IS HELL LOSS OF BEING?
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.")
Sin,—Mr. Ormond, the American philosopher whom you praise so highly in the Spectator of May 11th, seems to agree with Mr. Gladstone that bell is annihilation. And no doubt that view gets rid of many great difficulties. It is quite inadmissible for us Roman Catholics, but after all we are only one part of Christianity. Still, it seems to introduce the even greater difficulty that all eternal punishment must be the same, and that the greatest ruffian that has ever lived will not be a bit worse off than the least guilty soul that has lost heaven. No doubt this may be met by alleging that every human will that reaches to a certain point of wickedness is at once annihilated. But how would such a belief suit human morality ? Every ordinary schoolboy would feel that he was certainly in wickedness far behind some of the historical per- sonages to whom he was being introduced, and that there- fore it was still open to him fortiter peccare. And we know that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Would it not be much safer, as well as far more philo- sophical, to believe that the goodness of God gives even a great sinner chance after chance on earth, but that every new chance rejected sends him down lower, until at last infinite goodness and infinite wisdom see that to give him further chances were only cruelty? And the feelings of our schoolboys in the matter may only represent the feelings of countless multitudes of free wills in innumerable creations, who will all be kept straight during their times of trial by knowing that such is indeed the working of the reign of perfection in existence. The existence of evil is a necessity of the reign of justice. It is evident to all of us that if justice reigned alone every free will should begin its life with exactly equal chances of salvation and of damnation, and hell should be the exact counterpoise of heaven. Otherwise the mere fact of being created would give an undeserved advantage. Well, fortunately we know that justice does not reign alone, but in harmony with every other perfection. What, then, must be the state of the eternally lost ? Is it not safe to answer, in the first place, eternal opposition to God ; in the second place, eternal unhappiness proportioned to their crimes ? Can we not fancy them building up endless spiritual societies that always look as if they might give happiness, although the builders know only too well that they never can ? Dr. Mivart was clearly wrong in thinking there could be happiness in hell, but I have heard it suggested by a very able man that perhaps even the great Devil himself might prefer hell to annihilation. He had known the wonderful pleasure of thinking,—that pleasure of which the good Darwinians would try to deprive us all for ever. Fortunately, materialism can be proved to be unsound.
Previous page
