For centuries, universalism has been viewed as heretical by the Church... Fr. Patrick Briscoe

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,519
55,216
Woods
✟4,585,764.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
A few weeks ago, my Dominican brother, Father James Dominic Rooney, ended up in a now infamous (in certain theological circles) internet debate with Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart.

Their contest? Universalism — that is, the theological idea that at the end of time God will restore all things to himself. For universalists, hell is impossible; all will be saved.

It’s not a new subject for Hart. He provocatively asks in his 2019 book whether it is possible to love a God “who has elected to create a reality in which everlasting torture is a possible final destiny for any of his creatures.” For Hart, universalism is the most consistent and worthy reconciliation of all things in the God who is really love. It’s completely incompatible, according to Hart, that the God of mercy and compassion would relegate creatures to eternal punishment, separation from him.

But for centuries, universalism has been viewed as heretical by the Church (and every other mainstream Protestant denomination, as well). Father Rooney deftly summarized the logical crux behind the Church’s argument, saying that there are only two reasons that would explain the impossibility of hell. Father Rooney writes that either “God could not do otherwise than cause human beings to love him” or “human beings could not do otherwise than love God.”

Ultimately, Father Rooney writes, the “beliefs that we are free in our choice to love God, and that God is free in his choices to love and redeem us, are central to Christianity’s story of salvation.” If we have to love God, then sin isn’t a possibility. And if God has to make us love him, then his love isn’t really free.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity” (No. 1035). For Catholics, hell and the possibility of eternal separation from God are the consequence of sin. Pope St. John Paul II puts it this way: “God is the infinitely good and merciful Father. But man, called to respond to him freely, can unfortunately choose to reject his love and forgiveness once and for all, thus separating himself forever from joyful communion with him.”

Continued below.
Hell, David Bentley Hart, and Father James Dominic Rooney
 

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
A few weeks ago, my Dominican brother, Father James Dominic Rooney, ended up in a now infamous (in certain theological circles) internet debate with Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart.

Their contest? Universalism — that is, the theological idea that at the end of time God will restore all things to himself. For universalists, hell is impossible; all will be saved.

It’s not a new subject for Hart. He provocatively asks in his 2019 book whether it is possible to love a God “who has elected to create a reality in which everlasting torture is a possible final destiny for any of his creatures.” For Hart, universalism is the most consistent and worthy reconciliation of all things in the God who is really love. It’s completely incompatible, according to Hart, that the God of mercy and compassion would relegate creatures to eternal punishment, separation from him.

But for centuries, universalism has been viewed as heretical by the Church (and every other mainstream Protestant denomination, as well). Father Rooney deftly summarized the logical crux behind the Church’s argument, saying that there are only two reasons that would explain the impossibility of hell. Father Rooney writes that either “God could not do otherwise than cause human beings to love him” or “human beings could not do otherwise than love God.”

Ultimately, Father Rooney writes, the “beliefs that we are free in our choice to love God, and that God is free in his choices to love and redeem us, are central to Christianity’s story of salvation.” If we have to love God, then sin isn’t a possibility. And if God has to make us love him, then his love isn’t really free.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity” (No. 1035). For Catholics, hell and the possibility of eternal separation from God are the consequence of sin. Pope St. John Paul II puts it this way: “God is the infinitely good and merciful Father. But man, called to respond to him freely, can unfortunately choose to reject his love and forgiveness once and for all, thus separating himself forever from joyful communion with him.”

Continued below.
Hell, David Bentley Hart, and Father James Dominic Rooney
I take a bit of a different stance. First, I believe Jesus' death and resurrection results in the resurrection of all mankind, but then comes judgment. If we are only appointed once to die, and death is an enemy Christ defeats, then something has to happen to all the people who are resurrected, but won't submit to the lordship of Christ. If God is the source of all that is good, then someone who doesn't want to be near Him would only be in a place of torment--nothing else would be available, and death isn't an option any more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: St_Worm2
Upvote 0

setst777

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 25, 2018
2,202
599
66
Greenfield
Visit site
✟349,721.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Universalists must reject many Scriptures to hold onto their doctrine.

God is love, and God is also righteous and just, who shows no partiality. To those who repent and believe in Lord Jesus are saved. But to those who do not repent and believe, they will remain condemned.

John 3:16-18 (WEB)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned,
but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

2 Corinthians 7:10 (WEB) 10 For godly sorrow produces repentance to salvation, which brings no regret. But the sorrow of the world produces death.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Universalists must reject many Scriptures to hold onto their doctrine.

God is love, and God is also righteous and just, who shows no partiality. To those who repent and believe in Lord Jesus are saved. But to those who do not repent and believe, they will remain condemned.

John 3:16-18 (WEB)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned,
but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

2 Corinthians 7:10 (WEB) 10 For godly sorrow produces repentance to salvation, which brings no regret. But the sorrow of the world produces death.
I have been having this discussion at this forum since 2K.-ish. I am fairly sure I have read all the arguments and proof texts, multiple times. A question I have often asked is to see one vs., 2 or more would be better, where the Father, Himself, or Jesus, Himself, says unequivocally that the unrighteous will be saved even after death. But I have never found nor been shown such a verse. But there is a passage in Jeremiah 13:11-14 where God, Himself, says of the disobedient of Israel and Judah, "I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them."
In the NT there is a passage in the NT, Matt 7:21-23, where, Jesus, Himself on Judgment Day, says to many, not a few, "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
 
Upvote 0

Lukaris

Orthodox Christian
Supporter
Aug 3, 2007
7,839
2,533
Pennsylvania, USA
✟745,296.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Iohannes Origenis

Wannabe Saint–Mystic–Sage
Jun 29, 2022
14
9
Caesarea Palestinae
Visit site
✟9,925.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I know Fr. James Dominic quite well, and lived with him for a time. He is a genius, quite literally, and perhaps one of the greatest assets to the Order of Preachers from the Central Province of St. Albert the Great in the US. He is bi-ritual in the Byzantine Rite (Ruthenian, I believe) and his orthodoxy & Thomism is impeccable.

That said, Hart has essentially abandoned much of Christian orthodoxy (even his own Eastern Orthodoxy) in favor of a kind of Arian Gnosticism (if I had to characterize it) – although it seems to change frequently. Hart relies on his wit and knowledge to sort of "overwhelm" folks less conversant with the theological material he is. This doesn't work on Fr. James Dominic, lol. At all. Even Godbearing Origen's proposal of "apokatastasis" doesn't even line up with the full-blown universalism championed by Hart and his tribe. This was known for well over a century. As the OCE concluded in its article "Origen and Origenism" (1911):

"The distinctive mark of the Catholic is to belong to the Church, to depend on the Church outside of which there is no salvation; on the contrary, he who leaves the Church walks in darkness, he is a heretic. It is through the principle of authority that Origen of Alexandria is wont to unmask and combat doctrinal errors. It is the principle of authority, too, that he invokes when he enumerates the dogmas of faith. A man animated with such sentiments may have made mistakes, because he is human, but his disposition of mind is essentially Catholic and he does not deserve to be ranked among the promoters of heresy."

Among the many excellent points – typical of Fr. James Dominic's ability to boil things down to fundamentals (the antithesis of Hart!) – is this:

Universalism has been heresy since the beginning because it, of necessity, requires one of two things to be true. Either humans cannot but love God or God cannot do otherwise than save all.

In other words, universalism inevitably introduces "necessity" into the nature of either God or creation. Perhaps that is possible for creation (but this creates new heresies!), but it is absolutely not possible for God. He is not bound by necessity, else He would not be God.

Thus, universalism breaks down immediately. From the get-go. Either God isn't God...or humans are mere automatons destined to love God because they cannot help but do so.

As Fr. James Dominic put it once to me: "Whether anyone beyond the devil and his angels will be in hell, we cannot know. But to insist it is necessarily true it is empty gets us into serious theological trouble: heresy."

He also has some very excellent defenses of the so-called "problem of Hell" that are well-worth reading...
 
Upvote 0

Iohannes Origenis

Wannabe Saint–Mystic–Sage
Jun 29, 2022
14
9
Caesarea Palestinae
Visit site
✟9,925.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
The thing is that DB Hart seems to be posing a problem for Orthodoxy in that the Orthodox Church does not preach universalism.

This is evident in our teachings & hymnody of the Sunday of the Last Judgment ( Matthew 25:31-46) at the beginning of Great Lent.


Indeed. I have oft-wondered (as has Fr. James Dominic) when or if his bishop will engage in canonical penalties for this...mess he's made. I'm not sure what autocephalous church he is part of (Greek Orthodox, I think...) but, in my humble estimation, he has done great damage and should be reigned in by whatever measures available...if, indeed, such is possible.
 
Upvote 0