Sombre news last night from Pike River, as results from the test bore confirmed high levels of methane and carbon dioxide, and a second, bigger explosion destroyed any chance that the 29 trapped miners had survived.
My thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of those lost.
If anyone wants to help the families, or the agencies that responded to the emergency, a couple of trust funds have been set up. Read about them here.
Sad to say, but the likelihood is that the majority of them will now be in hell, along with Anne Frank and the rest of the Jews who suffered under the Nazis
KA
Doesn’t that comment violate the comments policy on any respectable blog?
KA And don’t be calling that a “parody of Catholic belief”, it doesn’t represent Catholic thought at all as you know. Indeed hell etc was discussed in detail when Wayne was posting here. It’s an inexplicable thing for you to post
I was ignoring it, on the principle that it is out of character for KA to be so crass.
Julian of Norwich, writing during the time of successive Plagues, said:
This was God’s response to her:
Julian is still troubled:
JJS, No, I’m sorry, but you can’t just brush of the uncomfortable teachings of Christianity like that. The fact of the matter is that more times than I care to mention, the bible and theologians throughout the ages have taught that non-believers will be cast into hell. You might not like it, but it’s there in black and white.
KA
Well the sun is shining so I’m going for a walk, the weather is too nice to work on the computer right now
Ignoring it does not make it go away. You have to deal with these so-called ‘truths’ of yours. Don’t you believe the bits of the bible that talk about people being cast into hell then? Oh, I forgot, that’s probably one of those bits that you conveniently ignore because you’ve learned to ‘see it in a different light through the guidance of god’. Well, that’s just so much nensense. You can’t cherry-pick from the bible like that and still call yourselves Christians. Why not just go the whole hog and re-write the bible for your own religion like the Mormons or the Jehovah’s Witnesses? That way you could miss out the bits that you find so offensive.
KA
So what did happen to Anne Frank and all the millions of non-christians persecuted and murdered under the Nazi regime (or indeed any repressive regime)? Am I destined for hell unless I die in a tragic accident or am murdered by a dictator?
KA
KA, we’ve discussed hell before on BF and on this blog. But if you insist, I will repeat Catholic teaching:
The Church has taught throughout the ages that there is no salvation outside the Church, but that we have no way of knowing what God counts as membership of the Church, and we do know that He is infinitely merciful.
This is a good summary from The Black Cordelias:
And yes, KA, I do believe in hell. I hope no-one chooses to end up there, but I fully expect that some will.
I’ve met people that are so set on their own will, so convinced that only they are right, that they will destroy anyone and anything that gets in the way of their most trivial desires. I can’t know what is going on inside their heads – and I’m content to leave that to God – but I can easily imagine them telling God that they’ll have none of Heaven.
Indeed, Heaven (a place of total self-giving and of adoration of the One Truth) would be a type of hell to such people.
Yes, I get that. What it’s saying is that unless you’re Catholic, or unless you’ve not been exposed to the gospel of Christ, you’re not going to be among the ‘saved’.
What is also says quite clearly is that those Jews who were murdered by the Nazis and all those non-Catholics murdered by Phol Pot, Stalin et al, are likely to be in hell because they would have been exposed to the gospel of Christ and rejected it. Hence the comment about the miners who died and all those others who die every day, whether in a tragic accident or just from old age or disease. Your own teaching says that, you can’t ignore it, and to call the statement crass is, I suspect, a deflection because you find the thought unpalatable
KA
Hell is the state voluntarily conformed to by those who reject utterly and to the end goodness and anything other than selfish self interest. C.S. Lewis is rather insightful on hell in the Problem of pain.
Sincerely held intellectual convictions are nothing to do with the route to hell. So no, you don’t get it.
No, that is not what it is saying at all.
Read it again.
What it is saying is that God defines who is part of the Church, not us.
That was a list of examples; not a definitive list. There is no definitive list. But the Church does cite ‘ignorance beyond his [sic] control’ as the defining feature. So the point is that there are many people who do not recognise the Church as the one Church, and Jesus Christ as the Saviour of the World because they lack some information that would convince them. And the Church expects God to cut them some slack because of that.
We acknowledge – have acknowledged since Jesus’s parable about the dividing of those who had and had not helped the least of his brethren, and the thief on the cross – that (except in the case of saints) we do not know who God sees as part of the Body of Christ.
They will be judged on what they knew, not what they didn’t know.
This says what I said, only more succinctly. So yes, I think I do get it.
KA
So, KA, do you know that Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that the Catholic Church is both His Body and His Bride?
Because if you don’t know these things to be true, you can’t be held to have rejected them.
This is also nothing new by the way. St Paul put it in terms of being judged by the response to the “law written in their hearts” (Or to that effect).
No, there is insufficient rational evidence for me to believe any part of that statement. Now I can’t say that it’s untrue in equal measure to which you can believe that it’s true. You’re backing your horse, I’m backing mine, but I’m not arrogant enough to believe that my way is the only way.
KA
That statement wasn’t supposed to convert you. It was pointing out that from the Catholic perpective there is no reason to see you as damned. Are hypotheticals really so hard?
Jesus made the same point much more allegorically in refering to the forgiveness of one who blasphemed the son of man (the Church incarnate, from our perspective) but no one who blasphemed the holy spirit. (In this case the movements of ones conscience)
So if I blaspheme against the holy spirit will I be going to hell?
KA
Did you read what I said carefully? It seems not.
So what you’re saying is that I’m going to heaven no matter what? Seems like a plan. No need to go to church, do all that praying stuff, or dress up in silly costumes. From what you’re saying I can just continue to live my life as a decent bloke and I’ll end up in heaven. Sweet.
KA
An enormous loss os piritual life in this world is a truncation of human development for one thing. And of course Catholicism recognises something in between damnation and sainthood, only the truly saintly can expect to be ready for heaven as soon as they finish their life.
It’s not about the truth of Catholicism. JP was trying to explain why Catholicism doesn’t claim that you or Anne Frank etc would be damned. You don’t have to accept Catholicism to see the coherence of her point.
But Catholicism does say that if you have had the opportunity to hear the message of christ and the gospels and then you go on to reject it, you’re as destined for hell as you could ever be. Otherwise what’s the point of all this praying, church-going, religious hogwash then?
KA
No, Catholicism says that if you understand and accept the message of Christ and the Gospels and then you go on to reject it you are destined for hell.
And if you avoid hearing the message just in case you might accept it and have to change your life, you are probably not destined for hell, but you might be in for a rather long stay in Purgatory.
But in the end, for me at least, being a Catholic has nothing to do with whether or not I can shorten my time in Purgatory. I have accepted that I am closer to the Truth inside the Church than out, and my life’s goal has been to get as close to the Truth as I can.
It isn’t about rewards and punishments – it is about being in Love. If you love someone – and I do love God – you want to please them; you want to be close to them. And that’s the point of this praying, church-going, religion.
And, of course, Mr Badger’s point.
I’ve been put in this school to learn something. I can waste my time, fail to hand in my homework, skip classes, read under the desk during lessons, look out the window and daydream. I can do all of these things.
But I’m aware that when the big exam comes, that decides what I’m fit to do for all eternity, those who have used their time most wisely will have the most interesting jobs.
So I try to stick to my lessons: charity, patience, tolerance, faith, hope, prudence, self-restraint, kindness, humility, diligence, justice, courage – sometimes more successfully than others.
But don’t you think ordinary, non-theists strive towards those goals too? I know I do. Why do you think it necessary to have a belief in the supernatural to assist you?
KA
KA, you have it the wrong way round. I don’t choose to have a belief in the supernatural in order to help me to strive to be a better person. In fact, I don’t at all see how that order would work!
I fell in love with God. I’ve spent two thirds of my lifetime (so far) getting to know the implications of that.
I expect – because I was well socialised into the cultural values that Western culture inherited from its Judeo-Christian heritage – that if I had avoided God when I first became aware of Him, and managed to keep avoiding him, I still would have striven after the cardinal virtues. And I would no doubt be a pleasant enough person.
But I did follow the first tantalising glimpses of the numinous, and I did fall in love, and – as Frost says – that has made all the difference.
I’m holding off on my third post to write about “hell”. I hope to tackle some of these issues
KA,
Your basic line is once again along the lines of: “true Christianity is brutally judgemental; you civilised people imagine you get your compassion from your faith, but really that’s secular decency pulling you reluctantly out of these medieval torture fantasies.” With of course the usual implication that “I know your faith better than you do”.
This argument is utterly refuted in, for example “Atheist Delusions” (not a great title) by David Bently Hart, an Orthodox theologian and scholar, who points out that compassion for the poor, weak, elderly, slaves and infants is irrefutably rooted in the rise of Christianity. As the influence of Christianity wanes, we see such compassion fade too, as, for example, the unborn and infirm become an increasing irritation to the powerful.
Here is a commentary by Hart on an earlier disaster – the tsunami:
http://davidbhart.blogspot.com/2006/03/david-b-harts-tsunami-and-theodicy.html
I’m already late for work so I can’t go on to address your point about judgement. But the usual suspects appear to be doing their good work here anyway. In haste!
Good luck with thursday. Those of us in the antipodes are glad to be done with it 🙂
Manus, (et al). I’ve offered my thoughts on the issue on my new blog. http://bytheriverbank.wordpress.com/ . It wasn’t an issue I wanted to write about but KA’s comment demanded a response I felt.
Hi Badger,
I’ve had a quick look at your website and I look forward to seeing it grow. I like your exploration of the early lay voice. I’ve not chipped in on Hell yet, but I’m sure you’ll keep it warm for us all.
As for Thursday, well thanks for passing it on in such fine condition. We are expecting the first blizzard of the winter hear in the UK, the earliest snow since 1993, but meanwhile our American friends are enjoying their Thanksgiving Day, and may it bring peace and joy to all.
true Christianity is brutally judgemental; you civilised people imagine you get your compassion from your faith, but really that’s secular decency pulling you reluctantly out of these medieval torture fantasies
You know Manus, that’s the best description I’ve heard of Christianity in a very long time. Do you mind if I use it elsewhere?
KA
KA you rogue 🙂
Tee hee 😉
KA,
I’m not embarrassed at all by summarising your perspective on Christianity, which you have kindly affirmed. The point is it is entirely unhistoric. On what grounds do you persist in your myth – you claim after all to be rational and evidence-based?
For example, perhaps you can cite a single example of one of those noble Greeks or Roman philosophers giving a monkey’s cuss about the fate of abandoned or murdered newborns – a practice we are of course reintroducing for “failed” abortions?
Of course you are perfectly entitled to quote me summarising your misguided views on Christianity. However, if you were to suggest that these are actually my views on Christianity, then you’d just be spinning yourself another myth.
Dawkins is fond of citing Christians (and even Jews) “lying for Jesus”. I’ve often wondered for whom do Atheists lie?
KA, (re my blog, I have tried to answer your question) if we bracket the question of the existence of God, would you say that the view I have put forward seems internally coherent given the existence of a wholly good God?
Mr B, see your blog for my response
KA
Just as KA keeps explaining our religion to us in such a refreshing and insightful manner, I’m sure he will in due course have words of advice for the Almighty regarding the proper application of Divine Justice.
Few would doubt that God has some explaining to do – we have the book of Job, do we not? The sensible and the humble would allow for the possibility that God’s somewhat broader perspective might on balance prove convincing. Nevertheless, the basic choice is there. Either we accept eternity on God’s terms, or we reject it.
If KA believes he is capable of rejecting God’s justice then he is by definition accepting the possibility of Hell.