Chapter 9.—Of Hell, and the Nature of Eternal Punishments.
Caput IX. De gehenna et aeternarum qualitate poenarum.
So then what God by His prophet has said of the everlasting punishment of the damned shall come to pass—shall without fail come to pass,—“their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched.” In order to impress this upon us most forcibly, the Lord Jesus Himself, when ordering us to cut off our members, meaning thereby those persons whom a man loves as the most useful members of his body, says, “It is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not, and their fire is not quenched.” Similarly of the foot: “It is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” So, too, of the eye: “It is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” He did not shrink from using the same words three times over in one passage. And who is not terrified by this repetition, and by the threat of that punishment uttered so vehemently by the lips of the Lord Himself?
Quod igitur de sempiterno supplicio damnatorum per suum prophetam Deus dixit, fiet, omnino fiet: Vermis eorum non morietur et ignis eorum non exstinguetur. Ad hoc enim uehementius commendandum etiam Dominus Iesus, cum membra quae hominem scandalizant pro his hominibus poneret, quos ut sua membra dextra quis diligit, eaque praeciperet amputari: Bonum est tibi, inquit, debilem introire in uitam quam duas manus habentem ire in gehennam, in ignem inexstinguibilem, ubi uermis eorum non morietur et ignis non exstinguetur. Similiter de pede: Bonum est tibi, inquit, claudum introire in uitam aeternam quam duos pedes habentem mitti in gehennam ignis inexstinguibilis, ubi uermis eorum non moritur et ignis non exstinguitur. Non aliter ait et de oculo: Bonum est tibi luscum introire in regnum Dei quam duos oculos habentem mitti in gehennam ignis, ubi uermis eorum non moritur et ignis non exstinguitur. Non eum piguit uno loco eadem uerba ter dicere. Quem non terreat ista repetitio et illius poenae commonitio tam uehemens ore diuino?
Now they who would refer both the fire and the worm to the spirit, and not to the body, affirm that the wicked, who are separated from the kindgdom of God, shall be burned, as it were, by the anguish of a spirit repenting too late and fruitlessly; and they contend that fire is therefore not inappropriately used to express this burning torment, as when the apostle exclaims “Who is offended, and I burn not?” The worm, too, they think, is to be similarly understood. For it is written they say, “As the moth consumes the garment, and the worm the wood, so does grief consume the heart of a man.” But they who make no doubt that in that future punishment both body and soul shall suffer, affirm that the body shall be burned with fire, while the soul shall be, as it were, gnawed by a worm of anguish. Though this view is more reasonable,—for it is absurd to suppose that either body or soul will escape pain in the future punishment,—yet, for my own part, I find it easier to understand both as referring to the body than to suppose that neither does; and I think that Scripture is silent regarding the spiritual pain of the damned, because, though not expressed, it is necessarily understood that in a body thus tormented the soul also is tortured with a fruitless repentance. For we read in the ancient Scriptures, “The vengeance of the flesh of the ungodly is fire and worms.” It might have been more briefly said, “The vengeance of the ungodly.” Why, then, was it said, “The flesh of the ungodly,” unless because both the fire and the worm are to be the punishment of the flesh? Or if the object of the writer in saying, “The vengeance of the flesh,” was to indicate that this shall be the punishment of those who live after the flesh (for this leads to the second death, as the apostle intimated when he said, “For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die”, let each one make his own choice, either assigning the fire to the body and the worm to the soul,—the one figuratively, the other really,—or assigning both really to the body. For I have already sufficiently made out that animals can live in the fire, in burning without being consumed, in pain without dying, by a miracle of the most omnipotent Creator, to whom no one can deny that this is possible, if he be not ignorant by whom has been made all that is wonderful in all nature. For it is God Himself who has wrought all these miracles, great and small, in this world which I have mentioned, and incomparably more which I have omitted, and who has enclosed these marvels in this world, itself the greatest miracle of all. Let each man, then, choose which he will, whether he thinks that the worm is real and pertains to the body, or that spiritual things are meant by bodily representations, and that it belongs to the soul. But which of these is true will be more readily discovered by the facts themselves, when there shall be in the saints such knowledge as shall not require that their own experience teach them the nature of these punishments, but as shall, by its own fullness and perfection, suffice to instruct them in this matter. For “now we know in part, until that which is perfect is come;” only, this we believe about those future bodies, that they shall be such as shall certainly be pained by the fire.
Utrumque autem horum, ignem scilicet adque uermem, qui uolunt ad animi poenas, non ad corporis pertinere, dicunt etiam uri dolore animi sero adque infructuose paenitentes eos, qui fuerint a regno Dei separati, et ideo ignem pro isto dolore urente non incongrue poni potuisse contendunt; unde illud apostoli est: Quis scandalizatur, et non ego uror? Eundem etiam uermem putant intellegendum esse. Nam scriptum est, inquiunt: Sicut tinea uestimentum et uermis lignum, sic maeror excruciat cor uiri. Qui uero poenas et animi et corporis in illo supplicio futuras esse non dubitant, igne uri corpus, animum autem rodi quodam modo uerme maeroris adfirmant. Quod etsi credibilius dicitur, quia utique absurdum est ibi dolorem aut corporis aut animi defuturum: ego tamen facilius est ut ad corpus dicam utrumque pertinere quam neutrum, et ideo tacitum in illis diuinae scripturae uerbis animi dolorem, quoniam consequens esse intellegitur, etiamsi non dicatur, ut corpore sic dolente animus quoque sterili paenitentia crucietur. Legitur quippe et in ueteribus scripturis: Vindicta carnis inpii, ignis et uermis. Potuit breuius dici: Vindicta inpii. Quur ergo dictum est: carnis inpii, nisi quia utrumque, id est et ignis et uermis, poena erit carnis? Aut si uindictam carnis propterea dicere uoluit, quia hoc in homine uindicabitur, quod secundum carnem uixerit (propter hoc enim ueniet in mortem secundam, quam significauit apostolus dicens: Si enim secundum carnem uixeritis, moriemini), eligat quisque quod placet, aut ignem tribuere corpori, animo uermem, hoc proprie, illud tropice, aut utrumque proprie corpori. Iam enim satis superius disputaui posse animalia etiam in ignibus uiuere, in ustione sine consumtione, in dolore sine morte. per miraculum omnipotentissimi Creatoris; cui hoc possibile esse qui negat, a quo sit quidquid in naturis omnibus miratur ignorat. Ipse est enim Deus, qui omnia in hoc mundo magna et parua miracula, quae commemorauimus, et inconparabiliter plura, quae non commemorauimus, fecit eademque ipso mundo uno adque omnium maximo miraculo inclusit. Eligat ergo unum e duobus quisque quod placet, utrum et uermem ad corpus proprie an ad animum translato a corporalibus ad incorporalia uocabulo existimet pertinere. Quid autem horum uerum sit, res ipsa expeditius indicabit, quando erit scientia tanta sanctorum, ut eis cognoscendarum illarum poenarum necessaria non sit experientia, sed ea, quae tunc erit plena adque perfecta, ad hoc quoque sciendum sapientia sola sufficiat (nunc enim ex parte scimus, donec ueniat quod perfectum est); dum tamen nullo modo illa corpora talia futura esse credamus, ut nullis ab igne adficiantur doloribus.
Whether the Fire of Hell, If It Be Material Fire, Can Burn the Wicked Spirits, that is to Say, Devils, Who are Immaterial.
Chapter 10.—Whether the Fire of Hell, If It Be Material Fire, Can Burn the Wicked Spirits, that is to Say, Devils, Who are Immaterial.
Caput X. An ignis gehennae, si corporalis est, possit malignos spiritus, id est daemones incorporeos, tactu suo adurere.
Here arises the question: If the fire is not to be immaterial, analogous to the pain of the soul, but material, burning by contact, so that bodies may be tormented in it, how can evil spirits be punished in it? For it is undoubtedly the same fire which is to serve for the punishment of men and of devils, according to the words of Christ: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels;” unless, perhaps, as learned men have thought, the devils have a kind of body made of that dense and humid air which we feel strikes us when the wind is blowing. And if this kind of substance could not be affected by fire, it could not burn when heated in the baths. For in order to burn, it is first burned, and affects other things as itself is affected. But if any one maintains that the devils have no bodies, this is not a matter either to be laboriously investigated, or to be debated with keenness. For why may we not assert that even immaterial spirits may, in some extraordinary way, yet really be pained by the punishment of material fire, if the spirits of men, which also are certainly immaterial, are both now contained in material members of the body, and in the world to come shall be indissolubly united to their own bodies? Therefore, though the devils have no bodies, yet their spirits, that is, the devils themselves, shall be brought into thorough contact with the material fires, to be tormented by them; not that the fires themselves with which they are brought into contact shall be animated by their connection with these spirits, and become animals composed of body and spirit, but, as I said, this junction will be effected in a wonderful and ineffable way, so that they shall receive pain from the fires, but give no life to them. And, in truth, this other mode of union, by which bodies and spirits are bound together and become animals, is thoroughly marvellous, and beyond the comprehension of man, though this it is which is man.
Hic occurrit quaerere: Si non erit ignis incorporalis, sicut est animi dolor, sed corporalis, tactu noxius, ut eo possint corpora cruciari: quo modo in eo erit etiam poena spirituum malignorum? Idem quippe ignis erit, supplicio scilicet hominum adtributus et daemonum, dicente Christo: Discedite a me. maledicti, in ignem aeternum, qui paratus est diabolo et angelis eius. Nisi quia sunt quaedam sua etiam daemonibus corpora, sicut doctis hominibus uisum est, ex isto aere crasso adque umido, cuius inpulsus uento flante sentitur. Quod genus elementi si nihil igne perpeti posset, non ureret feruefactus in balneis. Ut enim urat, prior uritur facitque cum patitur. Si autem quisquam nulla habere corpora daemones adseuerat, non est de hac re aut laborandum operosa inquisitione aut contentiosa disputatione certandum. Quur enim non dicamus, quamuis miris, tamen ueris modis etiam spiritus incorporeos posse poena corporalis ignis adfligi, si spiritus hominum, etiam ipsi profecto incorporei, et nunc potuerunt includi corporalibus membris et tunc poterunt corporum suorum uinculis insolubiliter adligari? Adhaerebunt ergo, si eis nulla sunt corpora, spiritus daemonum, immo spiritus daemones, licet incorporei corporeis ignibus cruciandi, non ut ignes ipsi, quibus adhaerebunt, eorum iunctura inspirentur et animalia fiant, quae constent spiritu et corpore, sed, ut dixi, miris et ineffabilibus modis adhaerendo, accipientes ex ignibus poenam, non dantes ignibus uitam; quia et iste alius modus, quo corporibus adhaerent spiritus et animalia fiunt, omnino mirus est nec conprehendi ab homine potest, et hoc ipse homo est.
I would indeed say that these spirits will burn without any body of their own, as that rich man was burning in hell when he exclaimed, “I am tormented in this flame,” were I not aware that it is aptly said in reply, that that flame was of the same nature as the eyes he raised and fixed on Lazarus, as the tongue on which he entreated that a little cooling water might be dropped, or as the finger of Lazarus, with which he asked that this might be done,—all of which took place where souls exist without bodies. Thus, therefore, both that flame in which he burned and that drop he begged were immaterial, and resembled the visions of sleepers or persons in an ecstasy, to whom immaterial objects appear in a bodily form. For the man himself who is in such a state, though it be in spirit only, not in body, yet sees himself so like to his own body that he cannot discern any difference whatever. But that hell, which also is called a lake of fire and brimstone, will be material fire, and will torment the bodies of the damned, whether men or devils,—the solid bodies of the one, aerial bodies of the others; or if only men have bodies as well as souls, yet the evil spirits, though without bodies, shall be so connected with the bodily fires as to receive pain without imparting life. One fire certainly shall be the lot of both, for thus the truth has declared.
Dicerem quidem sic arsuros sine ullo suo corpore spiritus, sicut ardebat aput inferos ille diues, quando dicebat: Crucior in hac flamma, nisi conuenienter responderi cernerem talem fuisse illam flammam, quales oculi quos leuauit et Lazarum uidit, qualis lingua cui umorem exiguum desiderauit infundi, qualis digitus Laxari de quo id sibi fieri postulauit; ubi tamen erant sine corporibus animae. Sic ergo incorporalis et illa flamma qua exarsit et illa guttula quam poposcit, qualia sunt etiam uisa dormientium siue in ecstasi cernentium res incorporales, habentes tamen similitudinem corporum. Nam et ipse homo cum spiritu, non corpore, sit in talibus uisis, ita se tamen tunc similem suo corpori uidet. ut discernere omnino non possit. At uero gehenna illa, quod etiam stagnum ignis et sulphuris dictum est, corporeus ignis erit et cruciabit corpora damnatorum, aut et hominum et daemonum, solida hominum, aeria daemonum, aut tantum hominum corpora cum spiritibus, daemones autem spiritus sine corporibus haerentes sumendo poenam, non inpertiendo uitam corporalibua ignibus. Unus quippe utrisque ignis erit, sicut Veritas dixit.
Whether It is Just that the Punishments of Sins Last Longer Than the Sins Themselves Lasted.
Chapter 11.—Whether It is Just that the Punishments of Sins Last Longer Than the Sins Themselves Lasted.
Caput XI. An hoc ratio iustitiae habeat, ut non sint extensiora poenarum tempora, quam fuerint peccatorum.
Some, however, of those against whom we are defending the city of God, think it unjust that any man be doomed to an eternal punishment for sins which, no matter how great they were, were perpetrated in a brief space of time; as if any law ever regulated the duration of the punishment by the duration of the offence punished! Cicero tells us that the laws recognize eight kinds of penalty,—damages, imprisonment, scourging, reparation, disgrace, exile, death, slavery. Is there any one of these which may be compressed into a brevity proportioned to the rapid commission of the offence, so that no longer time may be spent in its punishment than in its perpetration, unless, perhaps, reparation? For this requires that the offender suffer what he did, as that clause of the law says, “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth.” For certainly it is possible for an offender to lose his eye by the severity of legal retaliation in as brief a time as he deprived another of his eye by the cruelty of his own lawlessness. But if scourging be a reasonable penalty for kissing another man’s wife, is not the fault of an instant visited with long hours of atonement, and the momentary delight punished with lasting pain? What shall we say of imprisonment? Must the criminal be confined only for so long a time as he spent on the offence for which he is committed? or is not a penalty of many years’ confinement imposed on the slave who has provoked his master with a word, or has struck him a blow that is quickly over? And as to damages, disgrace, exile, slavery, which are commonly inflicted so as to admit of no relaxation or pardon, do not these resemble eternal punishments in so far as this short life allows a resemblance? For they are not eternal only because the life in which they are endured is not eternal; and yet the crimes which are punished with these most protracted sufferings are perpetrated in a very brief space of time. Nor is there any one who would suppose that the pains of punishment should occupy as short a time as the offense; or that murder, adultery, sacrilege, or any other crime, should be measured, not by the enor mity of the injury or wickedness, but by the length of time spent in its perpetration. Then as to the award of death for any great crime, do the laws reckon the punishment to consist in the brief moment in which death is inflicted, or in this, that the offender is eternally banished from the society of the living? And just as the punishment of the first death cuts men off from this present mortal city, so does the punishment of the second death cut men off from that future immortal city. For as the laws of this present city do not provide for the executed criminal’s return to it, so neither is he who is condemned to the second death recalled again to life everlasting. But if temporal sin is visited with eternal punishment, how, then, they say, is that true which your Christ says, “With the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again?” and they do not observe that “the same measure” refers, not to an equal space of time, but to the retribution of evil or, in other words, to the law by which he who has done evil suffers evil. Besides, these words could be appropriately understood as referring to the matter of which our Lord was speaking when He used them, viz., judgments and condemnation. Thus, if he who unjustly judges and condemns is himself justly judged and condemned, he receives “with the same measure” though not the same thing as he gave. For judgment he gave, and judgment he receives, though the judgment he gave was unjust, the judgment he receives just.
Sic autem quidam eorum, contra quos defendimus ciuitatem Dei, iniustum putant, ut pro peccatis quamlibet magnis, paruo scilicet tempore perpetratis, poena quisque damnetur aeterna, quasi ullius id umquam iustitia legis adtendat, ut tanta mora temporis quisque puniatur, quanta mora temporis unde puniretur admisit. Octo genera poenarum in legibus esse scribit Tullius, damnum, uincla, uerbera, talionem, ignominiam, exsilium, mortem, seruitutem. Quid horum est quod in breue tempus pro cuiusque peccati celeritate coartetur, ut tanta uindicetur morula, quanta deprehenditur perpetratum, nisi forte talio? Id enim agit, ut hoc patiatur quisque quod fecit. Unde illud est legis: Oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente. Fieri enim potest, ut tam breui tempore quisque amittat oculum seueritate uindictae, quam tulit ipse alteri inprobitate peccati. Porro autem si alienae feminae osculum infixum rationis sit uerbere uindicare, nonne qui illud puncto temporis fecerit, inconparabili horarum spatio uerberatur et suauitas uoluptatis exiguae diuturno dolore punitur? Quid, in uinculis numquid tamdiu quisque iudicandus est esse debere, quamdiu fecit unde meruit adligari; cum iustissime annosas poenas seruus in conpedibus pendat, qui uerbo aut ictu celerrime transeunte uel lacessiuit dominum uel plagauit? Iam uero damnum, ignominia, exsilium, seruitus cum plerumque sic infliguntur, ut nulla uenia relaxentur, nonne pro huius uitae modo similia poenis uidentur aeternis? Ideo quippe aeterna esse non possunt, quia nec ipsa uita, quae his plectitur, porrigitur in aeternum; et tamen peccata, quae uindicantur longissimi temporis poenis, breuissimo tempore perpetrantur; nec quisquam exstitit qui censeret tam cito nocentium finienda esse tormenta, quam cito factum est uel homicidium uel adulterium uel sacrilegium uel quodlibet aliud scelus non temporis longitudine, sed iniquitatis et inpietatis magnitudine metiendum. Qui uero pro aliquo grandi crimine morte multatur, numquid mora qua occiditur, quae perbreuis est, eius supplicium leges aestimant et non quod eum in sempiternum auferunt de societate uiuentium? Quod est autem de ista ciuitate mortali homines supplicio primae mortis, hoc est de illa ciuitate inmortali homines supplicio secundae mortis auferre. Sicut enim non efficiunt leges huius ciuitatis, ut in eam quisque reuocetur occisus: sic nec illius, ut in uitam reuocetur aeternam secunda morte damnatus. Quo modo ergo uerum est, inquiunt, quod ait Christus uester: In qua mensura mensi fueritis, in ea remetietur uobis. si temporale peccatum supplicio punitur aeterno? Nec adtendunt non propter aequale temporis spatium, sed propter uicissitudinem mali, id est ut qui mala fecerit mala patiatur, eandem dictam fuisse mensuram. Quamuis hoc in ea re proprie possit accipi, de qua Dominus cum hoc diceret loquebatur, id est de iudiciis et condemnationibus. Proinde qui iudicat et condemnat iniuste, si iudicatur et condemnatur iuste, in eadem mensura recipit, quamuis non hoc quod dedit. Iudicio enim fecit, iudicio patitur; quamuis fecerit damnatione quod iniquum est, patiatur damnatione quod iustum est.
Of the Greatness of the First Transgression, on Account of Which Eternal Punishment is Due to All Who are Not Within the Pale of the Saviour’s Grace.
Chapter 12.—Of the Greatness of the First Transgression, on Account of Which Eternal Punishment is Due to All Who are Not Within the Pale of the Saviour’s Grace.
Caput XII. De magnitudine praeuaricationis primae, ob quam aeterna poena omnibus debeatur, qui extra gratiam fuerint Saluatoris.
But eternal punishment seems hard and unjust to human perceptions, because in the weakness of our mortal condition there is wanting that highest and purest wisdom by which it can be perceived how great a wickedness was committed in that first transgression. The more enjoyment man found in God, the greater was his wickedness in abandoning Him; and he who destroyed in himself a good which might have been eternal, became worthy of eternal evil. Hence the whole mass of the human race is condemned; for he who at first gave entrance to sin has been punished with all his posterity who were in him as in a root, so that no one is exempt from this just and due punishment, unless delivered by mercy and undeserved grace; and the human race is so apportioned that in some is displayed the efficacy of merciful grace, in the rest the efficacy of just retribution. For both could not be displayed in all; for if all had remained under the punishment of just condemnation, there would have been seen in no one the mercy of redeeming grace. And, on the other hand, if all had been transferred from darkness to light, the severity of retribution would have been manifested in none. But many more are left under punishment than are delivered from it, in order that it may thus be shown what was due to all. And had it been inflicted on all, no one could justly have found fault with the justice of Him who taketh vengeance; whereas, in the deliverance of so many from that just award, there is cause to render the most cordial thanks to the gratuitous bounty of Him who delivers.
Sed poena aeterna ideo dura et iniusta sensibus uidetur humanis, quia in hac infirmitate moribundorum sensuum deest ille sensus altissimae purissimaeque sapientiae, quo sentiri possit quantum nefas in illa prima praeuaricatione commissum sit. Quanto enim magis homo fruebatur Deo, tanto maiore inpietate dereliquit Deum et factus est malo dignus aeterno, qui hoc in se peremit bonum, quod esse posset aeternum. Hinc est uniuersa generis humani massa damnata; quoniam, qui hoc primus admisit, cum ea quae in illo fuerat radicata sua stirpe punitus est, ut nullus ab hoc iusto debitoque supplicio nisi misericordi et indebita gratia liberetur adque ita dispertiatur genus humanum, ut in quibusdam demonstretur quid ualeat misericors gratia, in ceteris quid iusta uindicta. Neque enim utrumque demonstraretur in omnibus, quia, si omnes remanerent in poenis iustae damnationis, in nullo appareret misericors gratia; rursus si omnes a tenebris transferrentur in lucem, in nullo appareret ueritas ultionis. In qua propterea multo plures quam in illa sunt, ut sic ostendatur, quid omnibus deberetur. Quod si omnibus redderetur, iustitiam uindicantis iuste nemo reprehenderet; quia uero tam multi exinde liberantur, est unde agantur maximae gratiae gratuito muneri liberantis.