Re: Apokatastasis

Feedback from newsgroups

Rowland Croucher wrote (quoting Richard Rohr): When I read the history of the church and its dogma, I see 'apokatastasis' was never condemned as heretical.

Response [1]

Really? Remember that is was Origen that taught the doctrine of apokatastatis, and here is what the Synod of Constantiople held in 543 said about apokatastasis in its list of anathemas: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3812.htm Anathemas against Origen I. IF anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration (apokatastasis) which follows from it: let him be anathema. --end quote-- The rulings of the synod were accepted by Pope Vigilus in 544, so are binding. Further, the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople condmened Origen as follows: Anathemas of the Second Council of Constantinople http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=2_council_of_constan.html X. If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinaris, Nestorius, Eutyches and Origen, together with their impious, godless writings, and all the other heretics already condemned and anathematized by the holy catholic and apostolic Church, and by the aforementioned four Holy Synods and all those who have held and hold or who in their godlessness persist in holding to the end the same opinion as those heretics just mentioned; let him be anathema. --end quote-- Origen and his teachings were condemned by the Church long ago, so your doctrine of "final restoration" is heretical, I'm afraid.

RR: We may believe it if we want to. We were never told we *had* to believe it, but neither was it condemned.

[1]: Quite the opposite: those that hold to the teaching of the final restoration are heretics, unless you want to deny Christian doctrine.

RR: More interestingly, we Catholics are always canonizing saints, pronouncing them to be in heaven for sure. They are our role models; we can imitate them. But in the entire history of the church, it has never been declared that a single person is in hell. Even Judas. The church has never said, 'This person is definitely in hell'.

[1]: Correct, it is not the place of the Christian Church to declare any person in hell, but to bring the Gospel to the world that those elected unto salvation may be saved.

RR: We almost hold out for universal restoration: that the true meaning of the raising of Jesus is that God will turn all our human crucifixions into resurrection.

[1]

Look at it this way: if there is no eternal punishment for sin, that is, punishment for the wicked is finite and will eventually lead to their restoration, then "eternal life" also is finite, and there are some (all?) who will lose eternal life. It also means that people can be saved apart from Christ's atonement, in that some escape the finite punishment by "accepting" Christ's cross work, while the rest will be punished for some length of time for their own sins, then be released. If such were the case, why would Christ, God incarnate, have had to die for a single person? If God's wrath toward sin could be appeased by man's suffering, is it not more in the line of justice to have each person suffer for their own sin rather than the innocent Lamb of God suffer? The reason that God Himself had to die for our sin is that there is no way that a human can make satisfaction to the Father for the least of the sins that we commit, never mind a lifetime of sin. God is perfect, and will brook no deviation from the demands that He makes. God is also infinite, and His hatred of sin is as infinite as He is. Ergo, the punishment of the wicked is infinite, and only by the infinite atonement of Christ can any person be saved, for only an infinite act of oblation can appease infinte anger toward sin. I sugest for your edification a reading of Anslem's famous text "Cur Deus Homo" (Why God became Man) available here: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/anselm-curdeus.html Now I know your retort: "if the atonement is infinite, then all will be saved by it!" While in theory all *could* be saved by Christ's atonement, the fact of the matter is that Christ himself warned again and again that many would be sent to eternal punishment. Ergo, while all *could* be saved, only those selected by God before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:3-5) will be saved, those who are predestined to salvation by the good pleasure of the Father (Romans 8:28-30). Again, you run into the problem that if eternal punishment isn't really eternal, than eternal life can't be eternal either, and God could decide to jettison a person from eternal life with Him. Do you believe in a God that is arbitrary with His gifts? Isaiah 66:24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh. That hardly sounds like a teaching condusive to apokatastatis. Christ quoted this in Mark 9, so it's not just an "Old Testament" teaching which can be ignored today.

~~~

[Response 2]

The Synod of 543 was not an ecumenical council. And the mention of Origen in the 11th anathema of the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople is believed by some reputable scholars to be a later interpolation. See the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church for more info. And even if these anathemas were binding, they only condemn the doctrine as it was taught by Origen, which was tied to the doctrine of the pre-existence of souls and taught the the end would be a return to the beginning. St. Gregory of Nyssa taught a version of the doctrine of apokatastasis that was never formally condemned.