24; 6:40; 1 7:6). Still, the proposition rises above the theme that runs through all of John's Gospel: that of crisis. As in the case of Paul, this theme is not simply to be subsumed under the universal statement that is suggested by other sayings as well ("Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world" [ 1 6:33]), although both .themes are, no doubt, to be seen together as a unity: first, God's love that, in Christ's Pas­ sion, extends all the way "to the end" ( 1 3: 1 )-and is, from this point of view, the deepest sense of "truth", namely, the representation of God the Father as he is in himself through the Son who attests to him ("For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son" for it [3:·1 6] ); and, second, the uncondition_al necessity for

28

DARE W E H OPE

accepting this truth of love, seeing its magnificence and responding to it through complete devotedness to one's brethren ("and we ought to . . . " [ I Jn 3 : I 6]). Love itself, as the utmost gift, is also the utmost demand, as is clearly shown by the drama of the eucharistic words of promise: because Jesus' unbounded self-sacrifice is "the truth", it must be accepted (in "faith") if one does not want to stray outside of the area of truth into that of the "lie" (Jn 8: 5 5) or of "murderous" hate (8: 44; I Jn 3 :8- 1 2). Love itself is crisis: to the extent that it is truth, it contains justice within itself, which is why Jesus, in his disputations with those lacking in love, can just as well say that he (as love) "judges not" as that he (as truth) "judges". He judges, however, only insofar as anyone who persists in darkness does not himself want to come into the light (3 :20) and thereby, in view of God's proclaimed word of love, judges himself ( 1 2 : 48). Thus, the words about resurrection to life and to judgment in John 5 :28-29, whose authenticity has been variously doubted, need only be placed in this context in . order to be comprehensible. There is nowhere any talk of "eternal rejection", although the threatening warning in the phrases beginning with "if " or "unless" rings out constantly: "For you will die in _ your sins unless you believe that I am he" (8:24), and so on. The crisis runs (as, by the way, it also does in the synoptics, for example, Mk 2 : I fT.; Lk 7 :36ff.) right through the middle of the conversion story (Jn 9:39, with the characteristic word "if " at the end [v. 4 1 ] ); but, at the same time, the whole of the Gospel is woven through with forms of a faith that is developing and on its way (as with Nicode­ mus, the adulterous woman, the astonished officers of the chief priests and Pharisees [7 : 4 5 f.]), which means that talk

THE NEW TEST AMENT

29

of a J ohannine "dualism" is totally misplaced. One might much sooner speak of a type of monism, because "judg­ ment" is nothing other than love (and love is "truth"). That applies also to the function of the Holy Spirit in " convincing" the world of the truth of Christ ( 1 6 : 8) , since he is, after all, "the Spirit of truth" , who guides us " into all the truth" of Christ and the Father ( 1 6 : 1 3- 1 5 ) . I f, in the high-priestly prayer, which aims at gathering "everything" through ever-widening circles into the trinitarian unity of love, the prayer is not "for the world" ( 1 7 : 9) , we need to consider the twofold meaning of the notion of the world in John's writing: for the world that wills to be unbelieving and contragodly, there can be-as far and as long as that will prevails-no prayer; but-in the same prayer--for the world that relinquishes that will for the sake of acknowledging the truth, . the Father is beseeched: "So that the world may believe" ( 1 T 2 1 ) ; "so that the world may know" ( 1 7 : 2 3 ) . The separation, in the First Letter of John, between those belonging to love and the antichrists who have renounced love ( 1 Jn 2 : 1 8() is only an obedient perpet­ uation, within the Johannine community, of the attitude of Jesus. And, as is also the case for Paul, there is no equi­ librium between the two camps, but only a predominance of the power of Christ: "Little children, you are of God, and have overcome them; for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world" (4:4). "This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith" (5 :4). The concept of "hope" does not occur here (or in the Gospels in gen­ eral) , but the word "confidence" (fiducia) expresses the same thing: the trustful handing over of oneself to the Lord, who predominates over the opposing powers and

DARE WE HOPE

30

to whom one surrenders oneself without wishing to raise impertinent questions about his judicial power. "Abide in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not shrink from him in shame at his coming" ( 1 Jn 2 :28). "If our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God" (3:2 I ). "We may have confidence for the day of judgment" (4: 17). "And this is the confidence which we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us" (5: I 4). To summarize this quick sketch of a more pre-Easter message and a more post-Easter one, it may be said that the predominantly pre-Easter aspects cannot be merged with the post-Easter ones into a readily comprehensible system; that the fear of the possibility of being lost, as called for by the first series of texts, is by no means superseded, in favor of a knowledge of the outcome of judgment, by those of the second aspect; but that the Old Testament image of judgment-which, with few exceptions, is strictly two­ sided-may well have become clearer (the Judge is the Savior of all) and that, as a result, hope outweighs fear. This remains a theologically grounded existential state­ ment and in no way a theoretical-systematic one. It also should not, therefore-as in system-building theses such as those put forward by Karl Barth-be interpreted as mean­ ing that Jesus, as God's chosen One, is rejected in place of all s�nners, "so that, besides him, no one may be lost" . 5 This comment is, to be sure, surrounded by others whose tone is less absolute, and the term apokatastasis, or "univer­ sal reconciliation", is carefully avoided, even rejected. Still, one ought to stay well away from so systematic a statement 5

Kirchliche Dogmatik III I , p. 55 I .

THE NEW TESTAMENT

31

and limit oneself to that Christian hope that does not mask a concealed knowing but rests essentially content with the Church's prayer, as called for in I Timothy 2:4, that God wills that all men be saved. 6

6

The extensive complex of problems regarding "Jesus' descent to hell" and its inclusion in the Credo will not be entered into here. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds, 3rd ed. (London and New York: Continuum, 1972), pp. 378-83, summarizes the essentials. According to the testimonies of Ignatius, Polycarp and Irenaeus, the detailed argument by Tertullian (De anima, 5 off.) is of primary importance, which holds that Christ had to experience all fonns of human existence, including that in Sheol. That "the complete subjugation of hell" took place through this is hinted at already by Melito of Sardis and Hippolytus' A naphora. The notion came more and more strongly to the fore that, through this, mankind as a whole had been saved: cf Kelly's quotations from Caesarius of Aries and others: Christ "descended to hell in order to rescue us from the jaws of the cruel dragon" ( Creeds, p. 382). The "missiqn of Christ to the patriarchs was fading more and more into the background", while the descent to hell "was coming to be interpreted as symbolizing His triumph over Satan and death, and, con­ sequently, the salvation of mankind as a whole" (Creeds, p. 383). According to Gregory of Nyssa and other Fathers, the lost sheep that Christ carries back to the ninety-nine (the angels) is mankind as a whole. For numerous texts, see H. de Lubac, Catholicism : Christ and the Common Destiny of Man, trans. Lancelot C. Sheppard and Sister Elizabeth Englund, O. C.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1 988), chap. 1 .

3 . ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

Under the above heading, a broad summary account will be given of how judgment was understood during the early centuries of Church history, up to the point at which the great decision was made: up to Augustine. It will be best to proceed as follows: first, the official Church docu­ ments and, then, the words of the liturgy will be sounded out; second, theological speculations about hell will be investigated; finally, the decision made by Augustine will be considered. 1 . The most ancient formulas of the faith contain, along with the avowal of Christ's Resurrection (vivus a mortuis; DS 10), that of his judgment "of the living and the dead" (ibid.). Before the fifth century, there is no such formula that makes any mention of the twofold outcome of that judgment; this is done in the Pseudo-Athanasianum, orig­ inating after 430 in southern Gaul, and in the so-called Fides bamasi (end of the fifth century, also originating in France; DS 72). These became models for various later formulas of the Creed, such as that of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 (DS 801), of the First (1245) and Sec­ ond (1274) Councils of Lyons (DS 858) and finally that of Florence (1439-1445; DS 1306). All these formulas are 32

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

33 nothing but the abbreviated formulation of the Parable of Judgment in Matthew 25, with its separation of the sheep from the goats, after which the former are admitted to the kingdom of heaven while the latter are dispatched to the eternal fire. Every Christian creed can take no other position than that under the judgment of Christ and must therefore confront the believer with "both ways", the two possible outcomes of his destiny. From this position under judgment, the liturgy not only of the earliest centuries but of all Christian times can only repeat incessantly the prayer of supplication to be rescued, through God's grace, from becoming lost and to be led into heaven. It is important here that the word infernum was long able to signify, without further differ­ entiation, not only the "netherworld", the "kingdom of the dead" (Sheol) and its lost souls, but also the Chris­ tian "hell" in its narrower sense. Without exception, the liturgical texts turn to God with the plea to be led out of the world of lost souls and into salvation and blessedness, whether they speak on behalf of those still living or of the deceased. They would like "to be rescued from eternal damnation" ( Gelasianum III, r 7, r24 7), "free [his soul] from the place of punishment" (ibid., 9 r, r 62 r), "that we may suffer in time rather than undergo eternal torments" ( Gregorianum 7 r, r), "that the threatened vengeance may pass over into salvation" (vet. Gelasianum I, 43, 440), "whom you rescued from the abode of perpetual death" ( Gelasianum I, 5 7), "(God) who redeemed both sexes from the destruction of everlasting death" ( Gelasianum, ed. Cagin, 1 8 5 0), "who wishes no one to perish" ( Gela­ sianum I, 4 r, 4 r3), "may you rescue the souls of your servants from the flame of burning fire" (Mozarabicus Liber

DARE WE H O PE

34

ordinum 42 7), and so on. ' How could the Church, being under judgment, pray otherwise? 2. If we shift our attention from the Church's faith and prayer to theological speculation, what presents itself is a rather confused picture and not at all (as G. Hermes says [2 52al) one that "has been preserved without variation by the Fathers and theologians down the centuries". Follow­ ing Matthew 25, which remains the leading text, the reality of hell is adhered to without exception: 2 beginning with the martyrdom of Poly carp (in 1 5 6) through Justin and Tertullian (who "will laugh when he one day watches", looking down from heaven, as "all the idolized kings, all the authorities who persecute Christians, all the sages and philosophers with their schools . . . are roasted" [De spect. 30]) all the way down to Augustine and his descendants. (The sadism of Tertullian was not imitated by his student Cyprian or by anyone else.) Interest is directed initially toward the nature of the eternal punishments; the images of fire, of the worm that shall not die, of the "outer darkness"-in short, the sym­ bols used in the Gospel-continue to be used. It is aston­ ishing that we have to await the advent of the two most important preachers of hell, Chrysostom and Augustine, before the actual essence of the poena damni, the loss of the The exact references and further texts are in Albert Blaise and Dom Antoine Dumas, O. S.B., Le vocabulai re latin des principaux themes liturgiques (Tumhout: Brepols, 1966), §§ 314-19. The official texts cited are enough and need not be multiplied by modem provincial councils (Bordeaux , 1956) and rejected conciliar schemas like those listed by H. Schauf, "Die ewige Verwerfung in neueren und alteren kirchlichen Verlautbarungen" , Theologisches 178 (1985): pp. 6253, 6256. 2 Texts in Rouet de Journel, Enchi ridion Patristicum (Freiburg: Herder , 1911). Index , pp. 869-70. 1

O RIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

35

grace and vision of God, comes clearly to consciousness. As Chrysostom says, No doubt hell, and that punishment, is a thing not to be borne. Yet though one suppose ten thousand hells, he will utter nothing like what it will be to fail of that blessed glory, to be hated of Christ, to hear " I know you not," to be accused for not feeding Him when we saw Him [hungry] . 3 It is no different for Augustine: "They that have begun to feel in any degree the sweetness of wisdom and truth, know what I say, how great a punishment it is to be only separated from the face of God: but they that have not tasted that sweetness, if not yet they yearn for the face of God, let them fear even fire." 4 But closely connected with this is another question that occupied many of the Fathers: Might the fire meant by Christ be a "spiritual" one, consisting of the tortures of conscience in the sinful soul that knows itself to have fallen away from God's order forever? Minucius Felix had already spoken of a sapiens ignis, 5 but it was Origen who first clearly · elaborated the idea: " 'Walk in the light of In Matt., horn. 23:9, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. The Homilies of St. John Ch rysostom, A rchbishop of Constantinople, on the Gospel of St. Matthew, trans. George Prevost, rev. M. B. Riddle (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Pubs. 1 995), p. 164. 4 En. in Ps 50:7 (PL 36:569), in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. 8, Expositions on the Book of Psalms by Saint Augustin, Bishop of Hippo, trans. A. Cleveland Coxe (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Pubs. 1995), 3

I O,

p. 180. s Octavius 35, 3 (Latin-German edition by B. Kytzler [Kosel, 1965], p. 192).

�6

DARE WE HOPE

your own fire, and in the flame which ye have kindled' [Is 50: r r ]. By these words it seems to be -indicated that every sinner kindles for himself the flame of his own fire, and is not plunged into some fire which has been already kindled by another, or was in existence before himself. Of this fire t�e fuel and food are our sins, which are called by the Apostle Paul 'wood, and hay, and stubble' [ I Cor 3: I 2] . " Just as poor nourishment brings on fever in the body, so, when the soul has gathered together a multitude of evil works, and an abundance of sins against itself, at a suitable time all that assembly of evils boils up to pun­ ishment, and is set on fire to chastisements; when the mind itself, or conscience, receiving by divine power into the memory all those things, . . . sees a kind of his­ tory, as it were, of all the foul, and shameful, and unholy deeds which it has done, exposed before its eyes: then is the conscience itself harassed, and, pier·ced by its own goads, becomes an accuser and a witness against itself . . . As we feel that when the limbs of the body are loosened and tom away from their mutual supports, there is produced pain of a most excruciating kind, so, when the soul shall be found to be beyond the order, and connection, and harmony in which it was created by God . . . , it must be deemed to bear the chastisement and torture of its own dissension, and to feel the pun­ ishments of its own disordered condition. 6 This idea met with approval and frequent emulation. Such was the case, above all, with Saint Ambrose: "What is the 6

Peri Archon II, I 0:4-5 (slightly abbreviated), in Origen , De Principiis, trans. Frederick Crombie in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, Fathers of the Third Century (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Pubs., 1995), p. 295.

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

37

outer darkness? Does a prison exist there, minelike excava­ tions in which the offender is locked away? No; but rather, those who persist in remaining outside of God's promise and order are in the outer darkness. Consequently, ·there is no actual gnashing of teeth or a fire that is eternally fed by physical flames; there is no bodily worm. "7 Then follows the comparison with the indigestible foods that cause fever in the body and the application of this to the sins of the soul, "which, so to speak, allows its constantly new sins to ferment along with the old, burned by its own fire and consumed by its own worm". 8 Jerome always speaks only of a spiritual fire, since the spiritual soul cannot be touched at all by a material fire.9 From all this it is clear, for one thing, that we cannot say that God has "created hell" ; r o no one but man can be Expos. Evang. sec. Lucam Vi l, 204. Jn Epist. ad Ephes. III, 5, 6 (PL 26:522). 9 For example, in the third Easter address (PG 46: 680). 10 "It is certain that the all-knowing God would not have created such [a hell] if it were not also to be peopled." G. Hermes, "1st die Holle leer?" , Der Fels I 5 (Sept. 1984): 252a. Against this, M. Schmaus: "Hell and its eternity are created by man, not God . . .. Every person who is damned therefore suffers the hell which is precisely fitting for him" (Dogma, vol. 6, Justification and the Last Things [Westminster , Md. : Christian Classics, I 984], p. 257). Kirchliche Dogmatik IV /2, p. 449. It would be rewarding here to listen a bit to Gustave Martelet, SJ : 7 8

If God is love, as the New Testament teaches us, hell must be impossible. At the least, it represents a supreme anomaly. In no case can being a Christian imply believing more in hell than in Christ. Being a Christian means, first of all, believing in Christ and, if the question arises, hoping that it will be impossible that there is a hell for men because the love with which we are loved will ultimately be victorious. And yet this love has not extinguished our freedom, for a love bestowed will always have to be also a love received. Neither

38

DARE WE HOPE

blamed for its existence. But then, too, that the idea of a self-condemnation of man-which, for G. Hermes, is nonsensical ("Who, then, will condemn himself, precisely Christ nor the Spirit nor the Father, no one, can do anything against a freedom that closes itself up so much within itself that the more the love bestowed shows itself to be infinite, the more its refusal makes of itself an absolute. But such a refusal, which is absurdity itself, cannot be regarded as the ultimate word on "ultimate things". The Gospel never presents such a refusal to us as a credible pos­ sibility that Jesus could be satisfied to accept. For hell is the real absurdity. It is no part of a whole in which it might have a mean­ ingful place but is a true outrage that is not able to be affirmed. It is an act o_f violence that freedom can inflict upon itself but that is not willed by God and never can be willed. Now, this absurdity nev­ ertheless exists in at least one case: for the one whom Jesus reveals to us as the absolute liar and supreme destroyer of men (Jn H:44). Apart from that case, hell, this unthinkable and absurd thing, still retains in the Gospel the character of a possibility. But that is to be correctly understood: if we speak of a refusal of love , then never of God who would refuse love. There will never be beings unloved by God, since God is absolute love. Should that case exist, then God would have to find himself accused-even if it were only in a single case-of not having truly loved. Therefore we must read the New Testament, and read it ever anew, in the light of divine love. Certainly there is talk of fire, worm and the second death that excludes one from the kingdom. _ Christ does not recognize the evildoers, distances them from him. But hell, as refusal of divine love, always exists on one side only: on the side of him who persists in creating it for himself. It is, however , impossible that God himself could cooperate in the slightest way • in this aberration, above all, not for the purpose of vindicating the magnificence of his denied love through the triumph of his righ­ teousness , as has, unfortunately, often enough been claimed. Thus , if there is any reaction in God to the existence of hell-and how could there not be such a reaction?-then it is one of pain, not of ratification; God would , so to speak, find a brand burned into his flesh: we can guess that it has the form of the Cross. Our pain in the face of hell would theri be only an echo of his own pain. The

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

39

if he is evil?") -is most convincing where the hardened unlovingness of man runs up against the word of God's absolute love. Why will "all tribes of the earth. . . . wail on account of him" whom they have pierced (Rev r : 7)? To diverge for a moment from the Church Fathers: if Herr Hermes lightly dismisses the testimony that I refer to by Karl Rahner, T 2 then that of C. S. Lewis-whom he approvingly cites 1 3-which forms the constant theme of Lewis' masterpiece The Great Divorce, might provide him with material for reflection; or perhaps the words 11

meaning of the New Testament text is thus surely not "Hear of what is to befall you" but, rather, "Hear of what should in no case befall you." If Christ speaks to us in the Gospel of the possibility of man's becoming lost through a refusal of love, then certainly this is not in order that it should happen, but only in order that it should not happen. How could Christ, who has thrown himself against death and sin, impose such a loss, even consent to it, since he has, after all, done everything to avoid it? Should, however, God's love be absolutely refused, then this refusal would amount to the senseless struggle to create a counter­ world that would be the opposite of life and, thus, a radical decre­ ation (de-creation) of itself. L' au-dela retrouve: Christologie des fins dernieres (Desclee, 1 974), pp. 18 1 -9 1 (text abbreviated) Cf. also the judicious major article by Gaston Fessard, "Enfer etemel ou salut universe!?" in Le mythe de la peine: Colloque Castelli (Paris: Aubier, 1967), pp. 223-5 5 , whose conclusion (p. 254) contains these words: "Nev­ ertheless, I am not prohibited from thinking, if only as an exercise of reflec­ tion, that at the end of time my hope is fulfilled and all men are effectively saved." On the Ignatian meditation on hell, ibid. , p. 238. 11 Hermes, "1st die Holle leer?", p. 3 1 8c. 12 Ibid. 1 3 Ibid., p. 3 r Sb. "Eternal damnation can be legitimately spoken of in theology only in a way that makes this clear: God does not will it, but rather he wills man's blessedness" : W. Kreck, Die Zukunft des Gekommenen (Munich, 1 961), p. 147.

DARE WE HOPE

40

of Cardinal Ratzinger : "Christ inflicts pure perdition on no one. In himself he is sheer salv.ation. . . . Perdition is not imposed by him, but comes to be wherever a person distances himself from Christ. It comes about whenever someone remains enclosed within himself Christ's word, the bearer of the offer of salvation, then lays bare the fact that the person who is lost has himself drawn the dividing line and separated himself from salvation." ' 4 Bernanos, in the famous scene with his country parson and the count� ess, has the former say: "Hell is not to love any more, Madame." Luise Rinser says, in one of her novels: "I have a distinct mental image of hell. One sits there, quite for­ saken by God, and feels that one is no longer able to love, never again, and that one will never again meet with a human being, never in all eternity." 1 5 And C. S. Lewis: "Every shutting up of the creature within the dungeon of its own mind-is, in the end, Hell. " 1 6 Superbly, Dos­ toevski, in his parable "The Little Onion" (in The Broth­ ers Karamazov): the wicked old woman, - clinging to the onion that she had once given to a beggar-the only good deed in her whole life-is being drawn up out of the lake of fire by the angel holding the onion; noticing this, other sinners take hold of her "so as to be pµlled out with her. But the woman was wicked as wicked could be, and she began to kick them with her feet: ' It's me who's getting Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life, trans. Michael Waldstein (Washington, D. C.: Catholic Univ. of America Press, 1988), pp. 205-6. 15 Georges Bemanos, Diary of a Country Priest, trans. Pamela Morris (Garden City, N.Y.: Image Books, Doubleday & Co., 1974), p. 127; Luise Rinser, Mitte des Lebens (Frankfurt, 1959), p. 140; trans. by Richard and Clara Winston as Nina (Chicago: H. Regnery, 1956). 16 The G reat Divorce (New York: Macmillan, 1946), p. 69. 14

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

41

pulled out, not you; it's my onion, not yours.' No sooner did she say it than the onion broke. And the woman fell back into the lake and is burning there to this day." 1 7 And earlier, in the notes of Staretz Zossima "Of Hell and Hell Fire": "Oh, there are those who remain proud and fierce even in hell, in spite of their certain knowledge and contemplation of irrefutable truth. . . . For them hell is voluntary and insatiable; they are sufferers by their own will. For they have cursed themselves by cursing God and life . . . . They are insatiable unto ages of ages, and reject forgiveness, and curse God who calls to them." 1 8 This is in agreement with the letter of Pope Pelagius I to King Childebert, in which is said: "the wicked, however, remaining by their own free choice 'vessels of wrath, fit for destruction' ", are given over to hell (DS 443). All these testimonies (which could readily be multiplied) are like a commentary on the statement of the Lord: "I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken [and that he does not want to hear] will be his judge on the last day" (Jn 12:47-48) � Naturally, this self-judgment by the sinner in the face of everlasting love does not-as I have shown in detail elsewhere 1 9-occur without the will and assent of the Judge of the world. 7 fyodor Dostoevski, The Brothe rs Karamazov, trans. Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (London and New York: Quartet Books, 1990), 1

p. 3 52. 18 Ibid . , p . 323. : Ignatius 1 9 Theo-Dra ma , vol. 5, trans. Graham Harrison (San Francisco on self­ tation Press, 1 998), pp. 294ff. ; see pp. 29 1 ff. for further documen jtid gment. Cf Lk 1 9:22: "I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wick� d servant!"

DARE WE HOPE

42

3. But now, after this excursus, let us return to the Church Fathers. At first, the view still �xisted among them that no Christians, even if they have sinned grievously, end up in hell. Cyprian already seems to suggest this, 20 Hilary as well; 2 1 Ambrose remains formal on the matter, 2 2 and Jerome no less so: "Whoever gives himself over to Christ wholeheartedly, even if he has died in his sin, lives forever by virtue of his faith." 2 3 But this hope need not occupy us any longer here. Much more important is the central question of the existence of an everlasting hell in general. Origen, as we know, is regarded as the first great repudiator _of an eternal hell, and for that, in consequence of the machinations of Emperor Justinian, he was con­ demned as a heretic long after his death. Matters are not, however, quite so simple in his case. For one thing, in the work that most clearly provides relevant evidence, he speaks largely hypothetically, and his leading idea is the ancient Greek one that the end of things must correspond to their first beginnings. Also, he aims to · approach the question with prudence, indeed, "with great solicitude and caution", more "in the manner of an investigation and discussion than in that of fixed and certain decision". 2 4 Then comes the surely vulnerable expression that Christ will lead all of creation back to the Father, and the reader is asked whether perhaps even the devils "will in a future world be converted to righteousness because of their 20

Epist. 55:20. In Ps 57:7. 22 In Ps 36:26; In Ps 118 sermo 20. 23 Epist. 119:7; similarly, Dial. adv. Pelagianos 1:28. 24 Peri Archon I , 6, 1 -2 , in Origen, De Principiis, trans. Frederick Crom­ bie, in Ante-Nicene Fathers , vol. 4, Fathers of the Third Century (Peabody, Mass. : Hendrickson Pubs., 1995), p. 260. 21

ORI GEN AND AUGUSTINE

43

possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether per­ sistent and inveterate wickedness may be changed by the power of habit into nature, is a result which you yourself, reader, may approve of " 2 5 Origen himself seems to incline toward the affirmative here. Attacked during his lifetime because of this opinion, he denied having wanted to do away with the punishments of hell. 26 Yet some passages in his works allow at least a glimmer of hope for all men to shine through, almost always supported by words from Holy Scripture. 2 7 The actual opinion of the master has been brought to light, with great precision, by Cardinal de Lubac. 28 His inquiries confirm the view of Henri Crouzel, another well-known Origen scholar: "The opinion that Origen, in his apokatastasis, had taught a return to grace on the part of the devil and the damned is so widespread that it has become one of those truths that no one even thinks to verify. And yet, precise and sufficiently extensive inquiry into the question would show that it is not ade­ quately justified." 2 9 At the center of Origen's meditation are two Pauline texts. The first is I Corinthians 3:12-13: that all men, on the last day, will have to go through fire s Ibid. , I, 6, 3, p. 261. Comm. in Jn 19: J . 2 7 Cf. my selections from Origen, Spirit and Fire : A Thematic Anthology of His Writings, ed. Hans Urs von Balthasar, trans. Robert J. Daly, S.J., 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Univ. of America Press, 1984), pp. 320-5o. 28 Henri de Lubac, "Tu m'as trompe, Seigneur", in Recherches dans la Joi (Beauchesne, 1979). 2 9 Ibid., p. 68. Other witnesses for the same view: Pico della Mirandola, Claude-Adrien Nonnote, S.J. ( 1774), J. Dupuis, P. Nemeshegi, S. Laeuchli, "Origen's Interpretation of Judas Iscariot", in Church History 22 (.1953): 253-68; also Marguerite Harl, "La mort salutaire du Pharaon selon Origene", in Studie materiali di Storia delle religioni (196.7): 260-68. 2

26 Cf.

DARE WE HOPE

44

(which is God himself: Heb 12:29) and that, depending on whether they have or have not built on Christ's foun­ dation, their work will survive or bum, while they them­ selves "will be saved, but only as through fire". And then, above all, I Corinthians 2:9 : that "the heart of man" has not conceived "what God has prepared for those who love him". If, however, God's rewards lie above and beyond all earthly imaginings, must the same not also hold true of the divine punishments, whose degree of dreadfulness can be imagined by no one on earth, and especially not by those who now "feel no disquiet at all"?3° We still live in the realm of images. Whether we are spiritual or carnal, "perfected" or "beginners": in this respect our condition is the same: the ultimate Ground of the mystery, whether adhered to in simple faith or pondered and researched by men of understanding, is inaccessible to us all. . . . Origen takes care not to venture any statement. All the texts to which our two homilies are linked never have as their theme an everlasting hell Or a Universal salvation. 3 I 30

In ]er., horn. 2 I :5 . De Lubac , "Tu m'as trompe", pp. 77-78. Henri Crouzel, probably the best contemporary authority on Origen, shows that the Alexandrian's anthropology was essentially trichotomous: body-soul-pneuma, the last being the element in man that is oriented toward God. But , says Crouzel, "the µamned man no longer has a pneuma. Accordingly , Origen seems to deny him any possibility of conversion, a strong argument against his apokatastasis as a return of the demons and the damned to God's grace. The same notion is to be found already in Irenaeus": "Geist" , in Reallexikon fur A ntike und Christentum, vol. 5 ( 1 970), p. 52 1 . Certain observations by Cullmann in Immortalite de l'ame ou resurrection des morts? (Neuchatel, 1 95 6) might be taken (cautiously) into consideration here in the light of what H. de Lubac has repeatedly said about the dynamic character of trichotomous anthropology. 31

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

45

In conclusion, we can, along with Gustave Bardy, say this of Origen: At the beginning of Peri Archon, he recalls the regula fidei and stresses which articles must necessarily be upheld and which points may be discussed. He comments on the lat­ ter, but hypothetically, without forcing his opinion upon us; he shows that he is prepared to abandon it if this is required of him. No one has evidenced more boldness regarding the questions that occupy us here, yet no one, too, has accepted Church doctrine with more ingenuous­ ness. After his death, he was accused of many errors that he had, on occasion, merely discussed without himself accepting or that we can find no trace of in his works. 3 2 Origen was (because later members of his school indis­ creetly spread his alleged doctrine of the "restoration of all things") condemned. Others among the most influ­ ential Fathers were never condemned, even though they openly advocated the apokatastasis, such as did Clement of Alexandria,33 Gregory of Nyssa,3 4 Didymus the Blind3 5 "Les Peres de l'Eglise en face des problemes poses par }' enfer", in L'Enfer (anthology), Foi Vivante (Paris: Revue des Jeunes, 1950), pp. 145-239. 33 For him, all punishments in the afterworld are "corrective". Strom. VII, I 6, 102; cf. VI, 6, 46. 34 for example, Or. catech. 26:7-9; 35: 14, 1 5. Cardinal Danielou's care­ ful study ("Comble du mat" and "Apokatastasis", in L'etre et le temps chez Gregoire de Nysse [Leiden: Brill, 1 970], pp. 186-204, 205-26) insists that, for Gregory, the concept has a significantly broader meaning than that of the nullification of hell. But the finiteness of evil is ev_en more strongly stressed by him than by Origen, and for him its disappearance "after long periods" (as he says along with Plato and Origen) is beyond question. 3 5 For Didymus, too, there are only healing punishments: De Trin. I I , 12 (a work perhaps not authentic); cf also Contra Mani�haeos 2. 32

DARE WE HOPE

and Jerome prior to his feud with Rufinus, 3 6 or, more discreetly, propagated it as something · that only mature Christians could accept, as did Gregory Nazianzen 3 7 and Maximus the ConfessorY' On the other hand, there was never any lack of "popular sermons" in which the congre­ gation "was given hell", probably most hideously by Basil3 9 and scarcely more mildly by Chrysostom; 40 these only pop­ ularized a doctrine that was understood since the begin­ ning of Church history, both by simple believers and-as 36

In Epist. ad Ephes. II, 7; IV, 16. Naturally, Evagrius Ponticus could also be added here (Keph. Gnost., ed. Guillaumont, 195 8), 2 : 84; 5 : 20; 6:27. 3 7 "There is another fire that does not purify, but eternally punishes . . . the offense committed. Unless it be that someone might know the latter to be understood in a way that is more humane and worthier of God" : Or. 40:36. "God, who formed us when we were nothing, and formed us anew when we had afterward [in death] disintegrated: we will inherit either the fire or you, God, the originator of light; but if God, will it then some day be all of us? That is for another to decide" (Poemata de seipso; PL 37: 10 10). Cf. Charles Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria (Oxford, I 8 86), p. 293. 3 H Cf. my description in Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe according to Maximus the Confessor, trans. Brian E. Daley, SJ. (Communio; San Francisco: Igna­ tius Press, 2003), pp. 3 54-5 8. My interpretation was called into question by Fr. Brian E. Daley, SJ. ("Apokatastasis and 'Honorable Silence' in the Eschatology of Maximus the Confessor", in Actes du S ymposion sur Maxime le Confesseur, Paradosis 29 [Fribourg, 1982] , pp. 309-39), but his argumen­ tation did not succeed in convincing me. Fr. Daley's careful study provides, by the way, further texts (pp. 321f.) relevant to my view. On decisive points, ·of course (as I myself showed), Maximus is an anti-Origenist, and he remains "very careful" regarding the point that interests us here. Cer­ tainly God allocates reward and punishment in accordance with righteous­ ness, but God's "love of his enemies" is just as strongly emphasized. The text that speaks most strongly in favor of an irrevocable separation is Ambig. PG 9 1: I 392A-D. 3 9 In Ps 38:4, 8 (PG 29:36of.). 40 Exh. ad Theodorum 1: 10; In Matt., horn. 43:4.

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

47 we have seen-by many theologians, as the straightfor­ wardly literal interpretation of the "twofold judgment" in Matthew 25 and other New Testament statements. If we consider this, then the enormous stress that we find Augustine now placing on the reality not only of hell but also of its numerous inhabitants is no longer surprising. Nevertheless, it si gnifies a turning point in Church history insofar as Augustine interprets the relevant texts in such a way as to show that he plainly and simply knows about the outcome of divine judgment. And all those bowing to his authority, from Gregory the Great through the early and High Middle Ages-Anselm, Bonaventure and Thomas not excepted-to the Reformers and J ansenists will become knowers in the same sense, taking this knowledge as a fully secure basis upon which to construct their further speculations about God's twofold predetermination post or ante praevisa merita. In the City of God, an entire book (2 I ) is devoted to punishments in hell, and every possible opening that might enable the "compassionate" to deny the fact of a hell pop­ ulated not only by devils but also by people is carefully plugged. For their compassion is "moved only towards men, and they plead chiefly of their own cause, holding out false hopes of impunity to their own depraved lives by means of this quasi compassion of God to the whole race".41 The main argument against these "compassionate" ones is that, if they are going to have compassion for their fellowmen, then they ought not to place limits on that De Civ. Dei XX.I, 18, trans. Marcus Dods, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. 2, Augustin : City of God, Christian Doctrine (Pea­ . body, Mass.: Hendrickson Pubs., 1995), p. 467. 41

DARE WE HOPE

compassion but should extend it all the way to the evil angels, for "why does this stream of mercy flow to all the human race, and dry up as soon as it reaches the angelic?" 4 2 They regard it as unjust that anyone should "be doomed to an eternal punishment for sins which, no matter how great th�y were, were perpetrated in a brief space of time"; but "must the criminal be confined only for so long a time as he spent on the offence for which he is committed?" Are there not punishments lasting a lifetime here on earth, and is there not the death penalty, which can be justly imposed? Why not also, then, "the punishment of the sec­ ond death"? 4 3 "The Platonists, indeed, while they maintain that no sins are unpunished, suppose that all punishment is administered for remedial purposes, be it inflicted by human or divine law, in this life or after death." Then comes a lengthy diatribe, based on the fall of Adam, in which the whole of earthly life is depicted in terms of punishment and burden, not excepting the strange evil of the suffering of children. Thus the answer to the objection comes back to the previous one: here, punishment for life; there, punishment for eternity.44 But are there not passages in Scripture that allow for universal hope, for instance, Paul's statement: "God has consigned all men to disobe­ dience, that he may have mercy upon all'-' (Rom I I :32)? And does the intercession of the saints have no effect at all on the divine Judge? 45 The reply to the latter question refers once again to the devil: "Why, then, if in that per­ fected holiness their prayers be so pure and all-availing, 42

Ibid., 1 7, p. 466. Ibid., I I ' pp. 462-63. 44 Ibid., 1 3- 1 6, pp. 463-66. 45 Ibid., I 8, pp. 466-67 .

43

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

49

will they not use them in behalf of the angels for whom eternal fire is prepared . . . ?" 46 To the universalist passages in Scripture, on the other hand, there is simply opposed the fact that the Lord "has condemned" the evildoers "to the everlasting fire, . .. [where] they shall be tormented day and night for ever". 47 But how is this, if, in I Timothy 2:4, God expresses the desire that all men should be saved and urges the Church to pray for all men? Now comes a distinction that really takes one's breath away: At present [the Church] prays for her enemies among men, because they have yet opportunity for fruitful repentance. . . . But if the Church were certified who those are, who, though they are still abiding in this life, are yet predestinated to go with the devil into eternal fire, then for them she could no more pray than for him. But since she has this certainty regarding no man, she prays for all her enemies who yet live in this world; and yet she is not heard in behalf of all. She also does not pray, by the way, for those who "retain an impenitent heart until death". The Church does not pray for the devil, and the same reason "prevents her from praying . .. for the unbelieving and godless who are dead", 4 8 even if they are human beings. Receiving the sacraments without undergoing inner transformation of one's life, 49 works of mercy and other good deeds are of no avail if a man shows no mercy for himself. 5 0 How the 46 Ibid. , 24 , 47 Ibid. , 23, 4 8 Ibid. , 24, 49 Ibid. , 25 , _ 5° Ibid. , 27 ,

p . 4 69. pp . 468-69. Cited are Mt 25:41; Rev 20:10. pp . 469-70. pp. 472-73. pp. 475-78.

DARE WE HOPE

50

unrighteous administrator can be received "into the eter­ nal habitations" by those saints to whom he has pleaded for intercession "is very difficult to ascertain, very perilous to define. For my own part, in spite of all investigations, I have been up to the present hour unable to discover this." , This is so because "human sloth would presumptu­ ously wrap itself in these sins" if it thought that it could "be rescued by the merits of other people". 5 1 But why should God's words not be mere threats, since, after all, he · unconditionally predicted the downfall of Nineveh, and yet what was foretold did not take place after the Ninevites had repented? The threat is "true, they say, in the truth of severity because they were worthy of it." And are there not passages in Scripture that allow us to infer this sort of mercy on God's part, even if they are not clearly stated, "for the sake of stimulating many to reformation of life through fear of very protracted or eternal · sufferings"?52 But Augustine does not allow himself to be misled by such allegedly unclear passages, since the clear ones provide him with absolute certainty and since "they could not invali­ date nor evacuate the divine sentence. " 5 3 The door was firmly closed and carefully fitted with ma_ny bolts; and, for the theology of posterity, it has long remained locked. Only a few marginal - fi gu res, who had not come into contact with Scholastic book learning, da�ed to speak another kind of language: we will give it a hearing. But these voices do not suffice. The question is really whether there is not some understanding of an Ibid., pp. 477-78. Ibid., I 8 , p. 467. 5 3 Ibid., 23, p. 468. 51

52

ORIGEN AND AUGUSTINE

51

unattenuated hell that goes beyond the alternatives pre­ sented here, so that we could say: The truth is not simply an either-or: either somebody is in hell or nobody is. Both are partial expressions of the whole truth. Thus, too, Ignatius has a right to make his meditations on hell and to instruct that they be made. . . . The truth consists in a sum total of partial truths, and each of these partial truths must be wholly expressed, wholly thought out and lived through. We do not arrive at the truth if we only bring out one part and cover up the other. In every perspective, the whole must come to expression. 5 4 This remark provides the occasion for bringing the present chapter to a close with a note on the two great geniuses of patristic theology. In what was said above, there was by no means any intention to place the (in themselves largely opposed) teachings on hell of Origen and Augustine in the center of their theological thinking. Regarding Origen, this is clear enough already from de Lubac's analyses, and his powerful exegetical writings had a seminal influence, in the most varied ways, on the whole of the following period, all the way into the Middle Ages and beyond (one need think only of Erasmus). But it would be no less fool­ ish to tie the so incomprehensibly rich and many-sided theology of Augustine· down to this single point. If his uncountable thought-provoking ideas do not permit being unified into a consistent system, they are, nevertheless, linked to one another in a living way a�d point together 54 Adrienne von Speyr, Kreuz und Holle, vol. lag, I 972) , pp. 85-86.

2

(Einsiedeln: Johannesver­

52

DARE W E HOPE

toward a center that is none other than the heart aflame with love that the saint is repeatedly depicted as holding in his hand. If that is true-and the great Tradition has always seen the great "Father of the Western world" in this way-then we are not entitled to regard his hard eschato­ logical , statements, which grew still harder in his old age, simply as a turning away from his innermost concern. It was because of his loving care for human souls that he saw himself forced to cast in so extreme a mold his warning about the possibility of becoming lost.5 5 His campaign was directed not only against laxity but also, and quite rightly so, against the presumptuous hope of the great Church Fathers mentioned above that Christians, even when they were grievous sinners, would not need to have any fear of s s Nevertheless, in conclusion, two French masters of theology may be cited: "Augustine solidified into historical opposites som�thing that was, for Paul, a dialectical opposition. The theologian of grace was vanquished by the theologian of original sin. Not until the present _ day did Catholic theology succeed in finding its way out of this blind alley" : Henri Rondet, in L'Esprit saint et l'Eglise (Paris: Fayard, 1969), pp. 173-74. Even the great Augustine, in describing grace as an irresistible desire, as the pure counterpart to sinful lust, inadvertently projected the pa_ganly imagined omnipotence of God onto his love. He therefore did not really accept that Christ died for all men, including the damned, for then human freedom would have been able to resist omnipotent mercy. Since one cannot resist that, it necessarily fol­ lows that grace is not granted to the damned. Accordingly, predes­ tination to salvation is limited, as opposed to what is stated by Paul ( 1 Tim 2:4). But God predestines no one to hell. The limitation of the great Saint Augustine is found at that point where he throws sacred history out of balance by centering it on Adam instead of Christ. [His conception of ] jud gment is oriented on the first fall, in the absence of the coming Redeemer to whom God will hand over the whole of jud gment. How does Augustine know that there are

ORIG EN AND AUGUSTINE

53

final condemnation. This had to be corrected. It is only regrettable that the great man, to whom posterity owes so much, did not do that within the limits laid down by the Gospel.

men who are damned? qod has revealed nothing of the sort to us, has given us no list of names. Jesus teaches us only, but clearly and plainly, indeed ardently and persistently, that damnation is possible, that we have to fear it, especially we, his friends, who are in dan­ ger of betraying him. Augustine, however, has damned the whole world in Adam . He is no better informed about_ hell than is Origen, who puts no one in there. But how does he know that? Andre Manaranche, Le monotheisme chretien (Paris: Cerf, 1 98 5 ) , p. 238

4 . THOMAS AQUINAS

During the early Middle Ages, Augustine's teaching on hope, as he had set it out systematically in the little book On Faith, Hope and Love, was the subject of almost count­ less treatises, published and unpublished, all of which occupy themselves with more-or-less harmless questions: whether faith is possible without hope, or hope without love; whether hope, as Hebrews I I : I seems to suggest, is an attitude included in faith; and other things of that sort. However, in the eighth section of the above-mentioned work by Augustine, there is a sentence that,' even if for­ mulated in passing, must still deeply alarm anyone who reflects on it. Faith, says the author, "applies both to one's own circumstances and those of others", and, furthermore, "is concerned with the past, the present and the future, all three", and "may have for its object evil as well as good"; "bu_t hope has for its object only what is good, only what is future, and only what affects the man who entertains the hope". 1 For how could anyone hope for someone else if he c;annot know whether that person belongs to the pre­ destined or not? What a frightful restriction of Christian Augustine, The Enchiridion, A ddressed to Laurentius; Being a Treatise on Faith, Hope and Love, trans. J. F. Shaw, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. 3, A ugustin: On the Holy Trinity, Doctrinal Treatises, Moral Treatises (Peabody, Mass.: Henrickson Pubs., 1995), p. 239; PL 40:235. 1

54

THOMAS AQUINAS

55

hope! And yet, prior to Thomas Aquinas, "no one had dared to cast doubt upon this claim. " 2 Everyone acted as if it did not exist. In his Summa Theologiae (11-11, q. 17, a. 3) , Thomas raises the question: "Can someone hope for the eternal life of someone else?" and uses the cited sentence from Augustine as the objection to his affirmation. His reply is circumspect but at the same time tears to shreds a veil that had been hanging for centuries over Christian hope. If we consider hope "in the absolute" (which seems to mean without regard for any other virtue), then Augustine's sente_nce may be valid. On the other hand, if we presup­ pose the love that unites the one who hopes with another person, then it is invalid. In cases where love prevails, "After him [St. Augustine] no one has dared to doubt this proposi­ tion" : Jacques-Guy Bougerol, La theologie de l'esperance au Xle et XIIe siecles, vol. I , Etudes (Paris: Etudes Augustiniennes, I 98 5), 287 (vol. 2 contains texts). Since the Lombard had included Augustine's proposition in his Sen­ tences (III, dist. 26) , it lay before the eyes of all commentators. Some simply make Augustine's proposition their own, for instance, Odo Rigaldus, who already prepares the way, however, for Thomas' solution: "Charity is not only loving oneself, but also loving God and neighbor, and so it extends to the good of others but, in extending to something to be possessed, i.e., that another may possess it, implies in itself the idea of one's own good": Bougerol, vol. 2, text 39, VI, p. 567. Bonaventure opposes to Augustine's proposition another, more frequently employed saying by him: "No one is to be despaired of while he is_ still under way", but the concluding qualifi­ cation ("dum est in via", that is, as long as he has the possibility of a return to the Church or of repentance) does not effectively remedy the problem (3, d. 26, dubium IV; Quar. III, 5843b). Thomas himself, in his com­ mentary on the Sentences, circumvents the problem by allowing certainty (certitudo) to theological hope, which, however, c_an deceive "ex aliquo accidentale impedimento" (from some accidental obstacle, meaning when merits or steadfastness are lacking) , so that "here below, the fear of separa­ tjon [from God] is bound up with the hope" (3, d. 26, q. 2, a. 4 ad 2 and 4). 2

DARE WE HOPE

extending directly to one's neighbor and valuing him as one's own self, "one can wish and hope the same thing for another that one desires and hopes for oneself And as it is the same virtue of love through which one loves God, oneself and one's neighbor, so, too, it is the same virtue of hope through which one hopes for oneself and for th� other." The Marietti edition (1948) adds a note: "This can occur through a natural love or through any other benevolent inclination." It is fortunate that Thomas' Compendium Theologiae, presumably his last and therefore unfinished work, gives us a closer indication of who this "other" is that love and, following it, also hope value "as one's own self ". Thomas quotes from the Letter to the Ephesians (5:1-2): "Be imitators of God, as beloved chil­ dren. And walk in love", then goes on to say: "God's love, however, is not limited, but reaches out unrestrictedly to everything; he 'loves all things that exist', as is said in Wis­ dom I I :24, and especially mankind, according to Deuter­ onomy 33:3: 'he loved his peoples.' " With reference to Matthew I 8: I 9 and the assured granting of any requests agreed upon by two people gathered together, Thomas says: "That the requests made by many do not attain their goal is impossible." 3 Moving on to the virtue of hope, he establishes that one "has to believe of whatever one hopes that it can be attained; this is what hope adds to mere desire. Man can, namely, also have desire for things that he does not believe he can attain; but hope cannot exist in such circumstances. " 4 So far, however, as the object of our hope is concerned, we are instructed about that by the 3

Comp. Theo[. , pt. 2, chap. 5 .

4

Ibid., chap. 7.

THOMAS AQUINAS

57

first petition in the Lord's Prayer: we can and may ask that God "be praised as great in the thoughts and reverence of all [omnium], he who, in himself, is everlastingly great. And so this may not be seen as impossible, since · he himself became man precisely in order that man should recognize God's greatness. We thus ask that what he has begun may also come to fulfillment." 5 Thomas quotes from Cyprian, who insists, at the beginning of his elucidation of the Our Father, that Christ, the teacher of unity, does not want prayer to be per­ formed individually and privately, so that the one who prays does so merely for himself We do not say: "My Father, who art in heaven", or "give me this day my daily bread" ; no one asks that his trespasses alone be for­ given or pleads privately for himself that he not be led into temptation and that he be delivered from evil. We pray, namely, publicly and together with others, not for one alone but for all the people, for as such we are one. 6 What is new in the passage from Thomas' Summa con­ sists in the fact that he (in contrast to Augustine, to Lom­ bard and _his early commentators) derives the universality of hope from that of love. The question that hovers m s Ibid. , chap. 8. De dominica oratione (CSEL 3:27 1 ). The Church prays in this manner , for instance, at the end of the Fourth Canon. But also Thomas himself, in his office for the Feast of Corpus Christi: " [Sacrifice] is offered in the Church for the living and the dead , so that what has been established for the salvation of all may be for the good of all" (Mandonnet, Opuscula omnia IV [ 1 927], p. 466. The text is also in the Liturgy of the Hours). The already­ mentioned work by Cardinal de Lubac, Catholicism, can be regarded as an interpretation of these words that spans the whole of Tradition; cf. , above all, the representative texts in the appendix as well. 6

DARE WE HOPE

the background, and remains unstated, 1s how far this love extends. If one believes in the twofold predestination advocated by Augustine and adheres, on the basis of that, to the certainty that a number of people will be damned, one might object that love would have to stop at this bar­ rier. But we are not forced by Scripture to make such an assumption. Thus, at most, a barrier might be erected at the point where a sinner irrevocably rejects God's uncondi­ tional love. Would not, then, our love, too, have to reach out as far as God's caritas does? Hans-Jurgen Verweyen, in an essay entitled "Das Leben aller als auBerster Horizont der Christologie" (The life of all as the outermost horizon of Christology), has at least posed this question. He puts forward the thesis: "Whoever reckons with the possibility of even only one person's being eternally lost besides him­ self is unable to love unreservedly." And he stresses here, above all, "the effect of this idea on my practical actions. It seems to me that just the slightest nagging thought of a final hell for others brings on moments in which human togetherness becomes especially difficult, as does leaving the other to himself If there may, in fact, be people who are absolutely incorrigible, why, then, should not those who make my life on earth a hell perhaps also be of that sort?" But would one not, as a Christian; have a duty "to accept every man in his total worth and to seek one's own final joy in this affirmation of others"? That would be, precisely in view of the "all-embracing mercifulness of God, which excludes no one from his kingdom", "the most severe demand that one can imagine: the decision to have a patience that absolutely never gives up but is pre­ pared to wait infinitely long for the other" . Strictly consid­ ered, to be sure, and as Verweyen rightly says, this is only

THOMAS AQUINAS

59

"a jud gment of practical reason" and thus not a principle "that can be put to further use to produce theories" , and particularly not theories "external to the confrontation with the Word of the Cross". 7 Karl Rabner has steadfastly insisted on the non­ convertibility of this practical demand into a theory about the outcome of divine judgment for all men. As is still to be shown in what follows, he has pointed out that we " shall have to allow this possibility [of a radical, subjec­ tive, resolute and definitive ' no' to God] to exist as the ' mystery of evil' " , 8 However, he adds three things to this. First, Christian teaching says "nothing about the question in what concrete individual and to what extent in the human race as a whole this possibility has become reality". Second, in view of the "surpassed state of equilibrium" in Romans 5 , he can say (and others join him in this) : "This open possibility is not necessarily the doctrine of two parallel ways which lie before a person who stands at the crossroads. Rather the existence of the possibility that freedom will end in eternal loss stands alongside the doc­ trine that the world and the history of the world as a whole will in fact enter into eternal life with God. " 9 Third, from 7 Christologische Brennpunkte (Essen: Ludgerus, I 977), pp. I I 7-33. 8 Foundations of Ch ristian Faith, trans. William V. Dych (New

York: Crossroad, 1984), p. I 02. 9 Ibid., p. 444. Rabner supports this stat ement th rough his doctrine of the inequality between "yes" and "no"; the "no" of a created being is "not of equal right and stature in relation to a 'yes' to God. For every 'no' always deriv e s the life which it has from a 'yes' because the 'no' always becomes intelligible only in light of the 'yes, ' and not vice_ versa": ibid., pp. 102. Th e refore, human freedom "of cours e does not limit the sovereignty of God vis-a-vis this freedom" (ibid., p. r n5). "Talk of heaven and that of hell are not on the same level": LThK, 2nd ed. , 3, p. r n96. Cf. A. von Speyr,

60

DARE WE HOPE

this follows-as will require still closer consideration-that I am obliged to hear, in a thoroughly existential way, the threat of possibly becoming lost as something directed in each case to me in particular. The words of Scripture are "instructions about the absolute seriousness of human deci­ sion. . . . The message of Christianity . . . is absolutely and deadly · serious. " It "says to each one of us, not to some­ one else, but to me personally: in and through yourself, in and through what you in your innermost depths are and definitively want to be, you can be a person who closes himself into the absolute, deadly and final loneliness of saying 'no' to God." 1 0 The same thing-as will be shown later-is proclaimed by the greatest Catholic philosopher of modem times, Maurice Blonde!, in his main work, L 'Action ( 1 893). We can bring this chapter to a close with a look at our century's philosopher of hope. I do not meap Bloch but rather Gabriel Marcel, who leads us back to just that point at which Thomas Aquinas opened the gateway to hope for others; Marcel will rightly say, on the basis of the totality of his analyses: for all others. "For there can be no particular­ ism of hope; hope loses all sense and all force if it does not John, · vol. 1 , The Word Becomes Flesh: Meditations on- John r-5, trans. Sr. Lucia Wiedenhover , O.C.D. , and Alexander Dru (San Francisco: I gnatius Press , 1 994): "Our darkness and his [God's] light are not absolute contrar­ ies. T_he darkness of sin is not beyond the power of God. That is why it is possible for God in his grace to envelop our sinful darkness in his greater darkness [on the Cross]" (p. 52). "Can a man be lost if another , anchored in God , is bound to him? To be lost would mean resisting love so violently that it is no longer possible to stay attached to him. But will the refusal to love ever be stronger than the infinite love of the Spirit?" F.-X. Durrwell , L'Esprit saint le Dieu (Cerf, 1 982), p. 96. 1 0 Rahner , Foundations ef Christian Faith, pp. I 03-4.

THOMAS AQUINAS

6I

imply the statement of an ' all of us' or an ' all together'­ but this one possible sense can ultimately ground itself, of course, only in the calling of the individual [by God]. " 1 1 In order to understand this concluding sentence, we have to start from Marcel's denial of an I that is self-contained, self-comprehending and self-sufficient; for a concrete I exists solely from the direction of a Thou and in the direction of a Thou and a We-otherwise, it becomes a hell for itself. 1 2 To step out of enclosedness within the I toward the Thou is to become a person, grounded in love, together with which hope awakens ("love . . . hopes all things" , says Paul [ r Cor r 3 : 7]) ; indeed, the hope initially for you but also, along with that� for us and, thus, ultimately for me. "No love without hope. But I always hope for us; I always declare a com­ munion to be indestructible. . . . In that the hope consists: I believe in your love. " The separation of faith, hope and love can only be a superficial, accidental one. "I have hope in you for us: that is the most adequate and most explicit expression for the mental attitude that the verb 'to hope' expresses in a still unclear and implicit way. " 1 3 However, Marcel cautions against the closedness of an I-Thou love that does not open itself to the being of everyone, indeed to the infinite being of God, in order, only then, to develop itself truly through G. Marcel, "Structure de I' esperance" , Dieu Vivant I 9 (Paris: Seuil, 195 1 ): 80. 12 "A consciousness that is centered on itself . . . lives in the closed time of despair (des-espoir) , which would be like a counteretemity, an eternity bent back against itself: that of hell. Despair is hell and, along with that, loneliness. There is the connection between closed time and the shredding of all living communication with others" : ibid., p. _ 76. 13 R. Troisfontaines, De / 'existence a l'etre : La philosophie de Gabriel Marcel (Namur: Nauwelaerts, 1953), 2:199-201. C£ Marcel, Homo Viator (Paris: 1 1

Aubier, 1944), pp. 89-91.

62

DARE W E HOPE

that. Thus he arrives at a definition: "Hope is essentially the open readiness of a soul that has involv�d itself sufficiently, at the inward level, with the experience of communion to assume the mental attitude-over and beyond mere will and cognition-in which it posits the living everlastingness that lends that experience both its security and pledge." 1 4 To hope for oneself alone would be unbearable egotism and arrogance; but, regarding the common hope that (as Thomas has brought out) is grounded in love, Marcel repeatedly demonstrates its inseparability from humility and prayer and, in so doing, rightly refers to the "unforgettable" book on hope by Charles Peguy, Le Porche du mystere de la · deuxieme vertu. In pointing out that common hope can exist only in humility and prayer (and with that, only as Christian, indeed, Catholic, metaphysics), 1 5 Marcel also shows that it is the total opposite of any sort of "presumptuousness". 1 6 "But a certain patience is inseparable from humility" 1 7-which refers us back to the basic statement by H.-J . Verweyen. For Marcel, this hope that is inseparable from faith and love is beyond the dialectic between "desire" and "fear"; accord­ ingly, as inseparable from love, indeed, as love's testimony, it would fit in well with the Johannine statement that per­ fect love casts out fear (1 Jn 4:18). Everything that has been said in this section deals, as is evident, with the concept of Christian hope (by no means, of course, exhaustively), not in direct confrontation with Homo Viato r , pp . 9, 90-9 1. Marcel, "Structure de l'esperance" , p. 78. 16 "His certitude could never be presumptuous" : Troisfontaines, Ma rcel, p. 1 94 . "The only authentic hope is that directed at what does not depend on us; what sustains it is humility": ibid., p. 195. 17 "Structure de l' esperance" , p. So. 14

15

THOMAS AQUINAS

the threatening words in the New Testament, but nev­ ertheless indirectly, so as to elucidate this concept within Christian dimensions that do not admit without fur­ ther reflection of being called into question ·or, indeed, destroyed by an allegedly "certain knowledge". That this has taken us only part of the way, and that the goal has still not been reached, should be clear to everyone.

5 . THE PERSONAL CHARACTER

It follows from what has just been said that it is only insofar as the "person"-or the I that goes beyond itself and toward all men-finds itself involved in the going beyond-or, in other words, in loving the neighbor in the way that God, who "makes his sun to rise . . . on the just and on the unjust", loves him-that it sees itself as being included in hope: basically, as the last one. And also as one who must always ask himself whether he achieves this going beyond in reality and not just apparently, deci­ sively and not just irresolutely, irrevocably and not just for a time. Even if someone could know himself as being in the "certainty" inherent in Christian hope, he still does not know whether he will not transgress against love and thereby also forfeit the certainty of hope. It is therefore indispensable that every individual Christian be con­ fronted, in the greatest seriousness, with the possibility of his becoming lost. For, on the one hand, he would certainly have been lost if redemption through Christ's Cross had not rescued him from this perdition-"the whole world may be held accountable to God . . . since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom 3: 1 9, 23)-and, on the other hand, according to Chris­ tian belief, no one can be so sure of his standing in grace 64

THE PERSONAL CHARACTER

that he cannot be mistaken about it (DS 1 5 34, 1 5 63). Therefore, Ignatius includes in his Exercises, at the end of the first week, an unrelentingly serious and penetrating meditation on hell in order, personally, to gain "a deep awareness of the pain suffered by the damned, so that if I should forget the love of the Eternal Lord, at least the fear of punishment will help me to avoid falling into sin" (no. 6 5 ) . But the exercitant should not pursue these reflections in hellishly self-contained solitude but rather (as with all meditations on sin during the first week) in "colloquy with our Lord, Jesus Christ" , who has so far constantly bestowed upon me such great favor and mer­ cifulness that he has not, through prematurely ending my life, allowed me to fall into the condition of the lost (no. 7 1 ). 1 As such, however, this merciful love cannot be so limited (anthropomorphically) by the individual as to imply that failure of Christ's patient love could be blamed if man, as a result of contempt for that love, were to bring ruin upon himself. And our own love, as Verweyen has rightly shown, must take its direction from the model of the divine love. The Sermon on the Mount requires On the_ meditation on hell in the Exercises, cf. the commentary by E. Przywara, Deus semper Major, 2nd ed. (Vienna: Herold, 1 964): "Sunken into this hell, I have a colloquy with Christ, our Lord. Fundamentally, that can only be the complete acknowledgment of the logical justness that I sensed; not as though it were up to any man (thus also not up to me, and also not up to me in respect to myself) to assert the actual damnation of anyone at all, because God's free decision has the final word" (p. 200). One should note the agreement of this statement with that of the other great (three­ volume) commentary on the Exercises by Gaston Fessard, La dialectique des Exercices spirituels ( 1 956, 1 966, 1 984). Note in vol. 2, pp. 99-1 00, the inser­ tion (in the Vulgate text) of a "perhaps" into the· text of no. 52: 3; ibid., pp. 1 02[ , on the risk of divine love, but then the prayerful confrontation with the Cross. 1

DARE WE HOPE

66

this, precisely in connection with love of one's enemies (Mt 5: 48; Lk 6 : 3 6). From being personally addressed in. this way, it follows that I may leave concern for the salvation of others up to divine mercy and must concentrate on my own situation before God. There is, to be sure, a theorem in Scholastic theology according to which the virtue of hope contains in itself its own certainty (certitudo) . "But just what sort of certainty this might be is difficult to define", Bonaventure assures us; 2 he attempts an answer by saying that certainty obtains only if the will is supported, not by its own incon­ stancy, but by God, which it can be only through living faith and genuine love; and even then, what is arrived at is only the "security of a certain trustfulness" and not that of "evident knowledge". 3 "Even if I do not know whether I will have the love all the way to the end, I still know one thing: that the love and the merits that I intend to have lead with certainty to eternal life." 4 From this ·perspective, we can understand the splendid statement by Kierkegaard: "In my life I have never got farther, nor will I get far­ ther, than 'fear and trembling', that point at which I am literally quite certain that everyone else will easily attain the bliss of heaven, and only I shall not. . . . Telling other people . . . 'You are eternally lost' is something I cannot do. As far as I am concerned, the situation is that all the others will, of course, go to heaven; the only doubt is whe�her I shall get there." 5 3, d. 26, a. 1 , q. 5 . d. 26, q . 2 , a. 4 ad 4. 4 Ibid., ad 5 . 5 Cited in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Theo-Drama: Theological Dramatic Theory, vol. 5, The Last Act, trans. Graham Harrison (San Francisco: I gna­ tius Press, 1998), p. 293. 2

3 3,

THE PERSONAL CHARACTER

In a long meditation on "the last things" , 6 Guardini circles around the fact that "the New Testament" takes "a characteristic step out of the general and into the per­ sonal" ; 7 in so doing, he provides a justification for Kierke­ gaard's proposition. Why should it be precisely with me that there may be "doubt"? Because, according to Church teaching, God's forgiveness always expects a correspon­ dence in man. "Justice should not only be promised to man but made his own; it should not merely be imposed upon him but should become one with his innermost will and being." "But what a task it is to make the will good all the way through!" Being genuinely good would mean that we would accomplish in every hour what that hour required, and thus life would ascend to the fullness of its achievement and perfection as called for by God. What is not done now cannot, however, be made good later on, because every hour comes but once, and the next has, once again, its own demands. What becomes of the gaps and voids in this continually passing life? And how do things stand with what has been done wrongly? . . . What has been done rests in being. What will become of that when time has run out and man can do nothing more? 8 Perhaps he thinks that the gaps and voids are unimport­ ant. But when he is brought before the criterion presented by Christ, who points his finger at nothing but gaps and Guardini, Die letzten Dinge: Die christliche Lehre vom Tode, der Lduterung nach dem Tode, A uferstehung, Gericht und Ewigkeit, 2nd ed. (Wiirzburg: Werkbund, 1949). 1 Ibid., p. 23. · 8 Ibid., pp. 3 1-38. 6 Romano

68

DARE W E HOPE

voids: "I was hungry and you gave me no food; I was thirsty and you gave me no drink", emphasizing in addi­ tion that what was not done to the l�ast of men was not done to him: "What sort of weight do these gaps and voids take on then?" This weight is something strange for us, "and, in fact, the estranging element consists in the con­ crete, · even personal, nature of the process". 9 My seem­ ingly small omissions take on such weight that I no longer have any time at all for glancing to left and right in order to see how others are faring. My most trifling matters are sud­ denly escalated into absolutes. "You did it to me." None of those addressed in this scene were conscious of this shift in weight; "When did we . . . ?" (Mt 2 5: 3 7, 44). From this perspective, Paul's words can be understood anew in a deeper sense: "I do not even judge myself I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me" ( 1 Cor 4:3-4). Some who thought that they would have to stand on the· right side in that judgment scene would perhaps steal over to the other of their own accord. That, however, means that there is, face to face with the final criterion, something like a self-judgment. "The individual suddenly recognizes what he really is. We can characterize this recognition that one's own person har­ bors guilt and imperfection as a self-judgment, but this self-judgment also has something to do with the larger, co�prehensive act of judgment." 1 0 And this self-judgment 9

lbid. , p. 7 1 . Otto Betz, Die Eschatologie in der Glaubensunterweisung (Wiirzburg: Echter , 1 965) , p. 2 1 2. Emphatic reference must be made to this richly documented and well-balanced work. M. Schmaus cites it in the same connection: "Inasmuch as an individual in the moment of his death sees '

0

THE PERSONAL CHARACTER

certainly follows in view of the great revelation of the truth as it ultimately is, namely, in view of the revelation of the Cross as the truth of what the world has done to God and what God has done for the world: "And every eye will see him, every one who pierced him; and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him" (Rev r :7) . Thus it is enough that the truth should show itself for judgment to take place. This is probably the sense behind Jesus' words: " I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day" (Jn 1 2 :47£) . In this connection, J. Ratzinger speaks of a "final purification of Christology and the con­ cept of God: 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 through continuing to abide with oneself " 1 1 What, and how varied, this self-centeredness can be has been described by C. S. Lewis in The Great Divorce , 1 2 in which, through constantly new imaginary conversations, the standpoints of heavenly love and hellish egotism con­ front each .other in some particular context, usually in such a way as to entail that the conversation ends with no clear himself unmasked ... sees himself exactly as he is without being able to look away, he is his own judge" (Dogma, vol. 6, Justification and the Last Things [Westminster, Md.: Christian Classics, 1 984], p. 237). 1 1 Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life, trans. Michael Waldstein (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Univ. of America Press, 1988), p. 20 5 . 12

C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, new ed. (New York: HarperOne,

2009) .

DARE WE HOPE

70

result, but at times in a way leading to discovery in the egotism of an opening through whi�h it can be linked to love so that the path of purification, of Purgatory, can be entered upon. "I only want my rights", says the one who approaches from hell. ' ' I'm not asking for anybody's bleeding charity." "Then do", says the heavenly one. "At ohce. Ask for the Bleeding Charity. . . . You weren't a decent man and you didn't do your best. We none of us were and none of us did." " 'You! ' gasped the Ghost. ' You have the face to tell me I wasn't a decent chap? ' " 1 3 The dialogue provides an opportunity for all the varieties of presumptuousness and self-justification to be acted out. "I don't want help. I want to be left alone", says one; 1 4 "Every shutting up of the creature within the dungeon of its own mind-is, in the end, Hell." 1 5 "All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell." 1 6 The story closes with a twofold statement that cannot, as such, be unified: How can anyone be in heaven without having compassion for the damned? Does not compassion descend to the lowest? The answer is: "Only the Greatest of all can make Himself small enough to enter Hell. . . . Only One has descended into Hell." But would, then, all be redeemed? "Ye can know nothing of the end of all things, or nothing expressible in those terms. . . . It Ibid, pp. 28-29. " It' s only the little germ of a desire for God that we need· to start the process" (p. 98). "If there's one wee spark under all those ashes, we'll blow it till the whole pile is red and clear. But if there's nothing but ashes we'11 not go on blowing them in our own eyes forever. They must be swept up" (p. 77). 14 Ibid., p. 59. 15 Ibid., p. 70. 16 Ibid., p. 75. 13

THE PERSONAL CHARACTER

71

may be . . . that all will be well. . . . But it's ill talking of such questions." For you can speak from within time, where nothing else stands before you but the choice-the free­ dom that most makes you similar to your Creator. But every attempt to see the shape of eternity except through the lens of Time destroys your knowledge of Freedom. Witness the doctrine of Predestination which shows (truly enough) that eternal reality is not waiting for a future in which to be real; but at the price of removing Freedom which is the deeper truth of the two. And wouldn't Universalism do the same? Ye can­ not know eternal reality by a definition. Time itself, and all ·acts and events that fill Time, are the definition, and it must be lived. 1 7 With this wisdom of George MacDonald, to which C. S. Lewis owed his earthly conversion and whom he encoun­ ters in the novel, as did Dante his teacher Virgil, all those candles of apokatastasis are now blown out with which cer­ tain writers-especially Russian ones and certain figures in Dostoevski-tried to enchant us: with which, too, cer­ tain (especially Protestant) theologians openly or covertly play. 1 8 Karl Barth's central construct is a systematic one: the one, chosen Jesus Christ is damned for the sake of all sinners, so that all the guilty are rescued and redeemed. All protestations that he d_oes not mean apokatastasis panton , pp. I 39-41. Cf. , along with Karl Barth, the summary account by Ernst Staehelin, Die Verkundigu ng des Reiches Gottes, vols. 1 -7 (Basel, 195 1 - 1 967), and the complete bibliography on the apokatastasis question by Gotthold Mi.iller in the appendix to Identitiit und Immanenz (Ziirich: EVZ, 1 968), pp. 321-37. ' 7 Ibid., 18

DARE WE HOPE

72

"for a grace that, in the end, would automatically have to include and reach each and all would certainly not be a free or a divine grace", 1 9 remain, as W. Kreck says, ulti­ mately "rhetorical". 2 0 We can bring this personal aspect of jud gment­ namely, as self-judgment-to a close with a look back to the New Testament. In question here is the doctrine that runs all the way through it, namely, that God's infinite love, meant to educate the sinner, must be accepted by that sinner, and acceptance means not only regarding it as true but behaving in a corresponding manner. This is so central that it had to be included, as the only condi­ tion, in the Lord's Prayer: "As we forgive those who tres­ pass against us". This behavioral correspondence crops up already in the Beatitudes: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy" (Mt 5:7), and the supplement to the Our Father brings it out emphatically yet again: "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" (Mt 6: 1 4---, 1 5). The Parable of the Debtor Servant makes it as plain as can be: his plea for mercy is immediately heard by the lord to whom he is massively in debt (Mt 1 8:2_6-27), and only after the servant does_ not emulate the lord's attitude of mind does the lord angrily condemn him. The moral is then repeated once again for everyone: "So also _ my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart" (Mt 19

K. Barth, Die Botschafi von de r fieien Gnade Gottes (Zollikon, 1 947) ,

p. 8 . 20

Die Zukunft des Gekommenen (Munich, 1 96 1 ) , p . 1 44.

THE PERSONAL CHARACTER

73

18:35). Related to this, too, is the directive to make friends with one's accuser while one is still "going with him to court" and not yet brought to judgm ent (Mt 5:2 5 ; cf Lk 12:58) . Related, too, is the reply to the lazy servant: "I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wicked servant" (Lk 19:22) . Probably the strongest formulation of this basic truth is the sentence in James, who has just spoken in the previous verse of the "law of liberty": "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; yet mercy triumphs over judgment" (2:13). Here it seems almost as if the merciful man deprives God's judg­ ment of its power; yet basically the very same thing repeats itself that was shown by the first encounter between the lord and the servant in the Parable of the Debtor Servant: God is primarily merciful and reacts with anger only to the unmercifulness of man. However, we also cannot say that the prison into which the unmerciful one is thrown is "hell", for here, as in the passage on courts in Matthew 25:26, what is involved is a term of custody lasting "till he should pay the debt" . Thus the prison is nothing other than the symbol of pure jus­ tice, which in the parable is provoked by the man himself, who brings nakedly to the fore the justice that, although already latent in the initially merciful lord (he is, after all, implored), was previously disarmed. 2 1

The commentators rightly stress that Jesus' demand (also in the judgment scene in Matthew 25) is linked to Old Testament understand­ al ing (cf. Prov 17:5 ; Sir 28:4; Toh 4:9-11; Test . Zab. 8:4); on rabbinic 1 ), texts, cf. H. Windisch , Die katholischen Briefe, 3rd . ed. (Tubingen, 195 Maton , 968) 1 , (Berlin us Matthii on James 2:13. Cf. also W. Grundmann, 21

thew 25 : 3 5-3 6.

0 . T F STl l\ h..1 N l ES

l t ,,.'-,uld bt' n'w�n·din�.- for '-' tll't'. t'-' tr..h.'t' in 1..k uil tht' his­ .._, f l'hristi.m c.� l'h.lh'l'-' '�'". whi1..' h. h,rY ...,t tlut undt'rst.mdin � ... St't .lp.lrt fu.,m the.' :\u�ust.i ni.m kn'-, win� h-''-' nnKh .lb,.'ut hdl n't st.ill .lt tht' 1..' c.' ntt"r 1..'f tlw l 'hurd1. 1..' ,.'nfinns wh.lt I . h.lVt" s,.' far �kt"tdlt'd in bn,.ld 1..' ,."nt \',urs . .-\l'-,ng this lint'. Wt' w'-, uld find. hrst .md h.ln'nh.'St. tw'-' m'-, ti� . The.' first W\,uld 1..' \'tlS.ist '-' f the.' insi�ht .. .. fu,m the."' .. .md lllt'\.iit.lti,)n. srrin�in� "' 11..,n' '-' f l.;\,d in Christ. dut this k,n is sm.'n�'r th.m ..my rt:'s.ist.m1..' c.' th.lt it c.'n\'(,untt'rs .md t.h .tt. fu,m tht' l�hristi.m �undpl,int. hl,pt' t,.'r .lll lllt'll is tht'rd\.)ft:' rc.' �nittt'\.i. The.' St'1..' \'th.i nwtif w,.'uld t.tkc.' i� cue.' fu,m tht' Sc."' n tc.' tKt' \,f s.iint S\,rn,w .md \llll'('.ls.in� P.ml th.lt he."' is hllt'\.i with ··�".lt .. ' .mguish ·· bc."\',.l\lSt" \,f the:" \,bst.in.Ky of hi$ bn"thrt:'n .lnd kim.m c:" n by r.tl't'. the."' hr-.tditt'S. S\' mu'-' h S\' that ht' '\.',.'uld wish · · t\, bt' .. .h.Y Urst'd .md l'Ut off fu.,m Christ for tht' �kt' '-' f"' _tht'st' wh'-' weigh s,..' ht'.tYily ,.ln his ht'.nt lRom \l: -�) . Ottt'n. t\''-' · thc.'St' tw'-' moti� l'.ln blt"th.i int(, t"'.Kh '-' tht"'r. In tht' fi.,llowing. to Sl'lllt' kw. .. I will h.n-t' to rt:'Stnl't mv-sdf . but wt'ightv. . .. . testimonit's. �\n'htildt' of H,Kkebon1 ldit'\.i 1 .i'-l'-l) ht',l.fd thest' W\.)t'\.is fu--.m tht" Loni: '

I tdl you tht" tn1th th.n I .un Yt'ry pk;.tsc:'\.i whc.'n mt"'n trustingly t'.Xpt't.' t �n",lt thin� from mt". For t'Vt'rvont"'

TESTIMONIES

75

who believes that I will reward him after this life with more than he deserves, and who correspondingly gives praise and thanks to me in this life, will be so welcome to me that I will reward him with far more than he could ever believe or boldly hope for, in fa.ct, �ith end­ lessly more than he deserves. For it is impossible that someone should not attain what he has believed and hoped for . . . . With confident hope you should believe that I will receive you, after your death, as a father receives his dearest son . . . . I who am faithfulness itself am incapable of misleading my friends through any sort of deceit. '

Saint Therese of Lisieux knew this text, which, although not written down by her, was, as something that she esteemed and perhaps dictated, incorporated into The Story of a Soul. 2 To Mechtilde, this something more than can be hoped for is not j ust promised and given to her personally but is expressly intended to be given in turn to others . 3 Jesus' most elevated name, however, is Salvator omnium saeculorum, Savior of the world. "For I am Deliv­ erer and Savior of all that is, that was and that will be. " And this applies expressly to "heaven and earth and infer­ num, for I embrace and contain within me every created being. And if I appear before the Father to praise and give thanks, then it cannot but be that, through me and in me, the shortcomings of a� creatures are compensated for in R.evelationes Gertrudianae ac Mechthildianae, vol. 2 (Solesmes and Paris, I kk7) , pp. 20 1 -2 . 2 Story- of a Soul: Th e A utobiography of St. Therese of Usieux, trans. John CJarke. O.C.D. (Washington, D.C . : ICS Publications, Institute of Car­ melite Studies, 1 976) , pp. 2 5 8-59. 3 R.evelationes, pp. 3 4-36 . 1

DARE WE HOPE

the worthiest way . " 4 Those "who are entangled in great sin I nevertheless constantly look upon in the love with which I have chosen them and in the clarity to which they will come"; therefore, one should "often recall to mind with what wondrous and hidden judgments I regard everyone caught up in sin as a just man and how lovingly, in thought of him, I turn everything for him, including the bad, into something good" . 5 The kiss of Judas can serve as an example. here, about which the Lord says: "At this kiss, my heart felt such love through and through that, had he only repented, I would have won his soul as bride by virtue of this kiss. " 6 (Adrienne von Speyr will later discuss· Judas' regret in more detail.) 7 At the end, Mechtilde is allowed to take the Lord's hand and to make with it a sign of the Cross so large that it seems to fill heaven and earth. 8 What she says about the judgments of Jesus is very sim­ ilar to statements by the Magistra Theologorum (as Bordoni has called her), 9 Angela of Foligno: Nothing gives me so comprehensive a knowledge of God as the experience of the judgments of God, which he unceasingly pronounces. If, therefore, I say in my evening or morning prayers: "Through your Incarna­ tion, your Nativity and your Passion, redeem me, O Ibid., pp . 48-49. s Ibid. , p. 28 1 . 6 lbid. , p. 1 96 . 7John : Th e Farewell Discourses: Meditations on John 1 3- 1 7, trans. E. Nel­ son, vol. 3 (San Francisco: I gnatius Press, 1 987) , p. 3 3 5 ; Kreuz und Holle, vol. I ( 1 966) , p. 4 8 . 8 Revelationes, p p . 1 82-8 3 . 9 Celestino Bordoni, Magistra Theologorum (Foli gn o: S . Carlo, 1 909) . 4

TESTIMONIES

Lord" , then I add with a greater joy than I otherwise ever feel: "Through your holy judgments, redeem me, 0 Lord! " I say that because I recognize God's goodness no better in a good and holy man than in a· damned one . This unfathomable thing was revealed to me once only, but it will never slip from my memory, nor will I forget the j oy I felt about it . . . . He turns everything to the advantage of the good. 1 0

77

Angela's most profound insight pertains to God's final humiliation, his highest freedom in his most extreme obedience , in his final Franciscan poverty, in his "most piercing and most severe pain based on his quite wondrous c ompassion for mankind. He participated in the sufferings of everyone with the deepest pain, according to the degree of guilt and punishment that was the lot of each . " 1 1 In the Middle Ages, probably no one ventured farther ahead than the great English mystic Lady Julian of Nor­ wich, who plainly records the words spoken to her by the Lord: God is all that is good, and God has made all that is made, and God loves all that he has made. And if any man or woman ceases to love any of his fellow Chris­ tians, then he loves none, for he does not love all; and at that moment he is not saved, for he is not at peace; and he who loves all his fellow Christians loves all that is · for in those who shall be saved, all is included: that is all that is made and the Maker of all; for in man is God,

10

P. Doncoeur, Le livre de la Bienheureuse A ngele de Foligno (Paris, 1 926) ,

pp . 8 8-89. 11 Ibid. , p . 1 04.

DARE WE HOPE

and so in man is all. . . . I am a woman, ignorant, weak and frail. But I know well that I have -received what I say from him who is the supreme teacher. 1 2

Julian is quite aware of sin, which cannot be loved but which-her bed is drenched with blood-is borne and expiated by the Passion of Christ. "Since I have turned the greatest possible harm into good", he says to her, "it is my will that you should know from this that I shall turn all lesser evil into good." 1 3 The theme of hope is greatly expanded by Saint Therese of Lisieux. 1 4 She is herself conscious of making a bold innovation when she offers herself to God, not as a "victim of justice", "in order to turn away the punish­ ments due to sinners; drawing them" upon herself-she feels no inclination toward that-but rather as a "victim of mercy": For "does not your merciful love need them as well? . . . On every side this love is misunderstood, rejected." And then she opposes love's sphere of influ­ ence to that of divine justice: "If your justice loves to release itself, this justice that extends only over this earth, 1 5 u Julian of Norwich, Revelations of Divine Love, trans. Elizabeth Spearing (New York: Penguin Books, 1 999), pp. 10-1 1. 13 Ibid., p. 2 2 . The chapters in the long text, too, are altogether marked by the same basic tone: "One time our good Lord said: All thing shall be well; and another time he said: Thou shalt see thyself that all manner [of ] thing shall be well" (Revelations of Divine Love, ed. by Grace Warrack, 13th ed. [London, 1949], p. 64). "But when God shewed me for sin, then said he: All shall be well" (ibid., p. 70). 14 For the following texts, cf. my book Two Sisters in the Spirit : Therese of Lisieux and Elizabeth of the Trinity, trans. Donald Nichols and Anne Eliza­ beth Englund (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1 992) , pp. 327-30. References to passages are given there. I 5 The emphases are those of Therese; ibid. 263. '

TESTIMONIES

79

how much more your merciful love desires to inflame souls, since your mercy reaches to the heavens" (cf Ps 36: 6). On the strength of this, and with the permission of her prioress, she will go on to describe her solemn act of sacrifice to divine mercy . It is basically aimed at giving the influence of God's love Pauline predominance over justice (not in the Old Testament sense, but understood as punitive justice). And this is to be done through an act of unbounded trust in God, which she characterizes as " blind hope in his mercy". "I believe", she says of God and the saints, "that they want to know how far I will push my trust . . . . But these words of Job have not entered my heart in vain: 'Even if God should kill me, I would still trust him.' " "Believe in the truth of what I am saying: we can never place too much trust in the good God, who is so powerful and merciful! We receive from him as much as we hope from him. " Here, she quotes the words men­ tioned above of the Lord to Mechtilde. And she adds: "We can never place too much trust in the good God; . . . We receive from him just as much as we hope from him." Anticipating her heavenly mission, she is able to say: "All my expectations will be fulfilled beyond measure, and the Lord wili do wonderful things for me, infinitely more than my boundless desires." Therese has so lively a conscious­ ness of the "always more" aspect of divine mercy that, in a Christmas play for the edification of the members of her religious order, she has various angels assemble around the crib: the "Angel of the Child Jesus" and the "Angel of the Holy Face" (the Passion) sing of the infinite love of the Son of Man in anticipation of his coming suffering but also of his Resurrection and triumph. Then there appears the "Angel of the Last Judgment, carrying a sword and a

80

DARE W E HOPE

set of scales" . The following excerpt from his lines may be cited here: Soon will come the day of vengeance, This impure earth will pass through fire. . . . We _will see Him in the power of His glory, No longer hidden in the guise of a child. We will be there to chant of His victory And to proclaim that He is the Almighty One. . . . You will tremble, the inhabitants of earth, . . You will not be able to bear the wrath Of this child, who is today the God of Love. For you; mortals, He chose suffering, Asking only your weak hearts. At the judgment you will see His power. You will tremble before the Avenging God! ! ! Then "the Angel of the Holy Face" speaks, requesting of the Child the promised mercy for those sinners whose conversion gives God greater joy than do the ninety-nine righteous who have no need of repentance. After this comes the voice of the Child: "I will listen to your request: every soul will find forgiveness." The Angel of the Last Judgment once again objects: Jesus, . . . have you then forgotten That sinners must be punished at the end? . . . Have you forgotten, in your extreme love, That the number of the impious is countless? . . . At the judgment, I shall punish crime. I want to wipe out all the ungrateful. . . . My sword is ready! . . . I'll know how to avenge You!

TESTIMONIES

8r

Then the Child Jesus: 0 Beautiful angel! lay down your sword. It is not for you to judge The nature that I raise up And have desired to redeem. It is I , named Jesus, Who will judge the world! The Angel of Judgment kneels down and, "dazed [ep erdu] , admires Your ineffable love". At the end, all the angels together say: How great is the good fortune of the humble creature. The seraphim in their ecstasy would wish To leave, 0 Jesus, their angelic nature And become children! 1 6 16

St. Therese, Saint Therese of Lisieux: Pious Recreations, trans. Susan Conroy and David J. Dwyer (Washington, D. C.: JCS Publications, Insti­ tute of Carmelite Studies, 2008) , pp. I 29-3 0 . Of Therese's relationship to hell, Adrienne von Speyr writes: for her, hell is overcome in the Passion and descent of the Lord, and we, as believ­ ers, overcome it somehow together with him by having compassion. For Therese, this compassion is a matter for those who seriously wish to serve the Lord so that his Church might grow. Thus, for her, hell is the "outside" 9f the Church . . .. She never touches upon the question of her own hell. This is perhaps a reason why her night never becomes fully dark: she knows that she has never sinned, since the father confessor has told her so . . . . Thus, too, from then on, she cannot enter any hell, since it is something that does not concern her. Because, however, she is used to exemplifying points on the basis of her own experience, yet cannot partake in hell, such exem­ plification ceases at the point of hell, as thus does, too, hell itself A llerheiligenbuch , pt. 2 (Einsiedeln: Johannes. Verlag, 1 977), p. 74 _

DARE W E HOPE

82

The second motif that was mentioned at the beginning of this chapter was the wish formulated by Paul in Romans 9: 3 : to be, in place of his Israelite brethren, " accursed and cut off" from Christ. The measure of love expressed in this, which goes as far as identifying with the worldly or after.-worldly fortunes of one, or a numb er, of one ' s fellowmen, can manifest itself, precisely i f a n everlasting curse is at issue, in various ways . I t can come about as an explicit request, directed to God, that another's damnation be taken upon oneself. If this occurs as a conscious act on the part of the one desiring to serve as the representative , this act would have to b e forbidden, and rightly so, by .his spiritual director; in most cases, however, the request occurs in a state of enraptured love and is expressed to the Lord, into whose suffering insight is s omehow gained, with unrestrainable spontaneity. But it is also p ossible that the Lord recognizes the unexpressed readiness of a s o ul to endure such representation together with him and, in response to this, allows that soul to experience s omething of the timeless hell for which, without precisely realizing the fact, it yearns . In such experiences, as shown by the two examples that I will give , something about the essence of damnation-a subj ect to b e addressed later on-already becomes apparent. I will leave aside the complicated case of the blessed Christine von Stammeln, who had to undergo repeated sufferings of a hellish kind, 1 7 and will cite as the first

' 7 On

this, cf the detailed account in Theodor Wollersheim, Das Leben der ekstatischen und stigmatisierten Jungfrau Christine von Stammeln (Cologne, I 8 59), and the later literature cited in the Dictionnaire de Spiritualite, vol. 2 (1953), p. 875 (M. Viller).

TESTIMONIES

case the holy Carmelite Mary Magdalen dei Pazzi, who declared herself ready to lay down her own life "a thou­ sand times a day", to go without heaven, if just one single soul could thereby be saved; who said of herself that she would like "all of her to become water in order to wash clean all hearts". 1 8 This is also made quite explicit by the adviser to Saint John Eudes, Marie des Vallees, who early on expressed the wish "to suffer God's wrath"; when the Lord protests, "You know not what you are asking", she disarms this with a naive: "Oh, if only you knew how great my longing for suffering is, you would not speak like that", after which she is granted a day in hell. 1 9 Later on, · this will turn into years. 2 0 The second case can be best represented through the experience of the great Saint Teresa of Avila, whose readiness, while still unspoken, was seen by God, with the result that "I suddenly found that, without knowing how, I had seemingly been put in hell." The brief experience, she says, was of a kind such as she is unable to describe because it differed so much from everything else that one can undergo on earth: "in writing Tutte le Opere di S. M. -M. de ' Pazzi, 7 vols. (Florence, 1960-66), 2:543 , 547, 560, 630; 3:86, and so on. 19 E. Dermenghem, La vie admirable et les revelations de Marie des Vallees (Paris: Plon-Nourrit, 1926), p. 26. 20 "She loudly proclaime q the wish to be eternally damned for sinners and for all men, if that is the will of God" : ibid., p. 79 1 , and the whole chapter "Facta peccatum", pp. 60-80. A strange saying by Marie may be cited here: "God's love is more terrible, and better understands how to make us suffer, than his justice. Nothing that his justice made me suffer in hell can be compared with what divine love _has done to me in the past twelve years. I love divine justice and find it wonderful, mild and pleasing, but [divine] love is relentless and frightful in a cruel way": ibid., 18

p. 73.

DARE WE HOPE

about this . . . , on account of the fear my natural heat fails me right here and now. Thus I recall- no time of trial or suffering in which it doesn't seem to me that everything that can be suffered here on earth is nothing; so I think in a way we complain without reason." The entrance to hell app eared quite narrow to her, leading through a low, dark and narrow gorge. The bottom was like slimy, very filthy, evil-smelling water, full of venomous worms. "At the end of the alleyway a hole that looked like a small cupboard was holl.owed out in the wall; there I found I was placed in a cramped condition." It is then that she suffers these indescribable and "unbearable" agonies. All other sufferings caused by the devil "are nothing in com­ parison with the ones I experienced there. I saw further­ more that they would go on without end and without ever ceasing." The word "despair" flows again and again from her pen. "Being in such an unwholesome place, so unable to hope for any consolation, I found it impossible either to sit or to lie down, nor was there any room, even though they put me in this kind of hole made in the wall. Those walls, which were terrifying to see, closed in on themselves and suffocated everything. There was no light, but all was enveloped in the blackest darkness." "Where was · I?" Teresa asks herself in retrospect, and she bursts out with a prayer of thanks in realization that the Lord has delivered her, much more often than she knows, from the gruesome dungeon into which "I have [often] put myself against your will." 2 1 We can see how close Teresa comes This experience occurred in 1 5 3 9 and is described in chap. 3 2 of her autobio graphy ( The Collected Works of St. Teresa of Avila, vol. 1 , The Book of Her Life, Spiritual Testimonies, Soliloquies, trans. Kieran Kavanau gh, 21

TESTIMONIES

here to the experiences of John of the Cross, who speaks in his Dark Night in a similar way of experiences of hell: God "disentangles and dissolves the spiritual substance­ absorbing it in a profound darkness-that the soul at the sight of its miseries feels that it is melting away and being undone by a cruel spiritual death; it feels as if it were swal­ lowed by a beast and being digested in the dark belly. " The saint quotes here Psalms I 8 : 3-7 and 8 8 :6-8 , in which "David" feels himself cut off from the hand of God, who no longer thinks of him languishing "in the depths of the pit" : "Your wrath weighs upon me, and all Your waves You have let loose upon me. . . . [The soul] feels very viv­ idly indeed the shadow of death, the sighs of death, and the sorrows of hell, all of which reflect the feeling of God's absence, of being chastened and rejected by Him, and of being unworthy of Him, as well as the object of His anger. The soul experiences all this and even more, for now it seems that this affliction will last forever. " 22 Marie de l'Incarnation, who was described by Bremond as the greatest French female mystic, could also be cited here. In her Account of Conscience} 1 654, she describes her deepest humiliations, which she suffered during her unre­ mitting ap·ostolic work in Quebec: "I was transferred from an abyss of light and love to an abyss of gloom and agoniz­ ing darkness, saw myself as if thrust into a hell, filled with O.C.D. , and Otilia Rodriguez, O.C.D. [Washington, D.C.: ICS Publica­ tions, Institute of Cam1elite Studies, 1976], pp. 2 1 3-15). It fired her zeal for the salvation of souls and contributed to detennining the purpose behind the order she founded. 22 The Collected Works of St . .John of the Cross, trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, O. C.D., and Otilia Rodriguez, O. C.D. (Washington, D. C.: ICS Publica­ tions , Institute of Carmelite Studies, I 979), PP. 337-38 • '

86

D ARE W E HOPE

sadnesses and bitternesses that arose from a temptation to despair, which brought themselves forth from these shad­ ows without my knowing why." She saw herself here as if placed on the edge of an abyss into which she would gladly have thrown herself in order to satisfy divine justice through eternal punishment. "I saw that I was deserving of hell and that God's justice would have done me no wrong by casting me into the abyss, and this was accept­ able to me if only I were not deprived of friendship · with God. " 2 3 All of these experiences-and they could easily be multiplied-have nothing to do with the alleged indif­ ference of the quietists; they all stem from a fervent love of the Cross, from a wish to suffer together with Jesus for the redemption of mankind, and therefore to gain a small share, in a manner pleasing to God, in Jesus' god­ forsakenness. Indeed, this is also the motive that impels Pe guy' s Joan _of Arc (in both versions of this work: the socialist drama of his youth and the later Christian Mystere) to commit herself to eternal perdition in flames for all her human brethren. Still, the descriptions given by the saints provide us with important information about what we call the "eternity" of hell, which will be discussed in chapter 8. From all of this, one may conclude that the title of L. Lochet's well-known book Die Holle gehort zur Frohbotschaft 2 4 was well chosen. After the descent of the Redeemer into the netherworld, it may be said: "From then 13

vol.

Ecrits spirituels et historiques, published by Dom Claude Martin et al. ,

(Paris and Quebec: Desclee de Brouwer, 1930), pp. 376-78. Vienna and Munich: Herold, 1 981 (French original: Jesus descendu aux enfers [Paris: Cerf, 1979]). 24

2

TESTIMONIES

on, hell is a part of the universe accepted by Christ; with that, it becomes a mystery of salvation. Christ takes every­ thing upon himself-and with that, everything becomes different." 2 5 "Solidarity" is the thing "that redeems us" . 26 This solidarity of Jesus' love with sinners goes beyond everything that we imagine, that we can comprehend and feel. In Jesus are all the sufferings of sinners, plus much else and much more still. The sinner's heart does not know enough of God to grasp fully the horrible mistake and misery of sinners: separation from God. Jesus alone, the Son of God, the beloved Child of the Father, suffers the whole evil of mankind, the whole malice of all the sins of the world, in the light of God and in the fullness of love. 2 1 "On Holy Saturday, we observe the fulfillment of the mys­ tery of salvation: from now on, hell belongs to Christ." Thomas Aquinas and Proclus of Constantinople are cited, and finally Gregory the Great: "Christ descended into the profoundest depths of the earth when he went into the lowest hell in order to bring out the souls of the chosen. Thus Go� made of this abyss a path. " 2 8 Lochet closes with a correct evaluation of the New Testament statements: to the question by the disciples, "Lord, will those who are saved be few?" (Lk I 3:23), Jesus replies with an admoni­ tion to strive to enter by the narrow door. But there is also his promise to draw all men to himself from the Cross. A Ibid. , Ibid. , 27 Ibid. , 28 Ibid. , 25

26

p . 77. p. 8 1 . p . 78. pp . 89-90.

88

DARE WE HOPE

contradiction? "Jesus' language is that of the prophets . The seeming contradiction is the same as with all prophets . " If someone asks us , "Will all men be saved? " we answer in line with the Gospel: I do not know. I have no cer­ tainty whatsoever. That means j ust as well that I have no · certainty whatsoever that all men will not be saved. The whole of Scripture is full of the proclamation of a salvation that binds all men by a Redeemer who gath­ ers together and reconciles the whole universe. That is quite sufficient to enable us to hope for the salvation of all men without thereby coming into contradiction with the Word of God. 29

29

lbid., pp. 127-28 (text compared with the original).

7. BLONDEL'S DILEMMA

Like few others, Maurice Blondel-who, through his L 'Action (1893 ), gave Catholic thought a decisive new beginning-struggled with the problem of an everlasting hell. He is, to be sure, aware that "authentic Christianity speaks of it in no other way than as a justly possible conse­ quence, with the Church never, after all, having officially linked it to any particular person". 1 Nonetheless, in his early notebooks 2 as well as in his late works, he regards hell as a problem that needs seriously· to be discussed phil­ osophically and theologically. Before entering into discus­ sion of his final position, I might stress his great concern to acquit God of responsibility for eternal damnation of the unrepentant. In this connection, he rightly cites sup­ port from Augustine, who, drawing on Jesus' statement that he did not come to judge but to save, says: "You do not want to be saved by him? Then you will be judged by yourself." 3 "Precise_ly because divine grace is not sim­ ply refused to any man who has a free will, voluntary IA philosop hie et ['esprit chretien, vol. 2 (P.U.P. , 1 946), p. 553 (cited as PhE ) . 2 Carnets intimes (Paris: Cerf, 1 96 1 ); German: Tagebuch vor Gott [Diary before God] (Einsiedeln: Johannesverlag, 1 964) (cited as TG ) . 3 Comm. in]n, treatise 1 2, 1 2 (PL 35: 1 490). 1

90

DARE WE HOPE

resistance to this hidden stimulus of redemptive Provi­ dence cannot be given equal weight. The guilty one hates and accuses himself." Blondel rejects Dante's inscription on the door to hell: "To claim that this dungeon with its punishments is 'the work of primal and highest love' is to attribute to God a responsibility that only the unrepentant have to bear"; he rejects in disgust the condemning ges­ ture of Michelangelo's Christ and refers us instead to Fra Angelico, who depicts Christ, at the judgment, as only displaying his wounds: "And at the sight of this, the unre­ pentant sinners turn away, beating their breasts to indicate that they hold themselves to blame." The older Blondel is emphatic in referring back to his starting point: to man's "free choice", which, as fundamental choice, already contains a "supratemporal" element, an "unbounded responsibility". The ungrateful, arrogant, unrepentant thus need only to acknowledge the truth and love with regard to which they have closed their thought, will and · heart. The Christian concept of punishment can, therefore, arouse absolutely no suspicion of divine vengeance. For the old law of fear, it might be appropriate to speak of the wrath of a vengeful God infuriated by rabble­ rousers and idolaters; the truth of the New Covenant knows only one punishment, which allows the irre­ t�evably hardened to dismember and incinerate them­ selves. The prosecutor and executioner is none other than the rebel who can place the blame only on himself Damnation is brought by the guilty upon themselves, once they have become conscious of their perversity. Thus hell has not been created by God; it is the logical and moral consequence of the sin of the guilty.

BLONDEL'S DILEMMA

91

Seen in this way, "hell, as created by sinners", is "also even a homage rendered through infinite pain of the infinite generosity of the Creator and Redeemer". 4 But this has all been merely a prologue. In order to get onto the trail of the real question, it is necessary to go back to the early masterpiece L'Action and to its moving antecedents in the Carnets Intimes (r 883-94), where, in an unceasing prayer, Blonde! brings together before God the ideas that ground his painfully won these. But precisely at this point, the basic problem already crops up: the the­ sis, destined for submission to the Sorbonne, was to be a purely philosophical work that, according to its author's intention, establishes "action" as the fundamental reality of human existence and leads, through numerous prelim­ inary levels, to the final, decisive question: Can man, by virtue of his actions (which can also include renunciation and suffering), bring himself to final perfection, or does he require for this a (divine) form of assistance that he cannot provide for himself or even claim as something owed to him?5 In his finiteness, he cannot equate him­ self with the infinite being toward which he essentially strives-here Blonde! makes use of "a kind of ontological argument", 6 and he could just as well (as H. de Lubac has shown) have appealed to Augustine and Thomas7-but if he nevertheless does that, he goes astray regarding his PhE, pp. 353-63. s "God has no raison d'etre, in our thought and our action, except in the measure that-inaccessible and inviolable in his mystery-he remains = beyond our grasp": L'Action (1893), p. 357 ( A). '_' Initiative absolument gratuite de Dieu": L'Action ( 1 949) 2:377. 6 A, p. 334. 7 H. de Lubac, Surnaturel (Paris: Aubier, 1 946). 4

DARE WE HOPE

92

"supreme option"; he condemns himself to a contradic­ tion that tears him apart. Could Blondel have formulated this statement if he had not worked out his philosophical thesis from the very start in Christian prayer, in the endur­ ing conviction that man can perfect himself in the love of God solely through the grace of God? He will later be forced to draw the line between philosophy and theology more precisely in abstracto (although he never lost sight of the concrete interpenetration of both spheres within con- . crete existence); but in the meantime (in L 'Action), these two spheres collide heavily with one another, and thus the following statement, unique and unprecedented in the context of our question, comes to be made: The ominous greatness of man! He thinks that God no longer exists for him, and God no longer exists for him. But since he always keeps his foundat�on of cre­ ative will, he clutches so strongly to this that it becomes wholly his possession. His being remains without being. And if God allows his solitary will to have its way, then that is damnation. Fiat voluntas tua, in aeternum . Misus­ ing and despoiling the world is thus nothing compared to the offense that the perverse will burdens itself with: misusing God and killing him in man, killing him to the point that man is capable of dealing him a divine blow. What we cannot build up alone we seem able to destroy by our own powers. But no, if the principle of human guilt lies entirely in the guilty will, then its mur­ derous effect is not confined to man alone. Action is a synthesis of man and God; neither God alone nor man alone can change, produce or destroy it. For remedy­ ing that, no decree of divine omnipotence is sufficient. 8 8

This is a basic insight in Anselm's Cur Deus Homo.

BLONDEL'S D ILEMMA

93

Someth ing else would be needed . And if I may say so : God would necessarily have to die if man's offenses were to be compens ated for; God would have to die voluntar ily, so that the offenses of man could be par­ doned and annulled. On the basis of himself alone ' man is capable of nothing. 9 T his p assage contains the result of a prior intellectual strug­ gle by the young Blonde! that lasted for ten years and will b e described in what follows through excerpts from the pages of his diary-a bitter but nevertheless seemingly undecided struggle, and seemingly undecided for two rea­ sons : first, b ecause the option supreme, toward which all of Blonde!' s intellectual work tends, occurs for him in the presence of the God of eternal love and therefore, if it turns out negatively, contains in itself the sin against the H oly Spirit that is unpardonable in the next world; second, b ecause the doctrine of eternal damnation (based on the age-old traditio n stemming from Augustine and the Mid­ dle Ages) appears to him as an unassailable reality. Thus it is all the more astonishing that Blondel-in the sense of the above-quoted statement from L 'Action-arrived at insights that come very close to the epoche that I have pro­ posed h ere. At this p oint, some p assages in which the "self­ damnation" of certain souls appears as a matter of course, precisely in view of the suffering of the Crucified, may already be considered: "What finally crucified your holy Soul was the unholiness of the sinners, who are lost forev­ ermore . You desired them, Sitio, and they offered you gall. We have to suffer through p erceiving the self-damnation 9

A, pp. 371-72.

DARE WE HOPE

94

of souls; it is our limbs that are torn from our bodies. Alas, we must make every effort to save them (!)" 1 0 The last turn of thought is characteristic. "How can I believe in the boundless evil of the damned, of a man whom I have known and loved? But above all: How much must we pray and suffer for those who have gone astray !" 1 ' The d1lemma is perceived: "Great difficulty: to justify the strictness of divine love and, at the same time, to demon­ strate the apparent cogency and hidden evil in the logic of sin. Many are enraged by the idea of eternal punishment and do not want to serve so hard a Judge; but precisely because he is so strict and unyielding, it is inexcusable of · you not to disarm him through your submission . " 1 2 "You have brought everything into being, even the power to engender a kind of Manichaeism, through the rebellious will that engenders evil, a hell that, even for your good­ ness, is no longer retrievable. " 1 3 Then, in the course of deeper consideration of the Passion, a new· form of expression emerges. Jesus suffers "absolutely", that is, more deeply than any other man, including one damned, can suffer, and still there are the damned. Let us listen: 0 my Redeemer, no one has suffered like you. And, in the full sense of the word, only you have suffered absolutely. Your Passion is not just one pain among so many other human sufferings, it is the pain, the Passion. TC, p. TC, p. r2 TC, p. 13 TC, p. pp. 382-83. ro 1 1

1 23. 19 1; cf. p. 259. 322. 374; cf. pp. 343-44, in the sense of the statement in A : TC,

BLONDEL'S DILEMMA

95

By virtue of your love, you have taken everything upon yourself and have known what men have suffered ' and ' above all, everything that, unjustly, they have not suffered, ultimately even the damnation that robs· them of your embrace more cruelly than they have tom them­ selves away from your blessedness . I revere you, Man of Divine Pain. 1 4 We have put him to death, and through his Sacrifice, although not being able to release us from dying, he nevertheless allowed us to escape the second death, the death of the soul. We have created hell, and he made himself to be sin, knew the ultimate forlornness, felt as if he were obliterated. He no more did away with hell than with sin and death, but he placed salvation, life and heaven in our hands once more. 1 s And again the typical turn of thought, a s i n the early texts : "Why hast thou forsaken me?" And that at the moment of your dying! The death of the soul: that is the hellish torment of the Passion: and one must have felt it in oneself if one is to know the full horror of godlessness, to share in suffering the wretchedness of souls damning themselves, to be able to devote oneself totally to their salvation [!] , to throw oneself down before you, my God, with the dismay and inner fervor of Peter: "To whom shall we go?"·1 6 14

T C, pp. 568-69. s TC, p. 222. 16 T C, p. 209. The statement in TG, p. 1 93, also remains ambiguous: "The Passion is not only redemption; it is Christ's very experience of hell: through this experience, hell becomes real and man is damned. Christ is �he one who makes all things real." 1

DARE WE HOPE

96

Do not utterances like these imply a hope that such a turn­ ing to God is not in vain? Here the te;xts on Mary as the "interceding omnipotence" would also have to be brought in. 1 7 Now come, finally, the texts in which the compar­ ison between the experience of hell of the Crucified and that of the damned no longer appears as evenly balanced but as surpassed in favor of the former: [To suffer] not merely from one's own sin but from the sin of others; like Christ in Gethsemane and on Calvary, is one made "sin". The true Passion is the futile one; so much squandered blood, so much pain for no rea­ son, so much guilt-laden human misery-in the face of this, the most hideously torturous agonies could appear blessed if only they could bring salvation. And yet: out of the greater evil you often bring the greater good by means of the greater forgiveness. I beg of you, Father, this moral transubstantiation for all things wicked. 1 8 And this hope can even be increased: It is terrible, this Passion, since it expiates all sins, com­ prehends hell, encircles every possible guilt, which its very nature is to forestall. If there were but a single damned person, then the Redeemer's heart, in its urge to · love, could lament that the company of the cho­ sen was still too small: the Good Shepherd thinks only of his lost sheep. The Father is strict and threatening beforehand, so that he will have to be less punishing later on, 1 9 Cf. TG, pp. 488, 382, 543. TG, p. 2 1 9. 1 9 TG, p. 263. 17 18

BLONDEL'S DILEMMA

97

"You have deigned to endure all these deaths; in rising from death, you have opened to all the path of life. " 20 "You wanted to deal exhaustively with shame, disgrace and agony, and that alone was your truth, and the excess was solely to glorify you and your Father. " 2 1 Thus Blondel struggles through to a conclusion. A few passages cast a shadow that will not be cleared up until our concluding chapter here. Blondel loves to make the point that man should not pass judgment but should show mercy toward all sinners. His reason for this is that God has reserved justice for himself and left mercy up to us. But his formulations remain one-sided. "You have entrusted [to man] ' the task of mercy, have presented him with your life, your fruitfulness, your omnipotence for the sake of good­ ness only; you have reserved justice for yourself " 2 2 "Thus we, too, are obliged to love sinners, since mercy, in order that it be even more strongly contrasted with vengeful jus­ tice, has been incarnated in us and for us. " 2 3 "We should be less intent than God upon justice. " 2 4 But then, despite this, we get the insight: "Nevertheless, mercy grows on the sternness of justice. Do not shrink from extending the divine perfections. Each one increases them all. " 2 5

TC, p . 486. "' ' TC, p. 377; cf. p. 485: "You have condemned yourself so that they again, should no longer bear the guilt of havi ng condemned you." And p . 510. 22 TC, p. 278; cf. p. 217. 20

TC, p. 3 0 1 . TC, p. 313. 2 5 TC, p. 3 54. 23

24

8 . THE ETERNITY OF HELL

What does the concept "eternal" imply with reference to hell? For a start, we can cite the lapidary sentence by Saint Thomas: "In hell, there is no true eternity but rather time. " 1 That implies, prior to any further explanations, a clear opposition between eternity with God in heaven and the so-called eternity of hell. Aquinas' more precise expla­ nations are largely conditioned by his times; he keeps to the notion of "endlessness" in the sense that he assumes changes in the forms of punishment: from · the extreme heat of fire to the extreme cold of ice. 2 We know how Dante used these aspects of Tradition. The manner of expression of a further traditional factor refers us back to Augustine (who will be discussed shortly), yet it is justified differently, namely, in Aristotelian terms, whereas Platonic influences predominate in Augustine: if eventually, at the end of the world, the movement of the heavens ceases, then materially conditioned changes will no longer be STh I, q. I O, a. 3 ad 2: "There is no true eternity in hell, but rather time." (Pseudo?-) Didymus had already recognized that God alone is eternal and that created beings, by contrast, necessarily remain subject to change (De Trinitate II, 6:4). 2 STh, ibid., and 1-11, q. 67 et ad 2. It is stressed here that this change of punishments affords the damned no hope at all of a way out (evasio). 1

THE ETERNITY OF HELL

99 possible but only such as are "secundum esse spirituale" _ 3 Heavenly eternity is usually characterized by Thomas, fol­ lowing Boethius and, even more, Aristotle4-but with the qualification that this is our only possible way of conceiv­ ing it from the standpoint of time-as nunc stans or as tola simul possessio. Augustine, in his conception of hell in De Genesi ad Litteram XII, was probably influenced most strongly by Porphyry, with whom he presumably became acquainted through the relevant summary in the third book of Iam­ blichus' De mysteriis.5 The threefold division of man into mind, imagination (referred to in ancient medical and phil­ osophical tenninology as pneuma _, spiritus) and body stems from Platonic idealism. Broadly speaking, the highest vision of heaven is, above all, that of the mind, whereas the expe­ rience of hell is primarily one of the imagination, which suffers the impress of painful "material images" (similitudines corporum). "There is, then, definitely a real hell, but I take it to affect the imagination, not the body. " 6 That implies, 3 Quodl. 8, q. 8, c. ad in contrar., Suppl. 86, 3 c: "spiritually by means of intentions", "by means of the soul"; Suppl. 97, 1 ad J : "by a spiritual action ... impressing the forms .. . according to spiritual being upon the soul". On the psychological explanation: De Ver. 26, 3, ad 1 1 . 4 Boethius: cf. STh I, q. I O, a. 1 , obj. I : "the complete and perfect pos­ session of unending life": Aristotle: IV Phys. c. I 1 : 2 1 9 b I . 5 Translated [into German] \)y T. Hopfner ( 1922), n. on p. 206. 6 De Genesi ad litt. XII, 32, 61 (PL 34, 48 1 ). Schelling, in his Clara, has expressed something similar:

So, . . . it would be conceivable that people who almost completely fall prey to external nature at death are seized by a kind of sleep in which they are bombarded by a dreamlike storm · of ideas.... If the imagination is indeed generally the tool through which people sin, shouldn't the imagination be that through which most people are

l 00

DARE WE HOPE

too, that hell is understood as a state and not as a place. 7 One other remarkable aspect of Augustine's speculations . e in the Vulgate in should be noted here. From the passag which it is said that God raised Christ up "having loosed the pangs of hell" (Acts 2:24), he concludes "that even the soul of Christ made its way into that region in which sin­ ners are tormented, in order that he might redeem as many of them from their tortures as he, in his justice that is hid­ den from us, saw fit to redeem". He clearly distinguishes this region from what we call limbo and he calls the bosom of Abraham, where there are no torments whatsoever. This place of rest cannot be called the "netherworld" (inferi) , since, as such, it cannot be in the netherworld. R punished-and shouldn't the tortures that await sinners in the other world consist primarily of tortures of the imagination, whose subject would primarily be the previous corporeal world? (Clara : Or, on Nature 's Connection to the Spirit· World, trans. Fiona Steinkamp, SUNY Series in Contemporary Philosophy [Albany, . N.Y.: State Univ. of New York Press, 2002], p. 58) "Why, however, hell [inferi ] is described as situated beneath the earth, given that it is not a physical place, or why there is talk of the under­ world if it is not beneath the earth, is rightly asked" (De Genesi ad litt. XII, 62). The aged Augustine thought, in his Retractationes, that he should have withdrawn this statement (2, 24, 2). Already in the City of God (21, 1 0), the bishop feels himself obliged to retract the doctrine of an immaterial fire that burns solely in fantastic images and to regard the immaterial devils as "conjoined to material fire despite their immateriality", which, to be sure, must occur "in an amazing and inconceivable way", one "incomprehen­ sible 'to man". The indetenninacy of heaven and hell in the ancient image of the cosmos wa:; something that only the boldest of medieval thinkers dared to advocate (Erigena, Cusanus). It is unfathomable why disputes still continue, even in the Dictionnaire de theologie catholique (article "Enfer"), about where hell is located. 8 De Genesi ad litt. XII, 33, 63-64. On all this, cf. Augustine, Psychologie und Mystik (De Gen . ad litt. 12), translated with introduction by E. Korger and Hans Urs von Balthasar (Einsiedeln: Johannesverlag, 1 960). 7

THE ETERNITY OF HELL

IOI

But these speculations threaten to divert us from our main theme: the difference between the eternity of heaven and that of hell. If we compare the Aristotelian nunc stans (which, as noted, Thomas understands not as a definition but as an approximation) with the experiences of hell that were described in the previous chapter, then this nunc stans seems more appropriate to them. They are, after all, char­ acterized by a total withdrawal of any temporal dimension, by being tightly bound into the most constricted, airless and exitless "now" and this in the vilest of all locations ("under Lucifer's tail" , as Mechtilde of Magdeburg writes once), which, in theological terms, implies the restricted­ ness of the mortal egotist, who has rejected every form of love and is thus thrown back upon his own simultaneously affirmed and detested I (A = A). It is no wonder that this is described conjointly by the great Spaniards as "despair". In hell, there may well "be torment and despair" , but "no remorse" _ 9 "The sufferings of hell . . . contain absolutely no longing for God. The damned person wills himself as he is, and hell as it is." 1 0 One can therefore agree with Otto Betz when he says: It is terminologically misleading to speak of the eternity of hell. Eternity, in the strict sense, applies only to God, who stands above time and is Lord over time. A cre­ ated being can participate in God's eternity if it receives from God a share in his glory. The damned, by contrast, is not eternal, nor does God grant him a share in glory. His lot is another form of being, which is an expression of his despair and hopelessness: endlessness, everlasting­ ness. Thus sin does not live eternally, but fixates man 9 K. Frohlich, Die letzten Dinge (Munich, 1959) , p. 37. A. Winklhofer, Vom Kommen seines Reiches (Frankfurt, 1959), P· 95-

·1 0

DARE WE H OPE

1 02

in such a way that he is trapped in an unchangeable rigidity that no longer desires conversion and no longer seeks forgiveness . ' 1 Regarding the way that the blessed rec eive a share in God's eternity, it is best to turn to the Greek Fathers . For God's " supratemp orality" is, vis-a-vis all temporality, something so positive that the best of time, its openness to future as to past in every now-present moment, is preserved. There- · fore, the opinion has gained currency today that Paul, in· 1 Corinthians I 3 : 1 3 , speaks of faith, love and hope as three things that endure in eternity, even if the nonseeing vir­ tues of faith and hope will be changed in the vision of God. The Thomistic teaching that we will never have a comprehensive vision of God was already given c oncrete expression by Irenaeus : What ground is there for complaint if . . . we are able by the grace of God to explain some [things in Scripture] , while we must leave others in the hands of God . . . not only in the present world, but also in that which is to come, so that God should for ever teach, and man should for ever learn the things taught him by God? As the apostle has said on this point, that, when other things have been done away, then these three, "faith, hope, and charity, shall endure . " For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures unchangeably, assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father; while we hope ever to be receiving more and 11

Die Eschatologie in der Glaubensuntenveisung (Wiirzburg, 1 965) , p . 223 .

Cf. DTC VI I ( 1 9 1 3 ) , p . 92 1 .

THE ETERNITY OF HELL

1 03

more from God, and to learn from Him, because He is good, and possesses boundless riches, a kingdom with­ out end, and instruction that can never be exhausted. 1 2 That this theological view is given its most conscious elaboration by Gregory of Nyssa when he equates ever­ lasting rest in God with everlasting motion through him and toward him is well known and can be documented through many texts . 1 3 Behind this theological statement, whic h is derived from the eternal vitality of God, there is no claim to have fo und a Christian answer to the Gnostic notion of " aeons " , nor is eternity to be understood "as an opposite to time " ; and if Scripture speaks of the fact that " with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thou­ sand years as one day" (2 Pet 3 : 8 ; Ps 90:4) , then what this asserts is " no t the timelessness of God . . . , but, more prob­ ably, the endlessness of God's time " . 1 4 A thousand images circle around this reality, b ecause, after all, " no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him" ( 1 Cor 2 : 9) . And if Jesus speaks o f the "many rooms" in his Father's house that he is going to prepare for us (Jn 1 4: 2) , then no theology will forget itself to the extent of trying to subsume that multiplicity under some unifying concept. A dv. Haer. II, 28, 3, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. I , The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, lrenaeus (Peabody, Mass. : Hendrickson Pubs., 1995), pp. 399-400. 1 ary on 3 Important texts are in my selected translation of the comment ver­ Johannes ln: the Song of Songs Der versiegelte Quell, 3rd ed. (Einsiede lag, 1 984), as also in my book Presmce and Thought: Essay on the Religious Philosoph y of Gregory of Nyssa, trans. Mark Sebanc (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1 995). 1 4 0. Cullmann, Christus und die Zeit, 2nd ed. (Zollikon, 1 948), pp. 23, 60. 12

DARE WE HOPE

1 04

There is talk of the eternal Jerusalem, of the heavenly inheritance, of ruling with God, of shining like the sun, of the eternal Sabbath, of the great · banquet and of the marriage of the Lamb: and other richly charged images are taken up and integrated into these. No one will seek a specific location for heaven within the cosmos (Scotus Eri­ gena already characterized anyone who wanted to do so as "insane"). Following on from Paul, whose desire was "to depart and be with Christ" (Phil I :23), Augustine is able to give a simple answer to the question of where heaven · could be: "He himself [Christ] will be our place after we die." 1 5 In Christ, however, is the whole, unending event of the Trinity, which encompasses the whole universe and enfolds it fast within itself. Thus-and nothing more was to be shown here-no greater contrast can be imagined than that between the things respectively design ated as eternity in eternal life and in "eternal" death. The former is the highest possible development -of all duration within the absolute vitality of God; the latter is complete withdrawal to the point of shriveling into a disconsolate immovable now. And in the former is contained every opportunity for the consummate development of man-not just of his contemplative but also of his active side-whereas in hell absolutely nothing more can be contemplated or done.

15

Enarr. in Ps 3 0 .

9. THE SELF-CONSUMPTION OF -EVIL?

It is now time to tum to the question that has proved disturbing to some, namely, whether we can speak of a self-consumption of evil; this is regarded, with reference to something by me that appeared in L' Osservatore Romano, as a "publicly presented, unsubstantiated and-in my opinion-erroneous theory" . 1 It concerns those passages in Revelation in which everything in world history that appears as negative and incompatible with God's final new world is cast into the "lake of fire". A strange diversity of things is involved, which it seems best to sort out a bit so that they can be treated separately. The one likely to cause least difficulty is the final re­ jection of "Death and Hades" , which are expressly con­ signed to . "the second death" (Rev 2 0 : 14), or, as one could say, the death of death. This conception was already known to Paul, who says (citing Is 25:8) that death is ultimately "swallowed up in victory" (1 Cor 15:54), or also: "What is mortal" is "swallowed up by life" (2 Cor 5 :4). The verb katapinein literally means to swallow, and, in the extended sense, to devour, "to cause the end of something, swallow H. Schauf, "Die ewige Verwerfimg in neueren und alteren kirchlichen Verlautbarungen", Theologisches 1 78 (1985): 6395 . 1

1 05

1 06

DARE WE HOPE

up" . 2 In the present case, then, this consumption cannot imply continued existence through transformation into "victory" or "life" but rather implies · an overcoming of such a kind that-to formulate it as positively as possible­ everything negative inherent in death and infernum is taken up into the pure positivity of what is victorious over it. In 1 Corinthians 1 5, Paul can hardly get enough of praising this victory of the "imperishable" over the "perishable" (v. 42) and of challenging all-conquering death in an almost mocking way: "O death, where is your sting?" (v. 55). That great power of world history that sallied forth as the fourth horseman of the Apocalypse: "Death, and Hades followed him", that Old Testament Sheol that had swallowed up everything living, whether good or evil, is now itself swallowed up by life, beginning with the Res­ urrection of Christ: "I am . . . the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades" (Rev 1 : 18). But still other sorts of thing are thrown into the lake of fire. First, there is the great whore of Babylon, who has corrupted .all nations with the wine of her impure pas­ sion (in the Old Testament: her idolatry), out of whom the people of God are commanded to go (Rev 18 : 4) and who, finally, will be "burned with fire"_ (Rev 18:8), so that "the smoke of her burning" (Rev 18:9) will be seen rising from "far off" and there will be rejoicing at this in hea�en: "Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever" (Rev 19:3, based on Is 34:10). Now, certainly no one will claim that this Babylon-which in the Old Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. and ed. Frederick William Danker (Chicago and London: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2000), p. 524. 2

THE SELF-CONSUMPTION OF EVIL?

I 07

and New Testaments (r Pet 5:13) is the symbol of the opposing power to Jerusalem and is interpreted in Reve­ lation (perhaps secondarily) as the city of Rome ( I T9)-is a person. It is a very powerful reality that runs through world history but that is proclaimed to be "fallen" (14:8) even before it is shown to the seer (17:rff). After Babylon, the three beasts of the Apocalypse are captured and thrown into the lake of fire, first "the beast . . . and with it the false prophet" (19:20), then also the pri­ mal principle of evil, "the great dragon . . . that ancient ser­ pent, who is called the Devil and Satan" (12:9); "they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever" (20:10). Regarding this contradivine trinity of the three beasts, we are also not able to say without qualification that it con­ sists of persons. These evil powers are more comparable to the "principalities and powers" so often mentioned by Paul; although they are not always described by him as evil but sometimes as neutral, they are also always described by him as "disarmed" and "made a public example of " before Christ in triumph (Col 2:r5)-they who, as the earlier "rul­ ers of this age", had not recognized Christ and had there­ fore "crucified" him (r Cor 2:8). In Revelation-which, of course, depicts things in black and white throughout­ they are decidedly the anti-Christian worldly powers (they do not appear on earth, after all, until the thirteenth chap­ ter, after the Ascension of the Messiah), and, since they are viewed and described by the seer as personifications, he can also say of them that they are eternally "tormented" in the lake of fire. To describe the sort of reality that they have is very difficult, for if the evil that leads the world astray has at first only the form of a black "smoke like the smoke of a great furnace" with which "the sun and the air were darkened'' (9:2), then the men who are led astray

DARE WE HOPE

I 08

by those powers lend the powers something of their own reality; the sins committed by men are something real, Which ' as it were ' nourishes and concretizes the deceiving powers, and precisely this thing, being both somehow real and invested with that reality by man, is committed to self-destruction along with the deceiving powers when God creates the new world and the holy city of Jerusalem. It should be noted that, up to now, the talk was of evil as such, of sin - and not of sinners. The image of the evil powers' being cast out from finite creation can certainly be described as their self-consumption, and as it is not a process within worldly time, this self-consumption can be transferred by the seer to eternity. In Revelation, which is not a historical but a vision­ ary book, all of this is described through images. Thus, it is senseless to read inner-worldly processes into things here: "Is it being said here that the evil in the sinner is consumed and that, at the end of his earthly life, he is left without sin and is saved? Or does what is said refer to man after his earthly life?" 3 Neither of these! For the moment, what is said here is not about living man. Further ques­ tion: "Does the evil consume itself so exhaustively that, in the end, it no longer exists, or does it persist as some­ thing that consumes itself like smoke in _eternity?"4 Here finite time and eternity are set against each other, which is not acceptable; in this connection, reference may be made to t�e preceding chapter. In addition, it can be said that Revelation unfolds its imagery outside of the concrete events in the Gospel. Thus there is never any mention of forgiveness of sins (given which, of course, there would 3 Schauf,

4 Ibid. ,

"Die ewige Verwerfung", p. 6395. p. 6396.

THE SELF-CONSUMPTION OF EVIL?

1 09

also

r em am th e question of wh at would b ecom e of th e r e ality of th e forgiven sins); th e bar e opposition of God and anti-God, of s aints and "dogs" (22: 1 5), of thos e se al e d by God ( 7: 3) and thos e m ark ed by the imag e .of the b east ( I 3: 1 6) is e v e n m aint ained in a st ate of const ant incr eas e: "L et th e . . . filthy still b e filthy, and the righteous still do right" (22: 1 1 ). This purely visionary character of R evela­ tion, which l eav es the historic al aside, prohibits us from dr awing any conclusions about earthly historical events, including thos e in the Gosp el. But now th e r e is, aft er all, a c e rtain c at egory of e vil men who ar e also thrown into th e l ak e of fir e along with the . allegorical figur es. "As for th e cowardly, the faith­ less, ch e pollut e d, as for murde r ers, fornicators, sorc er ers, idolat e rs and all liars, th eir lot shall be in th e lak e that burns with fir e and brimston e " (2 1 :8, and similarly 2 2 : 1 5). In diff e r ent l anguag e: "If any on e's n ame was not found writt en in th e book of life, h e w as thrown into the lak e of fir e " (20: 1 5). Th e enume r ation of the c at egories of sinners is r e minisc ent of P aul: "Do not be dec eived; n eithe r the immoral, nor idol at e rs, nor adult e r e rs, nor homosexuals, nor thi e v e s, nor the gr e edy, nor drunkards, nor r e vil ers, nor robb�rs will inh e rit the kingdom of God" ( 1 Cor 6 :91 0). In P aul's c as e, w e h av e a warning and admonition to historic ally living m en that th e y should mend th eir ways and not b e li e v e that th ey will autom atic ally e nt e r h eaven; in th e c as e of John of th e Apocalyps e, we h ave a vision of a situ ation at th e tim e of judgm ent. R eg arding v ers e 2 0 : 1 5, it is best to attend to the com­ m e ntary by Adrienn e von Sp eyr: The book of life guarantees the admission of temporal life to eternal life. But for that admission the presence

I IO

DARE WE HOPE

of a blank page in the book of life is not enough. Some­ thing needs to be recorded there . . . . This minimum is required . . . . Regarding the way that the book is kept, uncertainty remains until the Day of Judgm ent. And if someone were really to show a totally blank page, then he would not even be admitted to the judgm ent leading to life but would be disqualified from j udgm ent and thrown into the merciless lake of fire. Everyone must step forward individually, but the fact that a few have come · through j ud gm ent is no comfort for those who await it. For if the book of life is consulted when jud gm ent is passed, then any possibility of making comparisons is closed off For things now tum upon the grace that God has offered to each individual individually: upon the grace that is, in each case , destined and reserved for him . . . . The book of life now appears as the book of absolu­ tions, while the other book is the book of sin . . . . Grace takes on its full visibility in an instant from comparison with the .book of sin. For God, such a comparison is not necessary; he needs only to glance at the book of good and evil in order to see everything, including grace . For man, the comparison is necessary so that he . . . might see what use he has made of God's grace . . . . It seems now as if there are also blank pages in the book of life. And it is not known now whether that which seems blank to man is also blank for God. If the former statement holds true, then an entry record­ ing grace could be so alien to the sinner-because he has never responded to grace-that he does not even see and recognize it as grace and, in a state of utmost terror and extreme distress, must let himself be thrown-into the lake of fire, which really exists and

THE SELF-CONSUMPTION OF EVIL?

III

whose existence has a perfect justification on the basis of the justice of God. John sees the condemned in the position of being cast down, because he must bear wit­ ness to this possibility; this witness is part of his mission; he must be able to report that he has seen it, since it belongs , as a possibility, to the essence of jud gment, and in order to be able to report it, he must have seen it. At this point, everything remains open; the hope that he leaves for all is not of such a nature that the fear of possibly being cast down might not also remain. s

5 Apokalypse,

3rd ed. (Einsiedeln: Johannesverlag, 1999), pp. 687-90. Cf also the commentary on 2 1 : 8 : whoever opposes "his own irrecoverable 'No' to God's truth", an inexorable "No" that he utters every time any sort of request is made of him, is the complete liar. In the lake of fire, as the "second death", the lie, as a lie, consumes itself It no longer has the possibil­ ity of constructing for itself a sham reality; it has no more material that it can distort; it is finally powerless. But this death of the lie does not imply the possibility of a return to truth but rather the necessity of persisting in the death of the lie.. . . Whoever remains a liar to the end will, to be sure, know that there is a truth, but . . . it will be for him something completely alien, inaccessible, something in no way fulfilling. And because turning away is a hopeless lie, he will be constantly without hope. (Ibid., pp. 716- 17) In the exposition of Revelation

22: I I ,

this is said:

Once again, the special relationship of Revelation to time becomes apparent. In the time of the Lord in the Gospel, this sentence could not stand. In the supratime of Revelation, earthly time no longer plays a role. And yet there is also a threat implicit here, as if one were saying to a naughty child: "Just you keep doing that"-as, meanwhile, one goes to get the rod. These words can inspire a much deeper fear in the child than if one said to him: "You stop that, and be good!" Punishment is regarded in " quite another way. In the Gospel, it is a threatening possibility in case one does not reform. In Revelation, it is punishment in eternity, fulfilled punish­ ment. (Ibid., p. 804)

I O.

SATAN

Through Revelation, this much became clear about the evil power: that it is more than something arising from man or his history but is able, rather, to bring both person and history under its spell and to draw both into its vortex; and that it is thus a more-than-human, contradivine power _ that ultimately, since it has "surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city" (Rev 20:9), can be "consumed" (kataphagein) only by fire from heaven. Outside the sphere of Revelation, we find agreement with this in the Pauline statement that "we are not contending against flesh and blood, but . . . against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places", who can be attacked and conquered only with the whole armor of God (Eph 6: 12ff). And with that, we find ourselves also facing the satanic powers known to the Gospel, which first become prominent within sacred history when "the Holy One of God" appears on earth, who - is intuitively felt and recognized by -them to be the truly antisatanic one (Mk r:24). This Holy One is needed so that, as the "stronger one", he can force his way into the s·trong man's house and plunder his house and goods (Mt 12:29). And if the disciples sent out by Jesus are given the "authority to cast out demons" (Mk 3: I 5), this requires consummate prayer to God of a kind that the disciples are not, at the time, capable of (Mk 9:29; Mt 1 7:2 1 ). 1 12

SATAN

1 13

Thus we are faced with the question of a mysterious power-for man, a superior power-that somehow man­ ifests "personal" attributes, attributes that clearly emerge precisely vis-a-vis the person Jesus. Let it be said at the outset that theological hope can by no means apply to this power. The sphere to which redemption by the Son who became man applies is unequivocally that of mankind, and Karl Barth can be seen as right in holding that any state­ ments about the destiny of the satanic powers are so mar­ ginal to the New Testament that no coherent demonology can be constructed out of them (the spotlight of Revela­ tion is centrally focused on man, for whom it must suffice to know that, in the no longer fully illumined periphery, the satanic really exists) , and also that no demonology should be constructed, since man's business is not to peer curiously into the hellish gloom but rather to look up in gratitude toward the redeeming God (Kirchliche Dogmatik IIl/3 , pp. 608-2 3 ). By contrast, as I have shown in detail elsewhere ( Theo-Drama 3 :48off.) , one cannot agree with Barth's claim that the angels had no freedom of choice and that the myth of a "fall of the angels" is thus to be rejected absolutely. To this theory was opposed Henri de Lubac's insight that God can create no creature that is free yet, at the same time, "congealed in goodness" and that, instead, it is of the essence of the gift of freedom to be able to choose one's own highest value, thereby realizing oneself for the very first time. 1 Even if an angel were, in what pertains to his nature, created as perfect and as possessed Surnaturel, 2nd part: "Esprit et Liberte" (Paris: Aubier, 1946) , pp. I 8732 r . This passage, which is unfortunately not taken up again, is perhaps the most penetrating thing that we have from H. de Lubac. 1

I I4

DARE WE HOPE

of insight into all values, he would still have retained his freedom of choice with respect to the supernatural God. From this perspective, the doctrine of a fall of the angels, which is deeply rooted in the whole of Tradition, becomes not only plausible but even, if the satanic is accepted as existent, inescapable. A totally different question is that of to what extent the concept "person" can still be applied to the satanic being. For being a person always presupposes a positive relation to some fellow person, a form of sympathy or at least nat- · ural inclination and involvement. Precisely this, however, would no longer be predicable of a being that had, in its entirety, made a radical decision against God, or absolute love; thus, we would have to join J. Ratzinger in speaking of an "un-person", of "the disintegration and collapse of personhood", for which reason it is characteristic of the devil that he "appears without a face and why his being unrecognizable is his real strength". 2 E. Brunner says quite appropriately: "He works in an impersonal, indeed, in a virtually person-dissolving way." 3 Karl Lehmann has pur­ sued the whole complex of relevant problems down to the last detail4 and comes to a similar conclusion: after reject­ ing systematic demonology, he admits "that the problem cannot be solved through vulgar enlightenment tricks, and that the great philosophical-theological Tradition is by no ."Farewell to the Devil?" trans. Michael J. Miller, in Dogma and Preach­ ing (San Francisco: I gnatius Press, 20 1 1 ), p. 204. 3 Emil Brunner, Dogmatik, vol. 2 , Die christliche Lehre von Schopfung und Erlosung (Ziirich: Theolog. Verlag, 1 960), p. 1 58. 4 "Der Teufel-ein personales Wesen?" in W. Kaspar and K. Lehmann, Teufel, Damonen, Bessessenheit : Zur Wirklichkeit des Bosen (Grunewald, 1978), pp. 71-98. 2

SATAN

I15

means as naive regarding this question as it is purported to be" . 5 He is quite right to close, in opposition to theologies of palliation, with the stinging words of Kolakowski from his Gesprache mit dem Teufel. He could also have done this by drawing on Ivan Karamazov. Here we can close by returning once more to the idea of "self-consumption", and in fact (in H. Schauf 's sense) as "self-consumption in eternity"; for a turning of the per­ son that has been created as good against being good in general can properly be described as a turning of the crea­ ture against itself, as perversion per se. If Psalm I 8:26 says of God, "cum perverso perverteris", then this cum can be sensibly replaced by in: by him who irrevocably rejects the fire of God's love that fire can be experienced only as a consuming one. H.-J. Kraus says this about the verse: "He who . . . lives within the regulations of God's Cove­ nant, he by that very fact lives in an area of salvific power. But he who despises Yahweh excludes himself from the area of salvation." 6 And A. Weiser: "To those who are perverted, who infringe the ordinances of the Covenant, God, too, appears to be 'perverse'; they see him in this light just because, in opposition to those who are disobe­ dient, he carries his order into effect and executes his judg­ ment. Aga.in, they see him in this light precisely because he leaves the sinner to the perversity of his character. " 7

s Ibid., pp. 97-98. Hans Kraus, Psalms 1-59, trans. Hilton C. Oswald (Minneapolis: Augsburg Pub. House, 1993), p. 253. hia: 7 The Psalms: a Commenta ry, trans. Herbert Hartwell (Philadelp Westminster Press, 1962), p. 1 93. 6

I I . JUSTICE AND M�RCY

I mentioned at the beginning the unconscious attempt of a certain dogmatism to draw a line between the qualities of God in such a way that one could speak of pure justice without any reference to mercy. That would imply making his mercy finite, against which-to our astonishment­ Augustine was the first to offer energetic resistance. Both verses from Psalms must, after all, be true: "All the paths of the LORD are mercy and faithfulness" (Ps 2 5 : 1 0) , and: "The LORD is just in all his ways" (Ps I 4 5 : I 7). Says Augustine: Attend to mercy and justice. Do not imagine that these two can be separated in God in any way. They may at first seem to be mutually opposed, so that whoever is merciful would not uphold justice and whoever adheres unconditionally to justice would forget about mercy. But God is omnipotent: he lets go of neither justice in showing mercy nor mercy in judging justly. 1 Following on from Augustine, Bernard was able to call justice and mercy the two feet of God: But of one thing you must beware, that you do not neglect either of these feet. If, for instance, you feel 1

Enarr. in Ps 3 2 , on v. 5 . I I6

JUSTICE AND MERCY

1 17

deep �orrow for your sins along with the fear of the judgment, you have pressed your lips on the imprint of truth and of judgment. But if you temper that fear and sorrow with the thought of God's goodness and the hope of obtaining his pardon, you will realize that you have also embraced the foot of his mercy. It is clearly inexpedient to kiss one without the other; a man who thinks only of the judgment will fall into the pit of despair, another who deceitfully flatters God's mercy gives birth to a pernicious security. 2 Still, in Bernard's image, the divine qualities seem more to stand alongside one another than to be integrated with each other. Such integration is a main concern of Anselm, and he is aware of the difficulty of his aim. Already in the Monolo­ gion, he knows 3 that God transcends everything conceiv­ able, and thus, in the Proslogion, 4 he arrives at the formula "than whom nothing greater can be thought" (chap. 1), with God remaining, however, something "greater than can be thought" (chap. 15). At first, a way is found to unify the qualities of divine justice and mercy that seem to be separable within the salvific will, namely, that of regarding both as originating from a source that is "hidden in the depths of Your goodness" (chap. 9) or "justness". "If You In Cant., sermo 6, in The _ Works of Bernard of Clairvaux, vol. 2, Song of Songs I, trans. Kilian Walsh, O. C. S.O., Cistercian Fathers Series, no. 4 (Kalamazoo, Mich.: Cistercian Pubs. , 1981), pp. 36-37. 3 Perhaps stimulated by a saying from the Confessions: "Never will my soul be able to conceive of something that is better than you" (V II, 4, 6). 4 In Anselm of Canterbury, The Major Works, Oxford Wodd Classics (Oxford and New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998); quotations from the Proslogion, trans. M. J . Charlesworth, are from pp. 89-94. 2

I I8

DA RE WE HOPE

are merciful because You are supremely good, and if You are supremely good only in so far as You are supremely just, truly then You are merciful precisely because You are supremely just. Help me, just and merciful God, . . . so that I may understand what I am saying. . . . Is Your mercy not then derived from Your justice? Do You not then spare the �icked because of justice?" But at this point the train of thought becomes confused, since it is blocked by the boulder of the Augustinian hell. For justice, both possi­ bilities have to b_e kept open: to spare and (vindictively)· to punish: "When you punish the wicked it is just, since it agrees with their merits; however, when You spare the wicked it is just, not because of their merits but because it is befitting to Your goodness" (chap. 1 0). Thus, in the end, the divine will must become the root concept (" For that alone is just which You will, and that is not just which You do not will"), and everything must consequently dis­ appear into the incomprehensibility of God: "It certainly cannot be understood by any reason why, from those who are alike in wickedness, You save some rather than others through Your supreme goodness, and damn some rather than others through Your supreme justice" (chap. 1 1 ). That God cannot be merciful under conditions compat­ ible with disregard of his justice was not hard to demon­ strate, since the pardoning of a sinner without restoration, from the sinner's viewpoint as well, of the rightness of the relation between him and God would not be a mercy that is supreme and worthy of God. But can one also demon­ strate the opposite: that God cannot be just with respect to evildoers-whether, in this case, he spares or punishes them-if he is not also, at the same time, merciful? For the aforementioned reason, the Proslogion cannot provide proof of this; the very most that can be said is: "He who is

JUSTICE AND MERCY

I 19

good to the wicked by both punishing and sparing them is better than he who is good to the wicked only by punish­ ing them" (chap. 9). Now, some people have realized that the train of thought broken off here is continued in a work written much later, Cur Deus Homo, and is taken toward a solution that can be found nowhere else but in the Cross of the Son. Hans-Jiirgen Verweyen, in a short, compact article, 5 has shown that the "debt" owed to God that the sinner withholds from him is nothing other than the "rectitude of will" that is present when a created being, as something created in the image of the Trinity in the Son of God, lives wholly beyond itself in the direction of God. Should it not do this, then "a dark area" that can apparently not be reillumined by anything arises within creation. And yet there is a way out: if God, as the infinite good, were to appear in finite freedom and were not only to sacrifice in freedom the life and death that were owed to God anyway but also to die a death that takes that dark area into itself and endures it fully, and thus, "through a death of a higher order, consumes from within the death of us all". "This death is the only way in which God's mercy is able to rein­ state the justice that finite freedom has violated." Michel Corbin, SJ, goes farther than this but takes exactly the same path. 6 He brings Anselm's exposition under the principle that was concisely formulated by Thomas: "It was a greater mercy (when God forgave s "Die Einheit von Gerechtigkeit und Barmherzigkeit bei Anselm von Canterbury", IKZ Communio 14 (January 1 985): 52-55. 6 "Nul n'a plus grand amour que de donner sa vie- pour ses amis: Essai sur la signification de I' 'unum argumentum' du Proslogion", Congres anselmien, Universite de Villanova, 1 6-21 septembre 1985 (unpublished manuscript).

1 20

DARE WE HOPE

by sanctifying [for sin]). " 7 Now the aim is to demonstrate that God cannot save mankind on the basis of mere mercy without reference to justice. "Such a salvation would be less just than the one graspable through reading the Bible" and would therefore not be in keeping with the con­ ception of God: "than whom nothing greater can be thought" . In view of the Cross, however, we understand: "Now, the mercy of God which, when we were consid­ ering the justice of God and the sin of mankind, seemed to you to be dead, we have found to be so great, and so con ..., sonant [concors] with justice, that a greater and more just mercy cannot be imagined." 8 The identity of mercy and justice is not attained simply in Christ's death as such­ although · for man, to be sure, there is nothing " more painful or more difficult than death" 9-but only through the Father's gift to " a sinner condemned to eternal tor­ ments": "Take my only-begotten Son and give him [to me] on your behal(" And the Son himself says: " Take me and redeem yourself" 1 0 Implied in this, of course, is that the Son dies in godforsakenness, or, according to Paul, is " made to be sin" (2 Cor 5:21). In his Kirchliche Dogmatik (" Church Dogmatics") 11/ 1 ( I 940), Karl Barth extensively develops the argument begun by Anselm. 1 1 And rightly so, for Anselm, too, as 7 S Th

III, q. 46, a. 2 ad 3. 8 Cur Deus Homo I I , 20, in Anselm of Canterbury , vVhy God Became Man, trans. Janet Fairweather, in The Major Works, Oxford World Classics (Oxford and New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), p. 354. 9 lbid., II , I I (p. 331). 0 ' lbid., II , 20 (p. 354). " Kirchliche Dogmatik I I/2: "Gottes Barmherzigkeit und Gerechtigkeit" pp. 413-57. If this identity is to be maintained, and if God is called a "con­ suming fire" (Dt 4:24; Is 33:14; Heb 12:29), then no fire other than God's flaming love-justice is needed in order that the sinner who irrevocably

JUSTICE AND MERCY

121

much as he attempts to think methodologically "from necessary reason", receives his material from faith: How would he know that all the paths of the Lord are justice and mercy if not from the Psalm verses that he cites? Barth is led into the center of his theological concerns through this identity of divine justice and divine mercy; but then only a small turn-as I have already mentioned-is needed ( Christ damned for all, so that all the damned arrive at salvation) in order to bring him dangerously near to the apokatastasis panton, where I do not wish to follow him. It is better to take the path of Aquinas who, in his quaestio "On God' s Justice and Mercy" (S Th I, q. 27), also meditates on Anselm's sentence: "When You punish the wicked it is just, since it agrees with their merits; how­ ever, when You spare the wicked it is just, . . . because it is befitting Your goodness" (Prosl. , chap. r o). But between the misdeeds of the creature and the goodness of God there is no equilibrium, which means that justice with respect to the former is subordinated to divine mercy, indeed, must be virtually a mode of this mercy. That such things as man and world exist at all is due by no means to God's justice but solely to his goodness, and it is not until God's bottomless generosity deigns to create something nondivine that viewpoints such as "justice, generosity and mercy" arise and become relevant. Insofar as God bestows upon creatures what they deserve, he is just; insofar as he opposed this flame with hate should, as long as he did so, be consumed. With that, however, the doctrine-clearly articulated since the time of Augustine's Confessions (I, 1 2, 1 9) and handed down from that source­ is justified that guilt already contains within itself its own punishment­ which, as I have said ( Theo-Drama, vol. 4, trans. Graham Harrison [San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1 998], pp. 294ff.), does not exclude this from occurring within divine judgment.

1 22

D A RE WE H OPE

bestows it upon them not for the sake of his own advan­ tage but purely out of goodness and insofar as the perfec­ tions bestowed upon things by God ·overcome anything defective, he acts mercifully (a. 3). We can look at this in a more detailed way: to each is owed what he is entitled to, and on the basis, in fact, of an inner necessity . In the create.cl being, this debt can extend in two directions: for one, toward other created things (thus the part is directed toward the whole, and every thing toward its end); but then, too, every created thing is directed toward God. Here, then, we can speak of a twofold indebtedness : God owed the created being whatever is in accordance with his wisdom and will and, given that, whatever his goodness allows to become manifest; in this sense, God's justice is an expression of what befits (decentia) himself, through which he guarantees himself what he owes him­ self On the other hand, he owes the created being what­ ever befits that being, for instance, in the case of man, that he has hands or that the animals are subject to him. But this second sort of indebtedness is dependent upon the first. For if God gives a created being what is owed, that does not mean that he himself is a debtor, since, after all, he is not ordered toward his creatures, but they are ordered toward him. That they exist at all, and are what they are, is due not to God's justice but solely to his goodness and gener­ osity (a. r ad 3), which means that his justice-in respect of both himself and his creatures-is to be seen as a mode of his goodness. "The work of divine justice always pre­ supposes the work of mercy and is grounded in it." A being can be owed something only on the basis of some­ thing that exists in advance: a man is owed hands because he possesses a rational soul; he possesses that, however,

JUSTICE AND MERCY

1 23

because he is a man, and since the chain cannot extend to infinity, the final link is: the man owes himself, as such, solely to divine goodness. "Thus, in each of God's works, his mercy appears as the primary root", and because first causes persist most strongly in the effects, therefore " God, from the superabundance of his goodness, gives more generously to the creature than is demanded for that crea­ ture's inner stability . For less would suffice for the pres­ ervation of the order of justice than is actually granted by divine goodness, which exceeds every internal creaturely relationship" (a. 4). We can conclude this essay with a text by Josef Pieper, which brings the complex of problems treated in this final chapter back to the theme of the title: In theological hope the "antithesis" between divine jus­ tice and divine mercy is, as it were, "removed"-not so much "theoretically" as existentially: supernatural hope is man's appropriate, existential answer to the fact that these qualities in God, which to the creature appear to be contradictory, are actually identical. One who looks only at the justice of God is as little able to hope as is one who sees only the mercy of God. Both fall prey to hopelessness-one to the hopelessness of despair, the other to the hopelessness of presumption. Only hope is able to comprehend the reality of God that surpasses all antitheses, to know that his mercy is identical with his justice and his justice with his mercy. 1 2

Josef Pieper, On Hope, trans. Sr. Mary Frances McCarthy, S. N.D., in Faith, Hope, Love (San Francisco: Ign atius Press, 1997), p. 128. 12

A SHORT DISCOURSE ON HELL

If our truth is to belong to God 's,

then it has to remain funda­ m entally open to God's. For anyone who excludes the prospect of hope from his faith, that faith becomes closed knowledge. Perhaps, however, the decisive thing has always lain in what is hidden, and it is necessary to dismantle one's judgments and to reassemble everything anew from the standpoint of the hidden. And then it seems as iffaith has its deepest roots in hope and as if the light of temporal day draws its entire luster from what is hidden in the day of revelation. Adrienne von Speyr

1.

ON THE SITUATION

Be warned, dear reader, that this concerns a theologians' quarrel! And yet it is one whose nature will hardly leave any Christian cold. My little book Was durfen wir hoffen ? (Dare We Hope "That A ll Men Be Saved " ?) 1 was cut to pieces, almost intenninably, in the journal Theologisches, 2 with very strong collaboration from the journal Der Fels 3 before me lies a related heap of angry letters, entreaties to return to the true faith and so on. What is this all about? About the duty to have hope for all men. The opposing side holds: No, our hope for ultimate salvation is limited, since we know, indeed, it is dogma, that a number of men languish in eternal hell. Consequently, I am a heretic for refusing to accept a Church doctrine. To anticipate, it is necessary to take seriously the con­ stantly recurring objection that such a hope, such a "pre­ sumptuous�y false trust in God", lends support to "the salvation optimism that is rampant today and is both thoughtless and a temptation to thoughtlessness":4 smce This section was translated by Dr. David Kipp. r To which this "Short Discourse" has been added in the present edition.-Eo. 2 Eight issues from September 1 986 to April 1 987. In what follows, Theologisches is cited as Th. 3 March 1 987, with reference back to 1 984, pp. 25off., 3 1 6ff. 4 Th, 1 986, p. 7255. 1 29

I 30

DARE WE HOPE

God, after all, is Love, everything will be well in the end. My work as a whole (for anyone who knows it) certainly has nothing to do with this sort of thoughtlessness . I think that the most serious thing that exists is not God' s p unitive j ustice but rather his love . More will be said about this . For my opponents, things do not become really serious until � know with certainty that there are eternally damned men; they firmly dispute my personal, existential concep­ tion of the thought that I-precisely I-must unremittingly ask myself whether I will be able to qualify when brought • before Jesus Christ's throne of j ud gm ent. No , they say: things do not become truly serious until I know that hell is full. I quote once again from the Katholischer Erwachsenen­ Katechismus ( The Church's Confession of Faith : A Catholic Catechism for Adults), written by Walter Kasper, which was discussed sentence by sentence in Rome: "Neither Holy Scripture nor the Church's Tradition of faith asserts with certainty of any man that he is actually in hell. Hell is always held b_e fore our eyes as a real possibility, one con­ nected with the offer of conversio n and life . " 5 I found that the transformation of this "real p ossibility" into " obj ective certainty" occurred with the great Church Father Augus­ tine , whose opinion (whether traceable back to his ten years of Manichaeism may be left open here) has cast an enormous shadow over the history of Wes tern the ology, to the extent that the biblical warnings against taking our ultimate fate lightly have been transformed-indeed, actu­ ally vitiated-into information about the o utcome of the j udgm ent by God that awaits us. 5

Issued by the German Bishops' Conference i n 1 985 , English edition: The Church 's Confession of Faith: A Catholic Catechism for A dults (San Fran­ cisco: Ignatius Press, 1 987), p. 346.

ON THE SITUATION

I3I

I had, in the aforementioned book, posed some import­ ant theological questions: for example, the one about the separability (or inseparability) of God's qualities of justice and mercy. 6 Could God's love one day lose its patience, with the result that he would be forced to proceed on the basis of sheer (punitive) justice? The answer was: Yes, certainly!7 The solution that I had suggested, namely, that God does not damn anyone, but that the man who irre­ vocably refuses love condemns himself, was not consid­ ered at all. I had also offered for consideration the fact that, along with the words of threat, Holy Scripture also contains many words of hope for all and that to transform the former into objective facts would mean that the latter would lose all sense and force: this, too, was left unnoticed in the polemic. On the other hand, my words were continually twisted with a view to claiming that he who hopes for the salvation of all his brothers and sisters "hopes hell empty" (what an expression!). Or that he who voices such a hope advocates the "universal redemption" (apokatastasis) condemned by the Church-something that I have expressly rejected: we stand completely and utterly under judgment and have no right, nor is it possible for us, to peer in advance at the Judge's cards. How can anyone equate hoping with know­ ing? I hope that my friend will recover from his serious illness -do I therefore know this? But: if I hope for you, for others, for everyone, then in the end I am also allowed to include myself. (Not the reverse: I hope for me; but I do not know with certainty 6 Above,

pp. 105ff. but, at the 7 " God [is] incontestably just in rewarding and punishing, 733 r ). p. 986, 1 Th, ( (!) it" deserve same time, full of love for those who

I J2

DARE WE HOPE

whether you are among the chosen.) Cardinal Danielou has put this splendidly: Too often we think of hope in too individualistic a manner as merely our personal salvation. But hope essentially bears on the great actions of God concern­ ing the whole of creation. It bears on the destiny of all mankind. It is the salvation of the world that we await. In reality hope bears on the salvation of all men-and it is only in the measure that I am immersed in them that it bears on me. 8 I might add here that, together with Danielou during our theological studies, I immersed myself in the works of the Greek Fathers, Origen and also, above all, Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor, and that Danielou was later able to continue his studies far more thoroughly than I was. This took place long before my meeting Adrienne von Speyr, whose · theology of Holy Saturday (Christ' s descent into the netherworld) was utterly condemned by my crit­ ics. According to Bokmann, it is "questionable at least here", 9 while Besler detects "numerous contradictions" in it 1 0 and concludes that "its teaching stands in contra­ diction to Christian revelation and to the Church' s Mag­ isterium" . 1 1 Unfortunately for Besler, the Holy Father 8

Essai sur le mystere de l'histoire (Paris, 1953) , p. 340. Th, 1986, p. 7255. That her commentary onJohn was rejected in Rome (ibid.) is pure invention; I have already pointed that out once before. 10 Ibid., p. 7260; the objections on p. 7261 are utterly fatuous. 1 1 Ibid. , p. 7263. That A [drienne] "is an authentic mystic . .. is surely to be denied" ( Th, 1 987, 3/ 44). 9

ON THE SITUATION

133

takes quite another view, as is evident from his address to the symposium on Adrienne von Speyr 1 2 that he wanted held in Rome. Thus, it would seem to be high time to burn the witch before she is beatified. In the case of Edith Stein, to whom I will leave the final word in this little book, they would, unfortunately, find it already too late for this. My critics act as though I were alone in the limbo to which they banish me. But lo and behold, I discover myself in the best of company here. Present are (as I showed earlier) my two great teachers Erich Przywara and Henri Cardinal de Lubac; my old teacher Rondet; my friend Fessard; His Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop of Paris; 1 3 the great Blonde!; the former socialist Peguy, who wants to be a Catholic only if he may have hope for all; Claude! in his famous Cantique de Palmyre (Prose, Pleiade, pp. 703 f); Gabriel Marcel; the tempestuous . Leon Bloy ("No creature is excluded from redemption, for other­ wise there would be no community of saints. The exclu­ sion of a single soul from the wondrous concert of the world is inconceivable and would pose a threat to the uni­ versal harmony"); 1 4 but also clearly Cardinal Ratzinger, Hermann-Josef Lauter, Walter Kasper, Gisbert Greshake and Hans-] urgen Verweyen. And whoever reads closely Adrienne von Speyr und ihre . kirchliche Sendung, Akten des Romischen Symposions ( 1 986), pp. 1 8 1f 1 J Cf his statement on Judas' fate: "Jesus' request for forgiveness, spoken with respect to all who were instruments of his Passion, . . . is an utterance of mercy, not a facile , irresponsible amnesty. Mercy is the other face of true j ustice" : Wagt den Glauben (Einsiedeln: Johannesverlag t 1987), pp. 97-98. 1 4 In Leon Bloy, Meditations d 'un solitaire en 1 9 1 6, in Oeuvres, vol. 9 (Paris: Mercure de France, 1 983), p. 240. 12

1 34

DARE WE HOPE

the text by Reinhold Schneider that was cited as evidence against me ' 5 will see how much his view is the same as that held by all of us. Guardini is certainly not absent, 1 6 nor also, last but not least, Karl Rahner, who has expressed many sound ideas on the subject. ' 7 In summa: a company in which one can feel quite comfortable. T}:ie last word, here as well, will go to the saints. Regard­ less of whether they think that there are or are not men in hell, the thought of that possibility remains unbearable to them: "If we _see a person, whom in a special way we love here below, with a great trial or suffering, it seems that our own very nature invites us to compassion; and if their trial is great, we ourselves become distressed. Well, who is there who can suffer seeing a soul in the supreme trial or trials that has no end?" (Teresa of Avila). 1 8 May we ' :i Th, 1 987, pp. 4 1-49. Schneider, in his tragicism, takes the impenitent thief as a symbol of our godless age. "The cross of the Jost" is the "terri­ ble sign that is set to rule . . . this age. " The other says to him: "We suffer justly." "It is an utterance on the Cross. For we will not escape the Cross. But it is also an utterance of quiet power, . .. for it is obvious that light streams down upon the one uttering it and that, in the circle around the Cross on which it is spoken, life takes on order and men become brothers. The 'No' is pennitted to go no farther." Christ suffers for the "unpar­ doned" as well. 16 Cf. his The Last Things: Conce rning Death, Pu rification after Death, Res­ u rrection, Judgment, and Ete rnity, trans. Charlotte E: Forsyth and Grace B. Branham (Notre Dame, Ind.: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1965), which, while citing Matthew 2 5 gives no commentary on the decisive parts, has a largely personal orientation. 17 Cf. only Foundations of Christian Faith, trans. William V. Dych (New York: Crossroad, 1 984), pp. 9off. i ll Teresa of Avila, The Book of He r Life, chap. 3 2, no. 6, in vol. 1 of The Collected Works of St. Teresa of Avila, trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, O. C.D., and Otilio Rodriguez, O.C.D. (Washington, D.C. : ICS Publications, Institute of Carmelite Studies, 1976), p. 2 15.

ON THE SITUATION

I 35

ther �fore pray the Church's prayer of hope: "Lord Jesus Chnst, to save all mankind you stretched out your arms on the cross. Let our work be pleasing to you: may it proclaim your salvation to the world. " 1 9

Liturgy of the Hours, Ordinary Time, 4th week, Wednesday, Mid­ afternoon Prayer. I might also note here that Fr. B. de Margerie-in France a traditionalist, scarcely recognized outsider, but in Germany discovered by right-wingers as a theological luminary and often cited in polemic-does not represent an authority for me. 19

2.

CHRISTIAN FAITH

It can hardly be out of place here to clarify our question by taking an initial look at the nature of Christian faith. That nature emerges most clearly from the situation of early Christian baptism, which-as the theology of the Fathers plainly shows us-"consists" in a "turning away from idols in order to consecrate oneself, through Christ, to the unbegotten God" (Justin, I Apol. , chap. 49). 1 This could take the following form: the person to be baptized, turned to face the west, renounced the devil and his temptations, then, turned to face the sunrise, responded to the threefold question of the bishop: "Do you believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit?" with a threefold "Yes", after (or during) . which he was submerged in the baptismal font. This trinitarian baptismal formula subsequently gave rise to the oldest credo formu­ las, all of which, of course, obviously contain the threefold division. 2 Faith implies this change of bodily direction; con­ version [German: " Be-kehrung"] , "to turn oneself toward i" On the following, see above all: Henri de Lubac, The Ch ristian Faith : A n Essay on the Structure of the Apostles ' Creed, trans. Brother Richard Arnandez, F.S.C. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986). 2 For all particulars: J. N. D. Kelly, Early Ch ristian Creeds, 3rd ed. (New York and London: Continuum, I 972). On the formulas of abjuration, cf. pp. 30-40, 44, 75, 399-400.

1 36

CHRISTIAN FAITH

1 37

that in which one had still not yet had faith" (Clemens Alex. Strom I I , I , 2) . This turning toward is one of the whole person toward the God to whom one entrusts oneself (it is no accident that the Latin word fides means both faith and trust; the faithful, fideles, are the God-loyal) because this God appears to us as truth and faithfulness, the true, enduringly sustaining meaning of our existence. "To believe as a Christian means understanding our existence as a response to the word, the logos, that upholds and main­ tains all things. It means affirming that the meaning we do not make but can only receive is already granted to us. " "The phrase ' I believe' could here be literally translated by ' I hand myself over to' " (J. Ratzinger) . 3 Thus w e find, in the case of the Fathers, a distinguish­ ing (constantly repeated all the way into the Middle Ages) of three levels within the act of faith, with only the third representing faith in its total fullness: credere Deum (belief that God exists) , credere Deo (belief in what God says) , credere in Deum (giving oneself believingly over to God) . 4 This third one certainly includes the two preceding forms, yet in such a way that "faith" implies, by its very essence, the response of the whole man . 5 "A personal challenge addressed to man by God, revelation calls forth from J Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Introduction to Christianity, trans. J. R. Fos­ ter, rev. ed. (Communio Books; San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004), pp. 73, 88. 4 De Lubac, Christian Faith, pp. 141-42. 5 lbid., p. 145; cf. p. 1 61: Christian faith is only externally comparable to the "faiths" of other religions: "Faith is not an abstract concept but the name for something that occurs only once, the response of man to the God that comes in Christ." Romano Guardini, Vom Leben des Glaubens (Mainz: Matthias Grunewald, 1935), p. 33 .

138

DARE WE HOPE

man an equally personal response: that is what faith is. " 6 "What, then, does it mean to believe in God? Believingly to enter into God" (Augustine, In Io_h Ev. tract. 29, 6). That this occurs in the community of the Church is self­ evident to the Fathers, and yet they expressly refrain (as the credo formulas also do) from formulating: "I believe in the Church" (in Ecclesiam); rather, the wording is : "I believe that the Church exists" (credo Ecclesiam): with, and inside of, the Church, I believe and entrust myself to God. 7 This unconditional entrusting of oneself to the truth of God contains in itself a similarly complete hope in God and love of God: "The faith in Christ that hopes in Christ and loves Christ" (Augustine, Sermo 144, 2). A living faith is inseparable from hope and love (cf. I Pet I :3-9). From this Christian understanding of faith, which understands the attitude of faith as an utter and "blind" throwing oneself into the arms of God, it �ollows deci­ sively for us: in the Church's creeds, only redemptive events have a place (the devil, from whom the believer has turned away, is in no case included, and a - "belief in the devil" would fly in the face of everything just said). What is included and corresponds centrally to the Gospel is the fact that Christ will be the Judge of us all, of "the living and - the dead". But this, in the context of the second and most extended part of the credo, is definitely an aspect of God's entire economy of redemption, which progresses from creation (Father) through redemption (Son) to sanc­ tification (Spirit). 6

7

De Lubac, Christian Faith, p . Ibid. , pp . 1 7 1 -20 1 .

282.

CHRISTIAN FAITH

1 39

The believer likewise throws himself into the arms of this judgment by Christ: "I do not even judge myself . . . It is the Lord who judges me" ( 1 Cor 4:3-4), for "none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord." Therefore, Paul forbids any human anticipation of this judgment: "For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. Why do you pass judgment on your brother? . . . Each of us shall give account of himself to God" (Rom 14: 7-12). Do you have the right to refuse to your brother the hope that you have invested for yourself, through your living faith, in your Judge? Since our whole eternal salvation is placed in the hands of our Judge, what is at issue here is an ultimate serious­ ness; the Christian knows that his activity is not a game that God allows him and does not take seriously. He knows that he must answer for his actions, that he owes an account as a steward of what has been entrusted to him. . . . There is a last court of appeal that preserves justice in order thus to be able to perfect love. A love that overthrew justice would create injustice _ and thus cease to be anything but a caricature of love. True love is excess of justice, excess that goes farther than justice, but never destruction of justice, which must be and must remain the basic form of love . Of course, one must also guard against the oppo­ site extreme. It cannot be denied that belief in the Last J udgment has at times assumed in Christian conscious­ ness a form in which, in practice, it was bound to lead to the destruction of the full faith in the redemption and the promise of mercy. . . .

DARE WE HOPE

Against the Maran atha (Our Lord, come!) was set the Dies irae. But the early Christian creeds intended noth­ ing of that kind: "The early Christians, with their cry ' Our Lord, come' (Maran atha), interpreted the second coming of Jesus as an event full of hope and joy, stretch­ ing their arms out longingly toward it as the moment of , the great fulfillment" (J. Ratzinger). 8 In support of his assertion, Cardinal Ratzinger cites a passage from the Second Epistle of Clement: "Brothers, we must think of Jesus as God, as he who judges the living and the dead. We must not think little of our salvation, for by thinking little of him we also think little of our hope" (2 Clem I : i f). The seriousness that we are confronted with is the seri­ ousness of a love that goes beyond all justice. God's love for every man is absolute; it is ineffable. Who can, "by rights", claim adequacy before it? No saint would presume to say, "I can." No one has loved God with his whole heart, with his whole soul, with all his strength. Everyone, without exception, has to say: "Lord, I am not worthy." All will someday have to stand before him, and then "every eye will see him, every one who pierced him; and all tribes of the earth will wail (for themselves). Even so. Amen" (Rev 1 :7). Nothing is more serious than love, precisely because it is· "abundance that goes farther than justice": one must surrender oneself to it for better or for worse.

8

lntroduction to Christianity, pp. 325-26.

3 . THE DIRECTIVES OF SCRIPTURE

That Jesus Christ could not give us, nor wished to give us-living as we do in constant danger of sinning, even grievously-a "report" on our life after death but rather enough light to enable us to have hope in God plus a sufficiently serious warning that we must take account of the real possibility of forfeiting our salvation: this was explained in some detail above in Dare We Hope "That All Men Be Saved " ? Still, in the New Testament there are two series of statements that we cannot bring together into an overall synthesis. The first throws open a seemingly unbounded prospect for our hope; but we cannot separate this series from the second one, which prohibits any quick and easy conclusions ("Everything is sure to turn out all right") and confronts · us relentlessly with the most serious possibility of our damnation. And indeed, precisely in the case where we "have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come", yet "then commit apostasy" . If we are among those who "crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt", we are "worthless and near to being cursed" (Heb 6:5-6, 8). Why should God, who gave up the most valuable thing he had-his Son-for us, still have grace to spare for him "_who has spurned the Son of God and profaned the blood

1 42

DARE WE HOPE

of the covenant by which he was sanctified and outraged the Spirit of grace"? (Heb ro: 29). In the case of John and his conception of God 's judg­ ment, the way that the two series of statements both inter­ twine with yet run counter to one another becomes more than obvious. Jesus says of himself both: "I did not come to judge the world but to save the world" (12:47), and "For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind" (9: 39). But the apparent contradiction is soon resolved: Jesus comes as the light of absolute love ("to the end" [r3: r]) in order to save all men. But how will this be, if there are some who consciously draw back from this love and refuse it (3: r 9; 9: 40--4 r; r 2:48)? The question, to which no final answer is given or can be given, is this: Will he who refuses it now refuse it to the last? To this there are two possible answers: the first says sim­ ply "Yes". It is the answer of the infemalists. The second says: I do not know, but I think it permissible to hope (on the basis of the first series of statements from Scripture) that the light of divine love will ultimately be able to penetrate every human darkness and refusal. I will draw on several examples to show how the first of these readings interprets the inost extreme warnings as implying the factual exis­ tence of a full hell and what then becomes of the first series of texts. Also, the reasons may be noted that show why the move from the warning to the established fact is really a "step" that-because it vitiates the first series-remains questionable. Everything begins with the inexorableness, inherent in the grace of Yahweh's turning to Israel, of the choice: "See, I have set before you this day life and good, death

THE D IRECTIVES OF SCRIPTURE

1 43

and evil . . . blessing and curse; therefore choose life" (Deut 3 o: l 5, l 9). Then follow the long list of blessings and the even longer one of curses. It is of no importance here to trace the variations on this basic motif through ·the whole of the Old Testament. We know that disaster was initially experienced and interpreted as earthly punishment for breaking away from the Covenant, while death and Hades appeared as the common lot of all mortals, but that early on death as punishment was associated with the notion of fire (downfall of the company of Korah [Num 26]; cf the image of God's anger as fire, along with other images [Deut 32:22-26] ). In the prophets, the theme of choosing crops up, but scarcely anything about punishment in the next world, except in the concluding verse of Isaiah (the fire that shall not be quenched and the worm that shall not die in the corpses in the valley of Hinnom, images that are taken up again and again in Sir T l 7 LXX and the New Testament). It is in Daniel 12:2 that mention is first made of a resurrection of some to everlasting life and of others to shame and everlasting contempt, which finds an echo in 2 Maccabees 7:9. Here, too, are found for the first time prayer and sacrifice for the fallen soldiers (in whose tunics idols that were forbidden by law were found), so that, on the day of their resurrection, they might be delivered from sin (2 Mace 12:39-45). Whereas (especially in the Book of Job) the netherworld is - characterized primarily by extreme darkness, while the place of punishment (gehenna) in the Book of Enoch and other intertestamental writings con­ tains ice, gloom and fire, during the latest pre-Christian times the focus of man's final destiny shifts more and more away from the people and toward the individual: the l�te Psalms distinguish, within Israel itself, the persecuted

1 44

DARE WE HOPE

righteous men who implore God from the "horde of evil­ doers" and godless ones. Neither the Baptist, who heralds jud gment by God and speaks of inextinguishable fire for the evildoers, nor Jesus, who employs the Old Testament images of everlasting fire ' the outer darkness and the worm that shall not die, needed to worry about not being understood. Even in the parable that sees the rich glutton consign ed to a fiery Sheol (Hades: Lk 16:23), Jesus says nothing that his disciples can­ not understand, not even in Matthew 2 5, where the evil­ doers are cast into the eternal fire that (as the Apocrypha and the Letter of Jude also repeat) is prepared for the devil and his angels. The individual responsibility of each man before God's throne of judgment (clearly evident since Ezekiel) comes strongly to the fore in the New Testament, above all in the Pauline letters and the Catholic letters. Still, there is continued talk, in the Old Testament vein, of the day of wrath (Rom 2 : 5; r Thess r : r o), of possib_le damnation (r Cor 3:r r -15), of a two-sided vengeance (2 Thess r :5r o): "Each one" will "receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body" (2 Cor 5 : r o). The truly new element in the New Testament is that the old righteousness of the Covenant becomes concret­ ized into acknowledgment of the ultimate Word of God in Jesus Christ: "He who is not with me is against me" (Lk ·r r :23). "For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words . . . , of him will the Son of man also be ashamed ' when he comes [to judge]" (Mk 8: 38). All of the writings of John are interwoven with the crisis (decision, j udg­ ment) between Christ as the light and rejection of him as the darkness. And this "Yes" or "No" transcends the

THE DIRECTIVES OF SCRIPTURE

1 45

bounds of temporal life; there is a resurrection of life and a resurrection of jud gm ent (Jn 5 :29). This same twofold division runs through all of the First Letter of John. For Jesus, the death of the body counts for naught; of whoever believes in him it is said, "though he die, yet shall he live" (Jn I I :2 5) , for he has eternal life; whoever does not obey him shall not see life, but the wrath of God shall rest upon him (3 : 3 6). The absolute decision must be made in one's earthly life; in the hereafter, it will be too late: "You will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he" (8 : 24). Thus the sin against the Spirit (denial of what God has revealed as evident) can also not be forgiven in the next life (Mt 1 2 : 3 2). But it would be pointless to cite still more texts documenting the absolutely required decision about Christ and God's testimony on his behal£ Just one further addition: namely, Jesus' unconditional demand for love of one's neighbor and of one's enemy as a prerequisite for receiving God's forgiveness. If you do not forgive men, neither will God forgive you (Mt 6 : 1 4). Or, if you have received forgiveness yet treat your neighbor with harsh justice, God will have to treat you with a sim­ ilar lack of mercy (Mt 1 8 : 3 3 ; James 2 : 1 3 ) ; you will be put into prison· until you have paid all of your debt (Mt 5 :26; 1 8 : 3 4) : this imprisonment is severe, but not eternal. And when Jesus informs the self-righteous that sinners would enter the kingdom of God before the self-righteous would (Mt 2 1 : 3 1 ) , he does not thereby announce that they will meet with eternal ruin; nor does he damn Israel, which does not acknowledge him, when he predicts her forsak­ enness (Lk 1 3 : 3 5) . And when he tells the ·unrepentant cit­ ies that they will "be brought down to Hades" and stand in_ the last place on the Day of Judgment (Mt I I :23£), he

1 46

DARE WE HOPE

is speaking the same prophetic language as that of Ezekiel (16) on Jerusalem. In view of the quite numerous threatening texts in the New Testament, which spiritually deepen the truly horri­ ble threats against a rebellious Israel (Lev 26: 14-43; Deut 28: r5-68) because they extend the perspectives of pun­ ishm�nt into the hereafter, the question arises-ultimately unanswerable for us-of whether these threats by God, who "reconciles himself in Christ with the world", will . be actually realized in the way stated. Jonah's disappoint­ ment at the fact that God did not carry out his categorical prophecies of ruin for Nineveh occupied the Scholastics to no end. Is the transition from the threat to the knowledge that it will be carried out necessary? It seems all the more logical if we are convinced that God, with his redemptive grace, does not wish to force anyone to be saved, that man alone and not God is to blame if he refuses God's love and thus is damned (on this, see the statements by the Council of Quiercy in DS 621ff.). But what, then, becomes of the statements of the sec­ ond series, in which God's redemptive work for the sinful world as undertaken by Christ is represented as a complete triumph over all things contrary to God? Here one cannot gef by without making distinctions that, while retaining the notion of God's benevolent will, nevertheless allow it to be frustrated by man's wickedness. "God . . . desires all inen to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all " ( r Tim 2 : 4-6). Permit us, Lord, to make a small distinction in your will: " God wills in advance [voluntate antecedente] that all men achieve salvation,

THE DIRECTIVES OF SCRIPTURE

1 47

but subsequently [consequenter] he wills that certain men be damned in accordance with the requirements of his jus­ tice" (S. Th . I, 1 9: 6 ad 1 ; De Ver. 23 :2). One can also speak of God' s having an "absolute" and a "conditional" will ( I Sent. 46: l , I ad 2) . Further, Christ is referred to as "the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe" ( 1 Tim 4: 1 0) : Can we not see a qualification in this formulation? But what about Jesus' triumphant words when he looks forward to the effect of his Passion: "Now shall the ruler of this world be cast out; and I , when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself" (Jn 1 2 : 3 1 -3 2) ? Oh, he will perhaps attempt to draw them all but will not suc­ ceed in holding them all. "Be of good cheer, I have over­ come the world" (Jn 1 6: 3 3 ) . Unfortunately, only half of it, despite your efforts, Lord. "The grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men" (Tit 2: 1 1 ) -let us say, more precisely, to offer salvation, since how many will accept it is questionable. God does not wish "that any should per­ ish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Pet 3 :9). He may well wish it, but unfortunately he will not achieve it. "Christ" was "offered once to take away the sins of all " (Heb 9 : 2 8). 1 That might be true, but the real question is whether all will allow their sins to be taken away. "God has consigned all men [Jews, Gentiles and Christians] to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all " (Rom 1 1 : 3 2). That he has mercy upon all may well be true, but does this mean that all will have mercy on this mercy, that is, will allow it to be bestowed upon them? And if we are r Here, the biblical version used by von Balthasar has been translated directly from the German. The Revised Standard Version contains the wc:>rd "many" where the German has "all" .-TRANS.

DARE WE HOPE

assured, in this connection, that one day "all Israel will be saved" (Rom 1 1 :26), then this sweeping assertion need not, of course, include every particular individual. The prison letters appear to speak in this sweeping manner, too, when they say that God was pleased, through Christ, "to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in he�ven" (Col 1 : 20) , or that he purposes "to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth" (Eph 1 : 1 o); hymnlike and "doxological" talk of this kind need not be taken literally. The same applies, of course, to the Philippians hymn in which, at the end, before the victo­ riously exalted Christ, " every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2 : 1 0- 1 1 ) . And if Jesus prays to the Father: "You have given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him" (Jn 17:2), would it not be better to distinguish the first "all", which can be universal, from the second "all", which refers only to a certain num­ ber of the chosen? But can the overpowering passage in 2 Corinthians 5 : 20( be in any way interpreted as restrictive: "For our sake" God "made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God"? And is it not all but embarrassing when the same Paul, in Romans 5, 2 hammers home to us that in Adam (the principle of natural man) " all died", "but God's gift of grace, thanks to the one man Jesus Christ, abounded for all in much greater measure"? That is stressed seven times in a row, with the culmination being that "through the trespass In the following context, too, the biblical versions used by von Balthasar have been translated directly from the German.-TRANS. 2

THE D I RECTIVES OF SCRIPTURE

I 49

of all " (for all share the responsibility for Christ's condem­ nation) "justification and life came for all " . The repeatedly stressed words "much more" and "abounding" cannot be ignored (Rom 5: I 5-2 I ). All just pious exaggeration? Many passages could be added here, I do not at all deny that their force is weakened by the series of threatening ones; I only dispute that the series of threats invalidates the cited universalist statements. And I claim nothing more than this: that these statements give us a right to have hope for all men, which simultaneously implies that I see no need to take the step from the threats to the positing of a hell occupied by our brothers and sisters, through which our hopes would come to naught. I do not wish to contradict anyone who, as a Christian, cannot be happy without denying the universality of hope to us so that he can be certain of his full hell: that was, after all, the view of a large number of important theologians, especially among the followers of Augustine. But, in return, I would like to request that one be permitted to hope that God's redemptive work for his creation might succeed. Certainty cannot be attained, but hope can be justified. That is probably the reason why the Church, which has sanctified so many men, has never said anything about the damnation of any individual.3 Not even about that of Judas, who became in a way the representative example for something of which all sinners are also guilty. Who can know the nature of the remorse that seized Judas when he saw that Jesus had been condemned (Mt 2 T 3)? 3 "The Church has never said of any concrete individual that he is damned": Johann Auer, "Siehe, ich mache alles neu. " Der Glaube an der Vol­ len4ung der Well (Regensburg: Pustet, 1984), p. 71.

4 . HELL FOR OTHERS

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the revelation of God's high- • est, unsurpassable love for us, who care not one iota for that love, have absolutely no conception of its dimensions and are, almost, happy if someone wishes to remove the burden of our guilt before God from us and carry it him­ self "While we were yet sinners Christ died for us . . . while we were enemies" (Rom 5:8, ro), that is, godfor­ saken ones, who "have turned their back" to God, "and not their face" (Jer 2:27). But then, is any man capable of looking into the coun­ tenance of eternal, absolute love, of being "equal to" that? And would not everyone who, in earnest faith, would like to direct his life toward this love first have to become exis­ tentially aware of the infinite distance from it, of his own godforsaken half-heartedness and indifference-in order not to succumb to the delusion that he could, just as he is, throw himself into God's arms and suddenly be capable of living in the "consuming fire" of his love? With a view to acquainting us with this distance, which is unbridgeable for us, Ignatius of Loyola, at the end of the meditations on sin that serve to introduce his Spiri­ tual Exercises, has us make a final meditation on hell. With the greatest seriousness, everyone must go through it for himself, for himself alone: placing himself, with all his

HELL FOR OTHERS

151

senses, into the "flames", into the "smoke" and "stench", "bitterness", into the "wailing", "howling", "screaming", "blasphemies" against Christ and those who are his-not just through an effort of imagination but in the conscious­ ness that all those who, "despite their faith, did not uphold his commands" (love, of course) condemned themselves to remain forever remote from the eternal love that they rejected. This should be done, however, with a view to Christ's crucified love and in wonder that such a fate has so far been spared me through his mercy because he died, incomprehensibly, for my sins. Becoming aware of the "opposition" (no. 59) between "his wisdom and my igno­ rance, his righteousness and my unrighteousness" is, for Ignatius, the condition of my being accepted into humble service (no. I 14) for Christ. "Hell" here is something that falls to me personally­ not hypothetically but by full rights-which, without any side glances at others, I have to withstand in utmost seriousness. And I do not need-like Schwab's rider over Lake Constance-to sink down dead after learning of my escape but may live in gratefulness to him who carried me through the ice of his godforsakenness. But woe is me if, looking back, I see how others, who were not so lucky as I, are sinking beneath the waves; if, that is, I objectify hell and tum it into a theological­ scientific "object" and begin to ponder on how many per­ ish in this hell and how many escape it. For at that moment everything is transformed: hell is no longer something that is ever mine but rather something that befalls "the others", while I, praise God, have escaped it. And 1- can cite support diligently and piously from Holy Scripture: "But as for th� cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers,

DARE WE HOPE

fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone" (Rev 2 1 : 8). "Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idol­ aters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inhe�t the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9- I O). But, the theological Monsignore tells himself, I do not seem to fall into any of these categories. And at once the prayer is on his lips: "God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax col­ lector" (Lk r8: 1 1). Then one goes on to populate hell, according to one's own taste, with all sorts of monsters: Ivan the Terrible, Stalin the Horrible, Hitler the Madman and all his cronies, which certainly results, as well, in an imposing company that one would prefer not to encoun­ ter in heaven. It can be taken as a motif running through the history of theology that, . whenever one fills hell with a massa damnata of sinners, one also, through some kind of conscious or unconscious trick (perhaps cautiously, and yet reassuredly), places oneself on the other side. We might ask the great Augustine, the teacher of grace and love who has the greater portion of mankind destined to eternal hell, whether-with his hand ·on his heart-he ever worried, after his conversion, about his eternal salvation. Much that is great is promised us by the Lord for the future, but something far greater, as we know, has been done for us. Where were the godless, what were they, when Christ died for them? Who can doubt that he will give his life to his saints, he who gave them even his

HELL FOR OTHERS

1 53

death? He made a wonderful barter with us: In taking our death upon himself, he pledged to us most faithfully that he would give us life in him. How could he, whose promises are truthful, not give the saints their reward? 1 The entire mass [ of mankind] deserves punishment, and if all should be allotted the torment of damnation owing to them, that would certainly not be unj ust. There­ fore, any that are set free from this through grace are not called vessels of their own merits, but "vessels of mercy" (Rom 9 : 2 3 ) . Whose mercy? That of him who sent Christ Jesus into the world to save sinners ( r Tim r : I 5) and who foreknew and predestined (praedestina­ vit) and called and j ustified and glorified them (Rom 8 : 29f) ? Who , then, could be so touched with madness that he would not give unending thanks to the mercy of him who set free those he wished to free? He could by no means censure the j ustice of him who had damned all without exception? 2 It would b e superfluous to quote any more here , and superfluo us as well to blame the great Doctor for the her­ esy of " certainty of faith" . But what a story of misery he set in train, all the way to the Reformation and b eyond, with his idea that, in prac­ tic e , o nly some are "predestined" to heaven. At bottom, it makes no difference _ whether they are many or few. Here one could think back to the Jewish " Fourth Book of Ezra " , written after the destruction of Jerusalem, in whic h the "prop het" , during a journey through the hells,

1 2 _

PL Suppl. II, pp . 545 £. De natura et gratia 5 ; PL 44:250.

1 54

DARE WE HOPE

glimpses the immense number of the damned and asks God ' in horror ' what sort of a world that is. God's answer: "I rejoice in the few who find salvation; I do not want to harbor sorrow on account of the multitude of those who are damned. " Ezra, of course, is to regard himself as saved. 3 It ":7ould be pointless to unfold here the unendingly com­ plicated and endless speculations, running from Augustine all the way through the Middle Ages, that attempt, in a thousand ways, under the assumption of the certainty of a · (more or less densely) populated hell, to relieve God of the blame for this. The only thing of interest for us is that this hell is usually there "for the others", for the sort, naturally, to whom one can "give hell" because of their sins with­ out seriously having to fear it for oneself. When so poor a fellow as Gottschalk, who in matters of predestination hardly got beyond a logically consistent Augustinianism, was condemned, whipped and thrown into jail for life, he was still certain, in his prayers, of belonging to the elect. 4 If, to be sure, it was the Reformers who first made a guiding principle of the religious certainty of being cho­ sen, that doctrine did not just spring up out of the ground with no preparation; the supernatural hope of winning salvation was regarded-to give but one example-as infallible by Bonaventure. We know what struggles of conscience the young Luther had to go through in order to flee from the thought of damnation, in naked faith, to God. He finds that he is not at all equal to God's com­ mand and, thus, that, by rights, God will punish him. Or 3

RieBler, Alljudisches Sch rifttum auj3erhalb der Bibel ( 1 928), pp. 274, 276. Lambot, Oeuvres . . . de Godescalc d ' Orbais (Louvain, 1 945) , pp. 7 3, 1 8 3 , and so on. 4

HELL FOR OTHERS

155

did God want him to have this experience so that the sinner would give himself over to him for better or for worse, acknowledging that he is nothing in himself and must be prepared to go into hell if that should be ·required for the glorification of divine justice? Thus it becomes the "basic question" for Luther "whether it is possible to be aware of unity with God when starting from the absolute­ ness of self-condemnation" . 5 Could one learn " to think constantly of absolute rejection and, likewise, of uncon­ ditional reprieve as simultaneously conjoined with respect to oneself" ? 6 " For Luther, the matter is bitterly serious, even though it concerns the mere possibility of rejection. " 7 In the "lecture on the Letter to the Romans ( r 5 r 5-r 5 r 6) , he regards unquestioning certainty of faith as a consola­ tion that can be permitted the weak; the strong Christian would have to endure the tension and "prepare himself seriously for the possibility of himself being · among the rejected. Love of God first shows itself in its full purity only when one affirms God's will even though it destroys one's own happiness . " 8 Later, admittedly, for Luther too, 5 Karl Holl, Gesammelte A ufsatze I, Luther, 7th ed. (Tiibingen, 1948), p. 68. 6 Ibid., p. 144. 7 Ibid, p. I 5 I . 8 WA II, 2 1 5 , pp. 8:tf : "For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ" (Rom 9:3)-.

These words seem strange, even foolish, to those who think them­ selves holy.... For those, however, who love God truly, with the love of a child and friend that does not stem from nature but comes solely from the Holy Spirit, these words are wondrously beautiful and the testimony of an exemplary model of the most consummate sort. Men like this freely commit themselves to whatever God wills, even to hell and to eternal death if God wishes this so that his will

DARE WE HOPE

the notion of the certainty of salvation comes so strongly to the fore that he adopts for all men the standpoint that he had initially allowed only for the weak. The position of Calvin and of classical Calvinism is too familiar to require detailed description: the twofold divi­ sion of mankind into the chosen (elus) and the damned (repro�ves) is so unequivocal that we can tell empirically, from the character of their unbelief or weak belief, that they belong to the latter class. In Institutio III, 2 , Calvin describes the "pure and clear knowledge" that our belief in the redemptive work of Christ through the Holy Spirit has engendered in our hearts and lists the identifying si gns that distinguish this authentic belief from the "infirm and transitory" one of the damned. They "never attain this secret inner revelation of their salvation, which Scripture ascribes only to the chosen" (no. 12). Thus, for Calvin's successors, "the certainty of salvation and of the state of grace" is "the essential characteristic of belief and the most immediate effect that faith produces in the consciousness of the chosen . . . an immediate certitudo abs�luta, occurring together with belief itself " . 9 One really has to ask oneself how, given an eternally valid bifurcation of mankind like this, simple human love of one's neighbor, or even love might be fully accomplished, so little do they care for the pursuit of things that are their own. And yet, since they thus conform them­ selves so unreservedly to God's will, it is impossible that they would remain in hell. Romerbrief- Vorlesung I 5 I 5-15 I 6 3rd ed. (Munich, 1957), p. 302 9 Heinrich Heppe, Reformierte Dogmatik, newly revised by E. Bizer (Neukirchen, 1 935), pp. 410-11. References from classical dogmatics on this: 411-3 I .

HELL FOR OTHERS

1 57

of one's enemy in Christ's sense, could still be possible. It should not remain unmentioned, however, that certain late Catholic Scholastics, for their part, had racked their brains about whether, assuming that God were · to reveal to me privately that one of my fellowmen was destined to hell, I should still love that person with Christian love or would, instead, have to treat him with politeness only. The Council of Trent finally bolted the door on this whole doctrine of a "certainty of faith" about being cho­ sen. 1 0 Karl Barth, for his part, dealt this Calvinist doctrine a final blow when he declared that Jesus Christ died for us sinners, as the only one rejected by God, in order that we might all become chosen ones in him: a doctrine that, as I have shown elsewhere, comes too close to the doctrine of ap okatastasis. What remains for me an object of hope becomes for him practically a certainty. Luther had often voiced the same idea: "Christ, too, more than all the saints, was condemned and abandoned. He did not, as some pre­ tend, suffer only lightly but really and truly gave himself over, for our benefit, to God the Father and into eternal damnation." 1 1

JO OS I 534, I 564, I 565. Romerb rief- Vorlesung, pp. 302-3 •

11

5 . JOY OVER DAMNATION

That the Parable of the Rich Glutton and the Poor Lazarus is not meant as anything more than an earnest warning to the living to have mercy on the beggar at their door is clear. Even if it is described in such drastic terms how the one tormented in the flames of Hades pleads for a drop of water from the fingertips of Lazarus, who is in the "bosom of Abraham", the allegory should not evoke questions about the mental state experienced by Abraham and Lazarus at the sight of the tormented man: Do they feel compassion, indifference, or . . . ? In the context of the allegory, such a question is absurd. For its "intention is directed toward man's salvation, not toward giving purely concrete information as such"; it "aims at saying something kerygmatic for his present life, something relevant here and now" . All New Testament and theological talk about hell has but one point: "To bring man to come to grips with his life in view of the real possibility of eternal ruin and to understand revelation as a demand of the utmost seriousness. The fundamental reference to this redemptive meaning of the dogma must therefore serve as both a bound­ ary marker and an internal guideline for all speculation in this area" (J. Ratzinger). Assuming, however, that there might really be such a vantage point from which to survey the abyss between 1 58

JOY OVER DAMNATION

1 59

heaven and hell, would not a conscientious theologian still have to ask himself the question of how the blessed feel when they see certain of their brothers and sisters roasting in hell? The question arises, of course, only if, first, there are such people in hell and, second, one can see them from within heaven, or at least miss them there. At the end of the Book of Isaiah, there is a description of how those who were saved in the apocalyptic, magnificent ( earthly) Jerusalem walk out through the city gates; they "look on the dead bodies of the men that have rebelled against me; for their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh" (Is 66:24). In place of "abhorrence", the Septuagint has "sight [to see]", and the Latin translation by Jerome reads: "et erunt usque ad satietatem visionis omni cami" (PL 28:848), which translates literally as: "and they shall be a sight for all flesh to look upon till satiated"-a rather dark passage. Be that as it may, there are comparable passages in the Old Testament, for instance, Psalm 58:6, I O: "O God, break the teeth in their mouths; . . . The righteous will rejoice when he sees the vengeance; he will bathe his feet in the blood of the wicked. " Now, the author of the theological textbook for the Middle Ages, Peter Lombard, concluded his work with the question of whether the inhabitants of the heavenly Jerusalem, too, will someday stand before the gates of the city and "look upon" those languishing in fire, and what impression this "satiating sight" (the author refers specifi­ cally to Jerome) will have on them. "In the end, we ask", Peter Lombard concludes, "whether the -sight of the pun­ ishment of the damned tarnishes [decoloret] the glory of the blessed or enhances their blessedness. " Like Gregory

1 60

DARE WE HOPE

the Great, he observes that, in heaven, "there will no lon­ ger be any compassion for misery", and thus the joy of the heavenly cannot be dampened. "And although their joys are sufficient to them, it contributes to their height­ ened glory to see all the punishments of the evildoers that they have escaped through grace. " "They give thanks for their salvation when they perceive the unutterable misery of the godless. For 'The righteous will rejoice when he sees the vengeance' (Ps 58:r n)" (4 Sen t. 50). The seraphic teacher Bonaventure, who otherwise can speak quite bluntly about hell, avoids commentary on this last observation by the Lombard. He declares only (again · with a quotation from Psalm 5 8) that the blessed see hell while the damned do not see heaven, at least not after the Last Judgment, since that would distract them from their torment. He, too, agrees with Gregory that compassion is something earthly and does not belong to "the . goodness of nature in general" (4, d. 50, p. 2 , a. r , q. 3 ). Thomas, by contrast, does not draw back from even the thorniest of questions. He poses for himself the objection that compassion is, after all, a mode of love, and love is consummate in the blessed. God, too, takes pity on our misery, as do the angels. To be sure: "Whoever has com­ passion for another participates in a way · in his suffering, but the blessed cannot participate any more in anyone's misery." But do they really rejoice at the punishments of the damned? That would be hate . or spite. Again, there is the evidence of the aforementioned biblical passages against this. What, then, can be said? God, angels and men can have compassion for sinners as long as they are on earth by wishing to help them find salvation. "In the next world, however, their misery can no longer be changed,

JOY OVER DAMNATION

161

and thus there can also no longer be any proper compas­ sion." But what about joy over this? Not per se, but still per accidens, insofar as the righteous, with a view to divine justice, rejoice at their own liberation and merely "along with this at the torments of the damned" (4, d. 50, q. 2 , a. 3 and 4). It may be left to the more diligent to plow through the hundreds upon hundreds of commentaries on the Sen­ tences (published and unpublished) and to investigate the positions of countless theologians on this embarrassing-I would rather say instead shameful-problem. But can it be completely avoided under the assumption of a hell that we know· with certainty to be full-for instance, if I were to see, from my position in heaven, my mother or my best friend undergoing eternal torture? The point is not to paint a pathetic picture of such sit­ uations but rather to pose the absolutely sober, unavoid­ able question: Under the aforementioned hypothesis, is every human, every Christian, bond-designated as communio sanctorum-simply annulled? And more pro­ foundly, as seen from the viewpoint of God himself: Does God no longer love the damned, 1 for whom, after all, A. Auer says on this, not particularly convincingly: "All men will be saved in eternity, because God is love. In addition, it is frequently noted that we ourselves could not be happy being with God if, 'among our­ selves', we were to see our brothers and sisters eternally damned. This seems to be based on an all too naive human understanding of eternal bliss that cannot do justice to our Catholic image of God as Holy Trinity. Could there perhaps also be an erroneous (Marxist?) conception of society 1

at work here?" Among the many who sent me angry letters, an especially cunning person came up with the following: "Can one long for one's condemned rel­ atives or friends when one is in heaven? Jesus says that, in the next world,

1 62

DARE WE HOPE

his Son has died? Or-if I may revert to the hypothesis that I developed earlier-do the absolute naysayers bum in the fire of the absolute divine love that also embraces them, and what sort of effect does such a situation have on God?

men will become like angels; blood relationships will no longer play any role. The only binding thing then is sharing the same disposition. 'Who­ ever fulfills the Father's will is mother, brother or sister to me.' If, on earth, I had known my mother to be an impenitent whore, then I would not long for her when in heaven." Is that certain for one who loves in God? And what if she was not an impenitent whore?

6 . "ACCURSED AND CUT OFF FROM CHRIST FOR THE SAKE OF MY BRETHREN"

Paul, who had just (Rom 8:39) assured us that nothing could separate him from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord, declares in the verse immediately following, "in the Holy Spirit", his unceasing sorrow on account of his "brethren" , his "kinsmen according to the flesh", and says that he would wish himself accursed and cut off from Christ if he could thereby bring them to Christ. We will see shortly how the commentators twist and turn in order to cope with such a delirious assertion. First, however, we must consider the astonishing fact that in this he had a predecessor in Moses. God is outraged at the making of the golden calf. Moses had come down from the mountain with the tables of the Covenant and, in a state of similar anger at the sight of the dancing people, had broken the tables to pieces. The calf is destroyed, but on the following day Moses announces that he will try to appease Yahweh; he . goes up onto the mountain and offers himself as a sacrifice in atonement for the sins of the people: "But now, if you will forgive their sin-and if not, blot me, I beg you, out of your book [of life] which you have written" (Ex 32:32). This action by Moses is greatly celebrated in the Old Testament: God "said he would destroy them-had not 1 63

DARE WE HOPE

Moses, his chosen one, stood in the breach before him, to turn away his wrath from destroying them" (Ps 106:23). Jeremiah speaks as Moses: "Remember how I stood before you to speak good for them, to turn away your wrath from them" (Jer 18:20). And again, there are similar words in Ezekiel (13:5; 22:30). In Deuteronomy, Moses' offering of himself to God is described as an intercessory prostra­ tion before God that lasted for forty days and forty nights (Deut 9:25). But several of the Fathers have also defended this heroic act of love by Moses, particularly Chrysostom, extending up to Bernard and Rupert of Deutz, 1 who says: "We do not want to reduce what was said by Moses in utmost seri­ ousness to a trivial meaning just because we, as weaklings and frigid souls, are unable to comprehend the riches of Moses' spirit, which was aglow with love." No objection is of any use: that it is sinful to want to separate. oneself from God (but it was done out of love); that the whole thing was impossible anyway (but that was not in Moses' field of vision); that it was disordered and imprude-nt (but it took place out of love for the great mass of the people: one indi­ vidual may perish if many thousands are thereby rescued). Nor is Paul's offering of himself to God for the sake of his tribal brethren meant to eclipse Moses' deed. Ori­ gen compares Romans 9:3 with Exodus 32:32; indeed, he goes beyond that to compare Paul's offer to be accursed Passages given by Cornelius a Lapide, Exoduskommentar (Vives, 1 895), pp. 729-32. In conclusion, Cornelius makes reference to the self-sacrifice of pagan heroes for their fatherland, but he emphasizes that these sacrificed only their bodies, while Moses offered his soul. Cf. also the passage from Chrysostom that Thomas Aquinas cites on this passage in his interpretation of the Letter to the Romans. 1

"ACCUR SED AND CUT OFF FROM CHRIST"

I65

with what is said in Galatians 3:r 3, where Christ becomes a curse for our sake. 2 Gregory Nazianzen ( Or. 2 , 5 5) says the same: Paul is here emulating Christ. All the Fathers sing the praises of his love of his enemies. 3 It is ako point­ less to proffer minimalistic interpretations here.4 "In any case, Paul's offer is intended seriously." 5 "For the Chris­ tian, being prepared to do this is the utmost proof of his love for Israel. " 6 And again, Luther takes Paul's wish very seriously , seeing it as evidence of consummate love (Letter to the Romans, on the relevant passage). Do these two examples of extreme love stand isolated, without emulation? No; in the history of the saints there are many instances of emulation, the wish-even the vow-to sacrifice one's own salvation for the salvation of others. The history of taking this surely dangerous risk has probably not yet been written, and I do not wish to try writing it here. But what sorts of _ things do we not Romerkommentar, PG 14 : I 13 Sf. More details are in K.H. Sch elkle, Paulus, Lehrer der Viiter (Diisseldorf, 1 956), pp. 327-30. 4 For example, Alvarez de Paz, De vita spirituali (Lyon, 1608). "He wishes to do with out the consoling feeling of the presence of Christ for a time" (632a); oth er watered-down interpretations are given in R. Cornely, Romer (1896), pp. 473f. s Otto Mic hel, Der Brief an die Rome r, 4th ed. (1966), p. 225. 6 Ernst Kasemann, An die Romer (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1973), p. 246. Ulrich Wilckens, Der Brief an die Romer; EKK (Zurich : Benziger, 1980), also draws th e parallel between Romans 9:3 and Exodus 32:32 and sees that "Paul follows, in a certain respect, the beh avior of Christ" : "As Christ brought th e curse of th e law upon himself in order to save lost sinners, so now Paul wants to save his breth ren, wh o h ave become lost thr�:) Ugh their unbelief, by making h imself accursed and destined to ruin." Of course he knows: "Th e Cross alone is th e locus of esch atological sin created through God's 2

3

righ_teousness" (2 : l 87).

1 66

DARE WE HOPE

find in the hidden, shadowy comers of Christian history; what limits are reached in the imploring prayers of Chris­ tian mothers for their sons and daughters who have gone astray? What limits to the offering up of self by martyrs or even by simple priests for their enemies or irretrievable charges? Only God could reveal it to us, in inseparable conn�ction with the dying cry of his Son: "My God, why have you forsaken me?" For in this cry-when the Son of God became a "curse" and was made "to be sin" for. us-all the offerings up of self that seem so insane to us, of Moses and Paul, are caught up, taken in and gone beyond. Here we come to deep waters, in which every human mind begins to flounder. Can human defiance really resist to the end the representative assumption of its sins by the incarnate God? If one replies to this confidently and flatly: "Yes, man can do that" and thereby fills hell with naysayers, then the theologians will again have to set up strange distinctions within God's will for grace: there is, then, a "sufficient grace" (gratia sufficiens), characterized as something that, from God's viewpoint, would have to be sufficient for converting the sinner yet is rejected by the sinner in such a way that it is actually not sufficient for achieving its purpose; and an "efficacious grace" (gratia efficax), which is capable of attaining its goal. On the other hand, we will not be allowed to say that this latter simply takes the sinner's will by surprise, since his assent has to be freely given. Into what sort of darkness are we straying here? Christ's representative assumption of the guilt for sin must certainly not be understood as a magical-mechanical exchange: apart from the Cross, I am a sinner and can­ didate for hell, but on the basis of the Cross my guilt is taken away and I am a candidate for heaven. This is surely

"ACCURSED AND CUT OFF FROM CHRIST"

I 67

not how it works. Without my consent, given that I am a free person, nothing can just have its way with me. But how, then, are we to understand the grace that is effected through the representative work of Christ (and, -included in that, of Moses, Paul and all who offer themselves as sacrifices for others)? Tentatively, we can say this: that the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of absolute freedom, allows us to see, within our free spirit, what our own true freedom would be, that is, by confronting us with ourselves, with our own highest pos­ sibility. We would not be able just to say "Yes" to ourselves (that is effected for us vicariously); also, the meaningfulness of such a "Yes" and the desirefor it are set before us, indeed, inspired in us. Do you really want to exist forevermore in contradiction with yourself ? Grace can advance as far as that. And if one wishes to keep to the distinctions noted above, then one would have to say: grace is "efficacious" when it presents my free­ dom with an image of itself so evident that it cannot do other than freely seize itself, while grace would be merely "sufficient" if this image did not really induce my free­ dom to affirm itself but left it preferring to persist in its self-contradiction. To push on any farther into these deep waters is not permitted us. We have to stop at this observation: it would be in God's power to aPow the grace that flows into the world from the self-sacrifice of his Son (2 Cor 5:19) to grow powerful enough to become his "efficacious" grace for all sinners. But precisely this is something for which we can only hope. However, if, in closing, we look back to Moses and Paul, something is evident that lends encouragement to

1 68

DARE WE HOPE

this hope. The "decline" [Untergang] for which both of them wished when appealing to God was sufficient to bring about the "arising" [Aujgang] of that to which they were committed. In the former case, God's displeasure is mollified; Yahweh will send his angel out before the p eo­ ple who have been wandering in the desert so that they may be led into the promised land. And in the latter, the apostle will be able to add, as a concluding sentence, "All Israel will be saved. " It is the loving declines that transform . themselves into the grace of the free arisings . That ought to be said to those thousands of mothers who offer them­ selves for the sake of their degenerate children .

7- THE OBLIGATION TO HOPE FOR ALL

If the threats of jud gment and the cruel, horrifying images of the gravity of the punishments imposed upon sinners that we find in Scripture and Tradition have any point, then it is surely, in the first instance, to make me see the seriou_sness of the responsibility that I bear along with my freedom. But do Scripture anJ Tradition also force me to assume from these threats of judgment, beyond what concen1s me, that even only one other besides me has met ruin in hell or is destined to do so? Quite . to the con­ trary, it seems to me that, initially, the following thesis can be advocated (only, however, from the perspective of practical-prescriptive and not theoretical-cognitive reason): "Whoever reckons with the possibility of even only one person's being lost besides himself is hardly able to love unreservedly . . . . Just the slightest nagging thought of a final hell for others tempts us, in moments in which human togetherness becomes especially difficult, to leave the other to himself." One should, however, make a really unreserved decision to accept every man in his total worth and to seek one's own final joy in this affirmation of others. If one sees things in this way, then "heaven for all" does not mean something like an inducement to laziness in our ethical commitment but rather the heaviest demand upon all of us that one 1 69

DARE WE HOPE

can imagine: the decision for a patience that absolutely never gives up but is prepared to wait .infinitely long for the other. . . . If, on the basis of God's universal good­ ness, I cannot write anyone off for all eternity, then my eternal misfortune could consist precisely in the fact that I myself simply do not find the patience to wait infinitely long for the "conversion of the other". 1 And not say at some time to the good Lord: "Am I my brother's keeper?". Can a Christian allow himself to utter these murderous words? And which man is not my brother? Karl Rahner is therefore right when he says: "We . must maintain side by side and unwaveringly the truth of the omnipotence of the universal salvific will of God, the redemption of all by Christ, the duty of all men to hope for salvation and also the true possibility of eternal loss." And as far as preaching the Gospel is concerned, "the emphasis on the possibility of hell as perpetual obduracy must be paralleled by insistent encouragement to rely with confidence on the infinite mercy of God." 2 The certainty that a number of men, especially unbelievers, must end in hell we can leave to Islam, but we must likewise contrast Christian universality of redemption to Jewish salvation-particularism.3 Hermann­ ]osef Lauter poses the uneasy question: "Will it really be all men who allow themselves to be reconciled? No theology or prophecy can answer this question. But love hopes all t�ings ( I Cor 13 : 7). It cannot do otherwise than to hope Hans-Jiirgen Verweyen, Christologische Brennpunkte (Essen: Ludgerus, 1977), pp. l 19-22. 2 Encyclopedia of Theology, The Concise Sacramentum Mundi, ed. Karl Rahner (New York: Seabury Press, 1975), "Hell", pp. 603-4. 3 See ibid., "Salvation", pp. 1499-1530. 1

THE OBLIGATION TO HOPE FOR ALL

I7I

for the reconciliation of all men in Christ. Such unlimited hope is, from the Christian standpoint, not only permitted but commanded. " 4 "I cannot help having the impression", says the commentator Joachim Gnilka, "that Paul at least occasionally harbored. the fervent hope that all men will find salvation, a view that was later propagated as doctrine under the name apokatastasis and was, as doctrine, condemned. Even today, however, it is permitted to maintain this hope, under the presupposition that the solidarity with mankind expressed in the hope is practiced, struggled with and suf­ fered through by Christians in a way similar to that man­ ifested in the lives of the apostles." 5 G. Greshake writes, "Nevertheless: universal hope" . 6 Thomas Aquinas taught that "one can hope for eternal life for the other as long as one is united with him through love", 7 and from which of our brothers would it be permissible to withhold this love? Or could we really believe Dante when he inscribes above his door to hell: "I was created by divine power, supreme wisdom and primal love" (Irif. III), only to have to stand by and watch afterward what goes on in his hell? Should we not, rather, follow the Church Doctor Catherine of Siena when she admitted to her father con­ fessor, the blessed Raymond of Capua: "If I were wholly inflamed with the fire of Divine Love, would I not then, with a burning heart, beseech my Creator, the truly Pastoralblatt (Cologn e, 1 982), p. I O I . s "Die biblische Botschaft von Himme l und Holl e-B efreiung od er V ersklavung ?" in Ungewisses Jenseits? ed. by G. Gre shake (Patmos Paperback, 1986), p. 30. 6 Ibid., pp. 83-88. e7 S Th 11-11, q. 17, a. 3. B esl er 's ex eg esis of this passag e is simply inad qu�t e ( Th, 1986, p. 7332). 4

DARE WE HOPE

merciful One, to show mercy to all my brethren?" She spoke, Raymond tells us, in a soft voice to her Bridegroom and said to him: How could I ever reconcile myself, Lord, to the pros­ pect that a single one of those whom, like me, you have crea'ted in your image and likeness should become lost and slip from your hands? No, in absolutely no case do I want to see a single one of my brethren meet with ruin, not a single one of those who, through their like birth, are one with me by nature and by grace. I want them all to be wrested from the grasp of the ancient enemy, so that they all become yours to the honor and greater glorification of your name. The Lord replied to her, as she secretly confided to Ray­ mond: "Love cannot be contained in hell; it would totally annihilate hell; one could more easily do away with hell than allow love to reside in it." "If only your truth and your justice were to reveal themselves", the saint replied to this, "then I would desire that there no longer be a hell, or at least that no soul would go there. If I could remain united with you in love while, at the same time, placing myself before the entrance to hell and b_locking it off in such a way that no one could enter again, then that would be the greatest of joys for me, for all those whom I love would then be saved. " 8 But precisely at this point, someone will come up with the numerous texts providing evidence that Catherine 8

Vie de Sainte Catherine de Sienne par le bienheureux Raymond de Capoue, ed. Hugueny, O.P. (Paris, n.d.), pp. 479, 48 1 . I owe the reference to this passage to Fr. Christoph von Schonborn, O.P.

THE OBLIGATION TO HOPE FOR ALL

1 73

herself and many other mystics who, in their imitation of Christ, had experiences of eternal-seeming damnation and godforsakenness-Besler has filled pages in stringing together their statements-were all convinced, despite everything, that the damnation of many was a fact. And it is precisely here that we are faced with the absolute para­ dox of Christian love. The hell that is brought before their eyes does not at all produce resign ation in them but fires their resolve to resist it more strongly than ever. To be sure, a real discernment of spirits is necessary here. There are the cases in which the saint sees a group of men head­ ing for hell (like "snowflakes", or like "falling leaves") and throws himself into the breach at the sight of their "course toward hell". There are other cases in which a personal experience of hell is granted apart from the sight of any damned persons; here (as with John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila), it is divine grace that arouse·s the zeal for representative sacrifice. "From there come, too, the pow­ erful urges to help souls, with the result that it seems to me in truth that I would suffer death a thousand times with the greatest joy in order that even only one single soul might escape so horrible a torment" (Teresa). Of Little Therese, Besler rightly says: "It is beyond doubt that the Church's teaching about the possibility of eternal damnation was of great concern to her. " Even if there were cases not only in which images of hell were presented (which, in my view, probably applies regarding the vision of hell by the chil­ dren of Fatima) but also in which certain chosen ones had subjective certainty that a number of men were already lost, then still (and this is the intention behind the revela­ tion) the wish to take a stand against what was shown, to re.nder it, as it were, untrue, by far outweighs in them the

1 74

DARE WE HOPE

thought that with respect to those shown as lost nothing more can be done. This is evidently the case in the "Med­ itation on Hell" in the book of the Exercises, which is to be carried out with respect to the damned and, in fact-as always for Ignatius-in conversation with Christ our Lord. In essence, all these cases concern the grace of being per­ mitted , to suffer along with the Lord, as we see with great clarity in the case of Marie des Vallees: "Her sufferings were, as the Lord assured her, a participation in his own, a renewal of what he had to suffer when he bore the sins of the world and was himself made to be sin. It was a quite new hell, . . . created for me by divine love and exceeding, in its severity, its intensity and its torments, .. . the hell of the damned" (Besler, Th, 1 986, 7 458), all of which lands us right in the midst of the experiences and statements of Adrienne von Speyr. Precisely the passages (allegedly suppressed by me) by Mechtilde of Hackebom, Angela of Foligno and Julian of Norwich (ibid., 73 59) show that, even in view of a hell believed to exist, the saint just strives all the more for a love that will cross out what lies written before her. The frequent recourse to the idea of at least easing the sufferings of the damned, an idea that links up with Scholastic speculations, should be seen as a groping attempt to overcome things apparently contradictory. But, as promised, I want to bring all of this to a close with a longer passage from the work of the recently beati­ fied Edith Stein, which expresses most exactly the position that I have tried to develop in these short chapters: We attempted to understand what part freedom plays in the work of redemption. For this it is not adequate if one focuses on freedom alone. One must investigate

THE OBLIGATION TO HOPE FOR ALL

1 75

as well what grace can do and whether even for it there is an absolute limit. This we have already seen: grace must come to man. By its own power, it can, at best, come up to his door but never force its way- inside. And further: it can come to him without his seeking it, without his desiring it. The question is whether it can complete its work without his cooperation. It seemed to us that this question had to be answered negatively. That is a weighty thing to say. For it obviously implies that God's freedom, which we call omnipotence, meets with a limit in human freedom. Grace is the Spirit of God, who descends to the soul of man. It can find no abode there if it is not freely taken in. That is a hard truth. It implies-besides the aforementioned limit to divine omnipotence-the possibility, in principle, of excluding oneself from redemption and the kingdom of grace . It does not imply a limit to divine mercy. For even if we cannot close our minds to the fact that tem­ poral death comes for countless men without their ever having looked eternity in the eye and without salva­ tion's ever having become a problem for them; that, furthermore, many men occupy themselves with sal­ vation for a lifetime without responding to grace-we still do not know whether the decisive hour might not come for all of these somewhere in the next world, and faith can tell us that this is the case. All-merciful love can thus descend to everyone. We believe that it does so. And now, can we assume that there are souls that remain perpetually closed to such love? As a possibility in principle, this cannot be rejected. In reality, it can become infinitely improbable-precisely through what preparatory grace is capable of effecting in the soul. It can do no more than knock at the door, and there are souls that already open themselves to it

DARE WE HOPE

upon hearing this unobtrusive call. Others allow it to go unheeded. Then it can steal its way intp souls and begin to spread itself out there more and more. The greater the area becomes that grace thus occupies in an illegiti­ mate way, the more improbable it becomes that the soul will remain closed to it. For now the soul already sees the world in the light of grace. It perceives the holy whenever it encounters this and feels itself attracted by it. Likewise, it notices the unholy and is repulsed by it; and everything else pales before these qualities . To this corresponds a tendency within itself to behave accord­ ing to its own reason and no longer to that of nature or the evil one . If it follows this inner prompting, then it subj ects itself implicitly to the rule of grace . It is possible that it will not do this . Then it has need of an activ­ ity of its own that is directed against the influence of grace. And this engaging of freedom implies a tension that increases proportionately the more that preparatory grace has spread itself through the soul. This · defensive activity is based-like all free acts-on a foundation that differs in nature from itself, such as natural impulses that are still effective in the soul alongside of grace. The more that grace wins ground from the things that had filled the soul before it, the more it repels the effects of the acts directed against it. And to this process of displacement there are, in principle, no limits. If all the impulses opposed to the spirit of light have been expelled from the soul, then any free decision against this has become infinitely improbable. Then faith in the unboundedness of divine love and grace also j ustifies hope for the universality of redemption, although, through the possibility of resistance to grace that remains open in principle, the possibility of eternal damnation also persists . Seen in this way, what were described earlier

THE OBLIGATION TO HOPE FOR ALL

1 77

as limits to divine omnipotence are also canceled out again. They exist only as long as we oppose divine and human freedom to each other and fail to consider the sphere that forms the basis of human freedom. Human freedom can be neither . broken nor neutralized by divine freedom, but it may well be, so to speak, outwit­ ted. The descent of grace to the human soul is a free act of divine love . And there are no limits to how far it may extend. Which particular means it chooses for effecting itself, why it strives to win one soul and lets another strive to win it, whether and how and when it is also active in places where our eyes perceive no effects­ those are all questions that escape rational penetration. For· us, there is only knowledge of the possibilities in principle and, on the basis of those possibilities in prin­ ciple, an understanding of the facts that are accessible to us. 9

9 Edith

Stein, Welt und Person: Beitrag zum christlichen Wahrheitsstreben, ed. by L. Gelber and Romaeus Leuven, O.C.D. (Freiburg, 1 962), pp. 1 58ff. I owe the reference to this passage to Georg Batzing.

EPILOGUE APOKATASTASIS: UNIVERSAL RECONCILIATION

r . DEFINITION AND CONTEXT

The term apokatastasis occurs in the Bible just once, in Acts 3: 2 r , in Peter's sermon in the Temple. He explains to the Jews that they should reform their lives, and then God will send them Jesus, the predestined Messiah, '•whom heaven must receive until the time for the apokatastasis panton, [of which] God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old". Two translations are equally possible: "until the time for universal restoration of which God spoke", or "until everything predicted by God's prophets has come about". 1 The first version corresponds to the literal meaning of the term, which is "restoration" . Secular Greek employs it in the following contexts: (r ) medical: restoration to health; (2) legal: return of hostages to their hometowns; (3) political: restoration of a previous form of govern­ ment; (4) a·stronomical: recurrence of the same planetary constellation, meaning the completion of a "Great Year"; and hence (5) philosophical / cosmological: recurrence of a cosmic era, an idea developed and taught by the Sto­ ics especially. At the recurrence of an identical planetary constellation, the universe will perish in fire and then will form anew, thus beginning a new identical cosmic cycle This section was translated by Rev. Lothar Krauth. � Oepke, "Apokatastasis", Th WNT I, p. 390. 181

DARE WE HOPE

("The Eternal Return of All Things"). We should men­ tion here [the Neo-Platonist] lamblichus, who held that the cosmic conflagration would not leave "anything evil" behind, would make everything "rational and wise" again. Neo-Platonism, indeed, taught that all things, including the human soul, emanate from the "Divine Oneness" until , a point is reached where the direction is reversed and the ascent toward God resumes. 2 This basic meaning of the term clearly implies some notion of a recurring cycle: the intended end is identical with the beginning. Origen expresses this idea with the princi­ ple: semper similis est finis initiis. 3 But the second translation of the passage in Acts seems preferable because it better brings out the line of thought in Peter's speech: "What God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ should suffer, he thus ful­ filled" (v. 18); repentance is therefore required (19), "that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus (19-20), whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old" (21). Then the prediction of the Messiah by Moses is quoted (22-23), followed by the witness of all the prophets since Samuel - (24), and finally by the Covenant with Abraham (25). Here, apparently, a notion of linear development prevails: the chronological line · from the most ancient origins to Abraham, Moses, For individual examples, cf. C. Lenz, " Apokatastasis" , RAC 1 :5 10-16. 3 "The end is always like the beginning" : Peri Archon I, 6, 2: in Ori­ gen, De Principiis, trans. Frederick Crombie, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, Fathers of the Third Century (Peabody, Mass. : Hendrickson Pubs., 1995), p. 260. 2

DEFINITION AND CONTEXT

1 83

Samuel and all the prophets, directed toward Jesus, who represents the certain assurance of the final Messianic king­ dom, the "season of refreshment" and the fulfillment of all prophecies. And yet, on closer examination there can be no clear-cut separation of such a linear-historical interpretation from the first, the cyclical, understanding. The verb apokath{stemi, occurring in the Old Testament as well as the New Testa­ ment, points to the "restoration" of Israel and her inheri­ tance, with increasing Messianic overtones and contingent on repentance by the people, especially since the time of the Exile. Here, the fi gure of Elij ah predominates; he has to prepare this restoration and initiate its beginning (Mal 3:24; Sir 48:ro, which mentions reconciliation between fathers and sons and, above all, the restoration of the Twelve Tribes). Jesus would later identify this figure of Elijah with John the Baptist (Mt rr: r 4). 4 Some cyclical understanding echoes as well in the disciples' question to the Risen Lord: "Will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel [apo­ kathistaneis] ?" (Acts r:6). Considering the Bible's general theological understand­ ing of history, we certainly find in it a linear chronological conception, from the creation account to the Covenants of Noah and Moses, to David and the prophets, to Jesus, the era of the Church and finally the eschatology of the end time. Oscar Cullmann s considers this an essentially 4 An extensive discussion of the role attributed to Elijah (realization of the apokatastasis; high priest at the end of time; helper in distress-cf. Mt 27:47, 49; perhaps even an atoning suffering) is foun� in ]. Jeremias, "Ele­ jas", Th WNT II, pp. 930-43. 5 In Christus und die Zeit, 1946. For a critique, cf. W. Kreck, Die Zukunfi des. Gekommenen, 2nd ed. (Munich, 1966), pp. 25-39, 209-13.

DARE WE HOPE

biblical conception of time, in contrast to cyclical notions in non-Christian world views. And yet, this linear con­ ception is permeated and sometimes overshadowed, pro­ gressively and in varied forms, by reflections concerning recurrence, restoration and repetition of the origins. This happe�s in the Old Testament, as we have mentioned, within the expectation of a return, a political as well as moral return, to the original integrity and purity of the Covenant. 6 As Heinrich Gross has demonstrated, this expectation expresses ancient Oriental longings by includ­ ing the hope for an eternal, all-embracing universal peace. 7 The more the theological reflection on the Christ­ event develops, the more we see the linear chronology of promise-to-fulfillment almost wrapped in a cyclical con­ ception. Consider the complete cycle of Saint John's con­ ception of Jesus: "I came from the Father and have come into the world; again I am leaving the world and going to the Father" (Jn 1 6:28). As the origin from the Father is explained ever more in timeless, eternal terms, and as God's eternal plan of creation ever more includes, through grace, the future humanity in this eternal "birth from God" (cf Eph 1 :4-6), so does this Alpha of God's plan ever more correspond to its Omega when the Alpha will have become complete reality. All this has to be seen not merely in some Scotistic ideality, but in real terms, with the world in actual fact being redeemed in Christ's atoning blood (Eph r : 7; Col 1 :20; Heb 9: 1 1 - 1 4). The Victim, the 6

E . L. Dietrich, Die letzte Wiederherstellung bei den Propheten (Giessen, 1925). 7 Die !dee des ewigen und allgemeinen Welifriedens im alten Orient und im A lten Testament (Trier, 1 956).

DEFINITION AND CONTEXT

unblemished Lamb, was " destined before the foundation of the world but was made manifest at the end of times" ( I Pet I : I 9-20). The cycle is complete in the Letter to the Romans, chapter 8 , verse 3 0: election-call-justification­ glorification-which, however, must not be construed as some kind of double predestination. We shall now look briefly into patrology to identify its respectively cyclical or linear understanding of the term apokatastasis. Gnostic systems are all entirely cyclical: in the begin­ ning, the totality of all "Being" contained in God's pleni­ tude; then the emanation of the universe, which makes the material world appear; then the coming of the Redeemer, who leads all "lower" reality back into God's plenitude. This return, however, typically happens according to cer­ tain priorities of rank: "spiritual" persons and true Gnostics go to the highest regions; Hylics, that is, those who have surrendered to the material world, and the Demiu,ge who created matter return only to a lower sphere. The logical connection between the Old Testament, seen as corrupted by material thinking, and the New Testament is severed here (cf Marcion) : that is, any linear-historical sequence is denied. In contrast, note lrenaeus' vehement reaction: all "flesh" is created by God and is therefore good; the Old Covenant prepares for the Logos to become flesh in the New Cove­ nant. A linear sequence clearly prevails here, even though salvation history is conceived as recapitulation. But it is only the beginnings, really, that are once and for all "reca­ pitulated" and remedied in Christ and Mary, after Adam and Eve failed. For man right after his creation is still utterly i�capable of bearing the overwhelming glorious weight of

1 86

DARE WE HOPE

God's love; he must go through the experience ( peira) of evil in order to gain enough maturity to lead, eventually, a life "in the flesh" in imitation of Christ and to reach perfection through Eucharist and resurrection. We should note that in this linear conception the reality of sin can be seen as an educational means. And yet, Irenaeus speaks also about the concentration (anakephalaiosis) of all things evil in the person of the Antichrist, at the end of the world, so that "all apostate power, flowing into and being shut up in him, may be sent into the furnace of fire". 8 The Alexandrian School tried to reclaim from the cycli­ cal Gnostic world view those Christian elements that could · be integrated into a true New Testament theology. Clem­ ent, in this context, and also Origen raise the question about the disposition of evil at the return of the universe to God; since evil has been absent in the Alpha, it would not seem possible to tolerate it in the Omega � This ques­ tion greatly occupied the Fathers up to Augustine; we shall return to it in the second chapter of this epilogue. Before we do so, we consider how the cyclical pattern found in the Old Testament, which incorporates Irenaeus' and its own linear pattern, could be logically integrated into the theological speculation. In general outline, there appear three attempted solu­ tions. The first is offered by Origen, who follows a Platonic-Gnostic conception without abandoning the notion of creation. Origen himself makes it clear that he speaks only "gropingly" and "tentatively" (gymnastikos); so his premises should not be taken as his final and firm Haer. V, 29, 2, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1 , The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus (Peabody , Mass. : Hendrickson Pubs., 1 995) , p. 5 5 8 . 8 A dv.

DEFINITION AND CONTEXT

convictions. Man is originally with God, created with a subtle, spirit-like body9 in God's image, which was to become also God's likeness through the exercise of free­ dom. 1 0 As yet he is asexual; and if Scripture says, "Male and female [God] created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply' ", then it merely anticipates what is to come ( praeveniens quod futurum erat). 1 1 Only after man had turned away from God and toward the material world did his body "condense" materially and sexual, animal-like procreation begin. One of the angelic princes who had "fallen" before became the tempter-serpent. And yet it is human destiny-Origen said it first, not Augustine or Bernard-to take the place of the fallen angels in God's kingdom; this will happen at the resurrection of the dead, effected by the saving work of the Logos. 1 2 We find here, then, an apokatastasis in a pre­ dominantly cyclical conception: the vertical descent from God and the return to him. 1 3 As the matter-bound, earthly body reverts back into the spirit-like resurrected body, all evil disappears as well. The second answer comes from Gregory of Nyssa and closely resembles the first. But Gregory abandons the dis­ tinction between the two forms of materiality; our first parents in the Garden of Eden basically have already the same body as we do. Gregory, too, holds that animal-like procreation began only after the expulsion from Eden; Peri A rchon I, 6, 4; III, 6, 9. rbid., III, 6, 1; De Orat. 27, 2; C. Cels. 4, 30; Ez. , horn. 13, 2. 11 Gen., horn. 1, 14. 12 Ez., horn. 13, 2. s Lehre vorn 1 3 For a detailed discussion, see Georg Biirke, "Des Origene Urstand", in Zkath Th 72 (1950): 1-39. 9

10

1 88

DARE WE HOPE

God, however, in view of the Fall, had from the beginning endowed our first parents with their sexual organs, which would not have been used if paradise and its unknown way of procreation had continued. In this, Gregory agrees with Origen. ' 4 The human race to spring from Adam's loins is destined to be only temporal and thus is limited; it is destined to return, through the resurrection, to the blissful state of Eden. Gregory presents us with an odd mixture of cyclical and linear apokatastasis, as if Irenaeus' conception were integrated into that of Origen. But this does not add up altogether; for there is no need for sexual organs after the resurrection. 1 5 From this we can already anticipate how Gregory will eventually answer the ques­ tion about evil and its disappearance: as the entire material and historical order is temporal, so also is evil, in contrast to the good, which is eternal. A third conception, that of Maximus the Confessor, tries to avoid the pitfalls of Origen' s approach yet preserve its brilliant intuitions. Maximus, too, develops a decidedly cyclical pattern; but his starting point, the Alpha, is not mankind's pre-existence in God-a proposition he finnly rejects-it is rather the "Idea" that God has of every being and so also of every future human being. A period of bliss­ ful paradise does not occur because man, only just created, De hominis opijicio, chap. 22. More in my book Presence and Thought: An Essay on the Religious Phi­ losophy of Gregory of Nyssa, trans. Mark Sebanc (Communio; San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1995), pp. 29-60. Gregory is well aware of the paradox in his approach: "Even though some things may appear contradictory to human thinking, . .. they still have to be brought into an orderly, logical sequence, based on the teachings of Scripture and also on rational infer­ ences" (De hominis opijicio, prooemium). 14

15

DEFINITION AND CONTEXT

already rebels against God. Thus a linear history of the world ensues, similar to Irenaeus' thought. Christ, who is God and man, holds up for us, however, the original Idea and bestows it on us in our rebirth in God from water and the Spirit. Hence the way of perfection consists in striving to conform to this Idea in God's mind: "the ascent [anodos] and the restoration [apokatastasis] are directed toward the Idea in God [logos], which has determined our creation. " 1 6 In this conception, then, through the mediation of Christ, man becomes God-so Maximus declares-in the same degree as God becomes man. 1 7 It is tempting to pursue further the subsequent history of these three conceptions. The latter would lead us first to John Scotus Erigena, then to Meister Eckhart, who iden­ tifies the true human reality with the divine Idea (which, in essence, is God), then on to the Christological monism of Blonde! and Teilhard de Chardin . . But we still have to face our primary question, and we will do so now in the second chapter.

16 1

Ambig uorum liber 7; PG 9 1 : r n80C. r n84C.

1 Ibid. ,

2.

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

The New Testament contains statements that put the two­ fold outcome of Old Testament judgment in even sharper focus. We hear not just about the rejection and destruction of enemies and wrongdoers, but explicitly about the "eter­ nal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Mt 25: 41), about the sin against the Spirit, not to be forgiven "either in this age or in the age to come" (Mt 12:32), about the final "I do not know you" (Mt 25: 12), even "I never knew you" (Mt 7:23). Together with these and similar passages that unambiguously envision a twofold consequence, sal­ vation or damnation, there exist equally numerous passages that emphasize the triumph of grace over sin (Rom 5: I 7), the extension of mercy to all, Gentiles, Jews and Christians alike (Rom I I : 3 2) , the gathering (apokephalaiosis) of all in Christ (Eph 1: I O). We shall not try here to press these biblically irrecon­ cilable statements into a speculative system. Rather, we shall describe the different responses that historically have been· advanced in theology and in the interpretation of the New Testament. None of those attempted responses was formulated hastily; in all of them, even in those entirely foreign to our mentality, we sense the deep reverence due a mystery. And all of them, indeed, must come to terms with the notion of a primarily cyclical apokatastasis,

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

191

without, arrogant or unconcerned, simply dismissing the horrifying thought that brothers and sisters of Christ, cre­ ated by the Father for Christ, who died for them in atone­ ment, may fail to reach their final destination in God and may instead suffer eternal damnation with its everlasting pain-which, in fact, would frustrate God's universal plan of salvation. If we take our faith seriously and respect the words of Scripture, we must resign ourselves to admitting such an ultimate possibility, our feelings of revulsion not­ withstanding. We may not simply i gnore such a threat; we may not easily dismiss it, neither for ourselves nor for any of our brothers and sisters in Christ. 1 . The first centuries present an outline for an initial resolution. God's purpose must be fulfilled even against all opposing obstacles. So say Clement, Origen, Gregory N azianzen, Gregory of Nyssa and Evagrius Ponticus; also, of the Antioch School, Diodorus of Tarsus and Theo­ dore of Mopsuestia; then the Syrians Bar Sudhaile and Isaac of Nineveh; 1 in my view also Maximus the Con­ fessor and almost certainly Scotus Erigena. We shall not consider authors of later times. This first response is best understood in view of Saint John's statement: "In this is love perfected with us, that we may have confidence for the day of judgment. . . . There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and he who fears is not perfected in love" (1 Jn 4:17-18). It is precisely in this context that Clement of Alexandria's distinction between the gnostikos, the one perfected in love of God, and the ones who are as yet imperfect is situated. Origen calls the latter haplousteroi, 1

Cf. his study on "Gehenna", Oxf. Bod.I. syr. e 7.

I 92

DARE WE HOPE

those who are not yet morally and spiritually mature. The gnostikos, according to Clement, knows that "the Lord has disposed all things, as a whole and in every part, toward the salvation of all", while those "who have hardened their hearts will be compelled to repent by the necessary chastise­ ments. . . . About others, however, I shall remain silent. " 2 Orig�n did not keep such silence in the works of his younger years; but even then he remarked that he was speaking on this subject only tentatively (gymnastikos). In later years he referred to the doctrine of the completed apokatastasis only by way of intimation because he felt that this matter was not suitable in public sermons for the uninitiated. 3 · His decision does not seem prompted by the desire to hide higher truths in "mystical silence", the way Greek philosophers did (cf 0. Casel). 4 Rather, it points to a statement by Saint Paul, who was "caught up to the third heaven" and heard "things that cannot be told" or that must not be put into human language. Both translations of ouk ex6n are possible. This question was to become significant in subsequent times when Dionysius the Areopagite cate­ gorically denied the possibility of expressing divine things in human terms. Stromata VII , 1 2, 2-13, 1; BDK Clemens, 5 : 18-19. E. R. Redepenning, Origenes (Bonn: Weber , 1841), 1 :339( ; 2:244. 4 0do Casel, De philosophorum g raecorum silentio mystica (Giessen, 1919). Casel interprets this silence explicitly as a model for the Christian silence on mysteries; cf the preface. It is possible that the Fathers were influenced by Philo's statement (ibid. , pp. 72-86); Philo's main thought , according to Casel, holds that the divine truth does not need any external , artificial cover, but that "it defends itself against profane eyes , revealing its beauty only to those worthy to savor it" (ibid. , p. 83). It seems quite unlikely that Clement's silence might be based on a quotation from Aeschylus , Agamem­ non 36. (The custodian greets the king upon his return but wants to keep silence about the conditions in the palace.) · 2

3

1 93

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

The Fathers of Alexandria and Cappadocia, however, cer­ tainly meant primarily "must not be uttered". 5 Origen states that he would not permit himself to entrust ineffable words to those still caught in human weakness, that he would not answer them in ink on paper; for even Saint Paul "probably spoke those things to those who were no longer walking as humans. He spoke them to Timothy, to Luke." 6 Timothy, then, could draw from the same well as Saint Paul. 7 We would thoroughly misunderstand Origen, how­ ever, if we thought him to hold that the perfect were priv­ ileged to know that everything will end well eventually, while the common believers were to be kept in the fear of hell , We should note here that already the apologists considered God alone to be immortal and eternal, and man could achieve such a state only through God's grace and by participation in him. So when Origen speaks of "aeonic punishments", it implies that they may end after long aeons since they do not participate in God. No, Ori­ gen's silence on the apokatastasis has other reasons, reasons that lead us to the second response. 2 . The second response also is found m Origen' s writings; identified by Henri de Lubac, 8 it refers to 5 Corresponding to Mt 1 2:4; Acts 2:29; cf. 1 Cor 6 : I 2, "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful." 6 Jn ]os., horn. 23, 4 (VII, 447, 3), in Origen, Homilies o n Joshua, trans. Bar½ara J. Bruce, Fathers of the Church (Washington, D. C.: Catholic Univ. of America Press, 2002), p. 202. 7 Fragrn. on I Cor 1 1 (]TS IX, 1 907- 1 908), p. 440: H. Crouzel, Origene e t la co n naissa nce mystiqu e (DOB, 1 959), p. I 1 6. s "Du hast mich betrogen, Herr" (Einsiedeln: Johannesverlag, 1 984). Cf. also the preceding sections of this present book. We add this statement by Cardinal Danielou: "Dieu ne mettra personne en enfer, mais certains s'y precipiteront d'eux-memes, plutot que de devoir quelque chose Dieu", Bulletin des Amis du Card. Da n ielou, 1 4 (April 1 988): 49-.

a

1 94

DARE WE HOPE

Corinthians 2 : 9 , and he reaso ns thus: If no human heart can grasp what God has prepared for those who love him, then must we not say the same regarding the punishments to be expected in the world b eyond? And if, according to 1 Corinthians 3 : 1 2- 1 5 , all have to pass through fire in order to reach God, if all that is "wood, hay, straw" in them has to be burned so that they themselves may b e " saved . . . through fire " , then w h o can ever fully grasp the horror of this ordeal? 1

It is necessary that the mystery in this passage be con­ cealed, so that most people may not become faint­ hearted . . . . Or who will be found as Paul who can say, " It is better to depart and be with Christ. " I cannot say this . For I know that if I leave, it is necessary that my wood be burned in me, and I have reviler wood, and I have the wood of drunkenness, the wood of theft, and many other woods built up in my building. You know that all of these things escape the notice of many of those who have believed, and it is good it escapes the notice. And each of us thinks, since he has not been an idolater, since he has not been immoral-would that we were pure in such areas-that after he has been set free from this life, he will be saved.9 Origen insists that the beginning and the end of things remain hidden from us, that we know o nly things some­ how. in between. 1 0 Origen, following Clement, c alls the 9 In ]er., horn. XX ( 19) 3, in Origen, Homilies on Jeremiah, Homily on Kings 28, trans. John Clark Smith, Fathers of the Church (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Univ. of America Press, 1998), p. 227; cf. "Gesprach mit Herakleides", ed. Scherer, SC 142:3-16. 10 In Is., horn. 4, 1.

I

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

1 95

fire waiting for us "sapiential", "spiritual"; 1t 1s the bap­ tism in Spirit and fire mentioned by the Baptist, who had baptized with water. The Spirit came to us on Pentecost, the fire is waiting for us after our death: the Lord will "stand in the river of fire near the 'flaming sword' ", which everybody must pass in order to return to paradise. 1 1 No one's soul is entirely untainted; "we all need purification", purification that is "mysterious and inexpressible" . 1 2 Josef A. Fischer's remark, then, is justified: The common Chris­ tian "can bear his i gnorance more easily than Origen his knowledge" . 1 3 Thus we read in Origen's Contra Celsum: "The remarks which might be made on this topic are nei­ ther to be made to all, nor to be uttered on the present occasion; for it is not unattended with danger to commit to writing the explanation of such subjects, seeing the mul­ titude need no further instruction than that which relates to the punishment of sinners; while to ascend beyond this is not expedient for the sake of those who are with diffi­ culty restrained, even by fear of eternal punishment, from

" In Luc., horn. 24 (IX, 158), in Origen, Homilies on Luke, Fragments on Luke, trans. Joseph T. Lienhard, S.J., Fathers of the Church (Washington, D. C. : Catholic Univ. of America Press, 1996), p. 103. Two homilies later Origen returns to this topic: baptism in spirit and fire is interpreted as related to God, who is Spirit but also a consuming fire: In Luc., horn. 26 (IX, 164). Clement mentions _the "sapiential fire", Strom. VII, 34, 4; Paed. III, 44, 2. Origen uses the concept also in De Orat. 29, 15; and Minucius Felix in Octavius ("sapiens ignis"). Cf. H.-J. Horn, "Ignis aeternus: Une interpretation morale de feu etemel chez Origene", in REG 82 (1969): 76-88. r 2 In Num., horn. 25, 6, in Origen, Homilies on N_umbers, trans. Thomas P. Scheck, Ancient Christian Texts (Downers Grove, Ill.: lnterVarsity Press, 2009), p. 159; cf. In Ex., horn. 6, 41 (Munich, 1954), P · 301. . 3 Studien zum Todesgedanken in der alten Kircke

1 96

DARE WE HOPE

plunging into any degree of wickedness, and into the flood of evils which result from sin." 1 4 Thus . the surgeon, about to cut, will conceal his scalpel from the patient. 1 5 But there is no way that cleansing, burning, can be avoided; "does [Christ Jesus] wish you . . . to enter afterwards then into the holy lands with your wood and with your hay and stubble so that ·you may defile the kingdom of God?" Remember, "our God is a consuming fire . . . He does not consume what is according to the image and likeness, he does not consume his own creation but accumulated hay, the accumulated wood, the accumulated stubble." 1 6 3. Origen presents his position with great reserve. For · example, in his letter from Athens, addressed to friends in Alexandria, 1 7 he heatedly denies having taught simply that the devil himself would eventually be saved-"not even a madman could accuse me of this." Gregory of Nyssa, in contrast, tries to advance philosophical and theo­ logical arguments to prove that the pains of hell cannot be co-eternal with God. His main argument is based on the essential superiority of good over evil; for evil, in its essence, can never be absolute and unlimited. The sinner inevitably reaches a limit when all his evil is done and he C. Cels. VI, 26 (SC J :242-44), in Origen against Celsus, trans. Freder­ ick Crombie, D.D., in Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, Tertullian, Part Fourth; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen, Parts First and Second (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Pubs. , 1995), p. 585. 15 In ]er., horn XX ( I 9), J. In view of Origen' s eschatology, it appears pointless to distinguish between purgatory and the fire of the final judgment. 16 In ]er., horn. XVI, 5-6, in Origen, Homilies on Jeremiah, pp. 173-74. 17 For details, see Henri Crouzel, Origene (Paris: Lethielleux, 1985), pp. 38ff., 331ff. 14

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

1 97

cannot go farther, just as the night, after having reached its peak, turns toward the day. 1 8 This reasoning corre­ sponds to the example of a physician who allows a boil to mature until it can be lanced. Thus the Incarnation, too, occurred only when evil had reached its climax. 1 9 Gregory's position has never been condemned. We will gain a better understanding of it by keeping in mind two aspects: For one, there is the strong influence of Plotinus, who taught that all emanation from the Divine Oneness will necessarily reach a limit, an ontological and ethical turning point (epistrophe), when the longing for the One will again determine the following ascent. Then, we find here Gregory's own typical view that eternal bliss means a dynamic, never-ending movement toward the center in God; never-ending because God's essence can never be fully reached. After Emperor Justinian condemned Origen's teach­ ing, Maximus had to formulate his position on apokatasta­ sis very carefully. For this reason he attempted to "save" even Gregory of Nyssa through a distinction: true, since Gregory envisions a cyclical pattern, as do all the Cappa­ docian Fathers, 20 even the evildoers will eventually return to God; but, as Maximus has Gregory say, they will only come to enjoy the knowledge of God, not his gracious Or. in Nativ. (PG 44 : I 1 29CD; I I 32A). All relevant texts are found in J. Danielou, L'etre et le temps chez Gregoire de Nysse (Leyden: Brill, 1970), in the chapters on "Comble" and "Apocatastase", pp. r 86-226. 2 0 1 . Escribano-Alberca, "Zurn zyklischen Zeitbegriff der alexandri= nischen und kappadokischen Theologie", in Stud. Patr. ( TU) I 08 (Berlin, 1 972), pp. 42-5 r . 18

19

DARE WE HOPE

gifts, that is, eternal happiness_ ::,, r Maximus himself, like Origen, reserved the teaching about the apokatastasis pan­ ton for those perfected in love. The doctrine of hell, by then commonly held, he proclaimed in the form of an 21

The complete text reads:

The third meaning [of apokatastasis] is used by Gregory especially in reference to the qualities of the soul that had been corrupted by sin and then are restored to their original state. Just as all nature will regain, at the expected time, its completeness in the flesh [at the res­ urrection], so also will the powers of the soul, by necessity, shed all imprints of evil clinging to them; and this after aeons have elapsed, after a long time of being driven about without rest [stasis]. And so in the end .they reach God, who is without limitations [peras]. Thus they are restored to their original state [apokatastenai ] through their knowledge [of God], but do not participate in [his] gifts. It also will appear that the Creator cannot be blamed for any sinfulness. Maximus, Questiones et dubia I 3, PG 90:796AC There is no need to translate katekechretai as "misuse"; Maximus would never suspect Gregory of any misuse: B. D. Daley, SJ., questions our translation (against· Sherwood and Grumel, both outstanding experts on Maximus) in "Apokatastasis and 'Honorable Silence' in the Eschatology of Maximus the Confessor", in Maximus Confessor, Actes du Symposium . . . ed. Heinzer and Schonbom (Fribourg, 1 982), pp. 309-39; here p. 323, n. 63. Daley's criticism, I think, is not justified. E. Michaud, "Maxime le Confesseur et l'apocatastase", Rev. int . Theo[. I O (1902): 257-72, was the first to allege that Maximus had taught the fin�l universal salvation. Those passages which warned about hell were meant to be admonition rather than theology. V. Grumel, in DTC I O, 2 (1928), p. 457, agreed. But M. Viller (RAM I I , [ 1 930], pp. 259f.) rejected this interpretation in view . of Maximus' polemic against Origen. My opinion (in Cosmic Lit­ urgy, trans. Brian E. Daley , S.J. (Communio; ·San Francisco: I gnatius Press, 2003), has been that Michaud's position should be defended. Maximus, in at least three previously overlooked passages, teaches universal salvation as a doctrine reserved for those having reached perfection. Two of the three passages clearly refer to Origen's interpretation of the two trees in Eden (PG 90:257C-260A; 4 1 2A-413B), the concept that on the Cross, together with God's Son, the devil and his followers have perished as well. In the

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

1 99

ascetic admonition. 2 2 Frequently he uses universalistic for­ mulations like those in Romans 5 . To recapitulate Gregory's basic position, we may quote Karl Rahner, who repeatedly remarked that the possibility of refusing God "is not . . . of equal right and stature in rela­ tion to a 'yes' to God. For every 'no' always derives the life which it has from a 'yes' because the 'no' always becomes intelligible only in light of the 'yes,' and not vice versa. " 2 3 third passage, on Colossians 2: I 5 (the evil powers are overcome by the Cross), Maximus adds that he "could well offer another interpretation of this verse, a loftier and more secret interpretation", but would refrain from doing so "because, as you understand, it is not appropriate to divulge in books the more hidden truth about God; what we have said, therefore, has to suffice.... Should it please God, however, to reveal it to our mind, then we shall together explore it further, guided by the apostle's insight" (PG 90:316D). This does not testify to a "negative" theology in the style of Dionysius the Areopagite ("what cannot be uttered"), as Fr. Daley asserts, but evidently refers to "what should not be uttered", and not at all "out of simple modesty" (Daley, p. 3 1 8). So also Maximus' (frequent) allusion to Origen, without quoting him, is far from being "more than a little far­ fetched" (ibid., p. 320); cf. my research in Die Gnostischen Centurien, in Kos­ mische Liturgie (Einsiedeln: Johannes Verlag, 1 988), pp. 488-642. And then, Daley himself quotes two clearly universalistic passages (pp. 32 1 -22), not to mention the corresponding texts of a more biblical character (p. 328). Maximus, of c�urse, makes it a point to say that those who will be saved in the end (sozomenous) are the ones who are worthy (axious), and Maximus speaks abundantly (Daley, p. 334) about eternal punishments. After the doctrinal condemnations by Justinian and the Second Council of Con­ stantinople, it was no longer possible to speak in any other way. Looking ahead, however, to Scotus Erigena, who teaches the apokatastasis as openly as Gregory of Nyssa, we find that Maximus, the authoritative source for Scotus, is the link between the latter and the Cappadocian Fathers. 22 Daley, "Apokatastasis and 'Honorable Silence' ", p. 328. Gregory is also familiar with the Irenaeic thought that we, prompted by the "experi­ ence" of evil, turn toward the good: De hominis opi.fido 2 1 (PG 44:20 1 BC). 2 3 Karl Rabner, Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity, trans. William V. Dych (New York: Crossroad, 1 984), p. 1 02.

200

DARE WE HOPE

4. The questions raised by the notion of apokatastasis allow still another response, a response we may come to appreciate by considering Origen's statement that the Mys­ tical Body of Christ will not achieve complete perfection until he, the lowest and meanest sinner, has repented. 2 4 The conviction that "I am the least of all" leads to the sud­ den a�areness of my own precarious existential condition: the threat of eternal perdition is addressed, indeed, to me! Thus we read in ancient accounts of the Desert Fathers: Saint Anthony of E gypt was praying in his cell when suddenly he heard a voice calling, "Anthony, you have not. even reached the perfection of a goldsmith in Alexandria!" Early next morning, the old man set out, palm staff in hand; he entered the house of the gold­ smith, who became somewhat disturbed on seeing him. Anthony asked, "Tell me about your achievements." The other replied: "I can't see that I have accomplished anything worthwhile. Indeed, climbing out of bed in the morning I say to myself, 'The whole city, from least to greatest, will enter the kingdom for their good deeds, while I myself have merited only punishment for my sins.' And in the evening I tell myself the same thing." Father Anthony then said, "Like a good goldsmith who peacefully stays at home you will inherif the kingdom; 24

•� Quando consumerat [ Christus] hoc opus [redemptionis] ? Quando me, qui sum ultimus et nequior omnium peccatorum, consummatum fecerit et perfectum, tune consumat opus ejus; nunc autem adhuc imper­ fectum est opus ejus, donec ego maneo imperfectus" [When will Christ complete this work of salvation? Only when I, the least and worst of all sinners, have been made complete and perfect by him-then his work is completed; for now, his work remains incomplete as long as I remain imperfect]: In Lev. , horn. 7, 2 (VI, 376).

POSSIB LE RESPONSES

20 1

but I lack discernment, and even though I live in the desert, I am far from being better than you . " 2 s Another Desert Father asked God, "Tell me, Lord, whether I find favor in your sight. " He then saw an angel, who said to him, "You have not even risen to the level of the gardener who lives here . " The Father began to search until he found the gardener. He begged him to reveal his thoughts . After considerable reluc­ tance, the man finally replied: "When I get up in the morning, I tell myself that the whole city will enter the kingdom, only I shall be punished because of my sins . " At this, the din of songs and noise flowed in from the street. "Doesn't this disturb you?" asked, the Father. " Not at all" , replied the other. "But what do you think hearing this?" "I think that all those people will enter the kingdom. " Overcome with admiration, the Father exclaimed, "Your achievement is greater than what I have reached after these many years of struggle ! " 2 6 Elsewhere I have quoted as well what Kierkegaard once said: In my life I have never got farther, nor will I get farther, than "fear and trembling", that point at which I am literally quite certain that everyone else will easily attain the bliss of heaven, and only I shall not. . . . Telling other people . . . "You are eternally lost" is something I cannot do . As far as I am concerned, the situation is s Les sentences des peres du desert, nouveau recu�il : Apophtegmes inedits (Solesmes, 1 970), no. 490. 26 Ibid., no. 67. 2

202

DARE WE HOPE

that all the others will, of course, go to heaven; the only doubt is whether I shall get there. 2 7 Such a frame of mind is the ultimate consequence of Origen's position: the "Last Things" are and will be for­ ever hidden; we cannot deal with them by constructing impersonal theories. The Gospel wants to proclaim, in simple terms and "leaving the situation open", that Jesus is Judge and Savior. The Gospel is "not just the objec­ tifying description of a final drama, is not a 'prediction' but a 'promise' " . 28 The Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius remain the exemplary Christian way of dealing with the possibility of eternal damnation: the meditation on hell stands at the conclusion of the first week, during which the individual, with eyes on the Crucified, reflects on his guilt, to be made aware finally that it is grace, and grace alone, that saves him from the well-deserved everlasting perdition. What remains for us is not knowledge but, rather, Christian· hope. 5. We should mention one last aspect, which echoes only implicitly in the writings of the Fathers 2 9 but which the contemporary theology of the "Suffering of God" considers more intensively than did former ages. While all the possible responses so far derived from our human situation, this other response finds its point of departure in God's own mind: Can God really suffer the loss of even 27

See above , p. 66. W. Kreck , "Die Zukunft des Gekornrnenen" , 2nd ed. (Munich , 1966), p. 145. Cf. also the corresponding statements by Althaus , E. Brunner and K. Barth , who unanimously reject the idea of impersonal knowledge about the Last Judgment , putting in its place the attitude of Christian hope. 29 Centu r . de Car. 1 , 25 (PG 90:965B). 28

POSSIBLE RESPONSES

203

the least of the sheep in his fold? One of his own creation, one for whom the Lord has shed his blood and endured the agony of being abandoned by the Father? The German mystic Mechtilde of Magdeburg heard God speak to her thus: "My soul cannot endure that I banish the sinner from me. And so I pursue many of them on and on till I have them in my grasp, and I save them a place so narrow that no one, no matter how clever, can follow me there." 3° We shall not try to fathom this question any further, but wish to close with a statement by Maximus the Con­ fessor: "God loves the sinner because this is his nature. He extends his mercy to him in compassion [sympatheia] , as if to someone sick in mind and walking in darkness. . . . Be wary not to separate yourself from God, for he is Love and the Beloved. Even should God pass judgment, those judged would hate him without cause, for his nature is love, and he is called Love. For this reason he would never hate those he judges since he is free from any such passion." 3 1 I deem it appropriate simply to be content with this existential posture. Whoever wants to go farther would enter a realm where things can no longer be reasoned out. Consider, for example, the thought that God will fulfill his designs even with the reality of an eternal hell that glorifies 3° Mechthild of Magdebu�g, The Flowing Light of the Godhead, trans. Frank Tobin, Classics of Western Spirituality (New York: Paulist Press, 1 997), VI, 16, p. 246. 3 1 Epist. r (PG 91:389B). We may add this on Maximus: When questioned about the fate of the devil, he first referred to those who are taught directly by the Logos, compared to whom he would be incompetent and "like one crawling on the ground". But then he simply repeated the com­ m�nly accepted answers: Quaest. Thal. I r (PG 90:292C).

204

DARE WE HOPE

his justice, though not his love. Or that he continues to love eternally even those he has condemned and that pre­ cisely this constitutes their torture. Or that he indeed loves them, but has no pity on them, and that he will not even allow the blessed in heaven to have such pity. Or the opin­ ion of Thomas Aquinas, who held that those in heaven essentially could not experience pity any more, for pity implies participation in the pain of the one in distress, and this would diminish heaven's bliss. Let us cast aside what leads to such dead-ends and limit ourselves to the truth that we all stand under God's abso­ lute judgment. "I do not even judge myself", as Saint Paul says. "It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pro­ nounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness" ( 1 Cor 4:3-5). Not forgetting Saint John: "We may have confidence for the day of judgment" ( 1 Jn 4: 1 7).