Is Apocatastasis a legitimate Catholic position/a possible hope?

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

Is it good, bad, or neutral to want Catholicism to be false? Can one be a good practicing Catholic while wishing that Origenism or universalism were true? This is a stumbling block for me. I'm supposed to love God while having a problem with how He glorifies Himself (vindicating His justice in the form of eternal torment)?

If God's justice weren't perfect, He wouldn't be God.

Universalism demands contradiction from a being whose nature is totally incompatible with contradiction or deception.

[Michael Wilson]

Is it good, bad, or neutral to want Catholicism to be false? Can one be a good practicing Catholic while wishing that Origenism or universalism were true? This is a stumbling block for me. I'm supposed to love God while having a problem with how He glorifies Himself (vindicating His justice in the form of eternal torment)? 

We creatures have an obligation to conform our minds and wills to God's revelation. We cannot wish for something that is contrary to His express teachings.
He has revealed that those who die in the state of sin will go to Hell for all eternity; we have to accept this and submit to it.
It can be a comfort to know that God wills the salvation of all men and died on the Cross for our salvation. Also that He wills our salvation more than we do. If anyone ends up in Hell, it is because they willed to be there, and in spite of God's graces and inspirations that He sent them for their eternal salvation.

[Michael]

We creatures have an obligation to conform our minds and wills to God's revelation.

Is conforming our will to God's revelation incompatible with wishing for universalism?

We cannot wish for something that is contrary to His express teachings.

 Citation needed.

It can be a comfort to know that God wills the salvation of all men and died on the Cross for our salvation.

I don't understand how X can be comforting if X is compatible with going to eternal hell.

...He wills our salvation more than we do.

Citation needed. What does it mean for God to will something for us more than we do, especially if it could fail to obtain?

If anyone ends up in Hell, it is because they willed to be there, and in spite of God's graces and inspirations that He sent them for their eternal salvation.

Eternal damnation for an indeterministic choice? The usual defenses don't persuade me.

[JJoseph]

Here is the 1907 Catholic Encyclopedia explain that some Catholic writers deny that any ecumenical condemnation of apokatastasis ever took place. The word apocatastasis originates from the Greek of Acts 3:21, where it was used by St. Peter, while its interpretation is a mystery: "The New Testament (Acts 3:21) speaks of the "apokatastasis of all things," although this passage is not usually understood to teach universal salvation.[6]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apokatastasis

The CE below: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htm Also, one can make an argument like this. (1) God wills that all men will be saved. (2) one can legitimately hope (and pray) that God's will be done, even if finally it turns out that it wasn't. (3) therefore, one can hope and pray (at the least for a limited) apokatastasis. Even St. Augustine, a decisive opponent of apokatastasis, does not condemn those who held this view, but speaks of them as "Compassionate Christians", while only rejecting their opinion. No doubt one of those he was thinking of was St. Gregory of Nyssa, a well known apocatastasist, whom the Seventh Ecumenical Council, Nicaea II, praised as "The Father of Fathers".

"Were Origen and Origenism anathematized? Many learned writers believe so; an equal number deny that they were condemned; most modern authorities are either undecided or reply with reservations. Relying on the most recent studies on the question it may be held that:

It is certain that the fifth general council was convoked exclusively to deal with the affair of the Three Chapters, and that neither Origen nor Origenism were the cause of it.
It is certain that the council opened on 5 May, 553, in spite of the protestations of Pope Vigilius, who though at Constantinople refused to attend it, and that in the eight conciliary sessions (from 5 May to 2 June), the Acts of which we possess, only the question of the Three Chapters is treated.
Finally it is certain that only the Acts concerning the affair of the Three Chapters were submitted to the pope for his approval, which was given on 8 December, 553, and 23 February, 554.
It is a fact that Popes Vigilius, Pelagius I (556-61), Pelagius II (579-90), Gregory the Great (590-604), in treating of the fifth council deal only with the Three Chapters, make no mention of Origenism, and speak as if they did not know of its condemnation.

[JJoseph]

St. Gregory of Nyssa, On the Soul and the Resurrection: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2915.htm

Such I think is the plight of the soul as well when the Divine force, for God's very love of man, drags that which belongs to Him from the ruins of the irrational and material. Not in hatred or revenge for a wicked life, to my thinking, does God bring upon sinners those painful dispensations; He is only claiming and drawing to Himself whatever, to please Him, came into existence. But while He for a noble end is attracting the soul to Himself, the Fountain of all Blessedness, it is the occasion necessarily to the being so attracted of a state of torture. Just as those who refine gold from the dross which it contains not only get this base alloy to melt in the fire, but are obliged to melt the pure gold along with the alloy, and then while this last is being consumed the gold remains, so, while evil is being consumed in the purgatorial fire, the soul that is welded to this evil must inevitably be in the fire too, until the spurious material alloy is consumed and annihilated by this fire. If a clay of the more tenacious kind is deeply plastered round a rope, and then the end of the rope is put through a narrow hole, and then some one on the further side violently pulls it by that end, the result must be that, while the rope itself obeys the force exerted, the clay that has been plastered upon it is scraped off it with this violent pulling and is left outside the hole, and, moreover, is the cause why the rope does not run easily through the passage, but has to undergo a violent tension at the hands of the puller. In such a manner, I think, we may figure to ourselves the agonized struggle of that soul which has wrapped itself up in earthy material passions, when God is drawing it, His own one, to Himself, and the foreign matter, which has somehow grown into its substance, has to be scraped from it by main force, and so occasions it that keen intolerable anguish.

Then it seems, I said, that it is not punishment chiefly and principally that the Deity, as Judge, afflicts sinners with; but He operates, as your argument has shown, only to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness.

That, said the Teacher, is my meaning; and also that the agony will be measured by the amount of evil there is in each individual. For it would not be reasonable to think that the man who has remained so long as we have supposed in evil known to be forbidden, and the man who has fallen only into moderate sins, should be tortured to the same amount in the judgment upon their vicious habit; but according to the quantity of material will be the longer or shorter time that that agonizing flame will be burning; that is, as long as there is fuel to feed it. In the case of the man who has acquired a heavy weight of material, the consuming fire must necessarily be very searching; but where that which the fire has to feed upon has spread less far, there the penetrating fierceness of the punishment is mitigated, so far as the subject itself, in the amount of its evil, is diminished. In any and every case evil must be removed out of existence, so that, as we said above, the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all.

[Michael]

The mentality I'm proposing is, "I'm willing to practice Catholicism (go to Mass, confess my mortal sins) for fear of going to hell (imperfect contrition), but deep down, given my lack of certainty that revelation indeed teaches Catholicism, I hope Catholicism is wrong and that apokatastasis is true."

[Michael Wilson]

Mike

Is conforming our will to God's revelation incompatible with wishing for universalism?

Yes,
Me:

We cannot wish for something that is contrary to His express teachings.

Mike's response:

Citation needed.

We have to believe what God has revealed; to "not believe" is to reject what He taught us:
Mark 16:16

He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.

Is Christ God? If He is, then He cannot lie, but He is quoted speaking about Hell in thirty five places in the N.T.
He also told us that Hell is for eternity
Matthew 25:41

Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels.

Mike

I don't understand how X can be comforting if X is compatible with going to eternal hell.

If "X" = God's will for our salvation; then "non-X" is contrary to God's will; which is comforting in knowing that if we obey God's inspirations and graces, He will lead us to Heaven.
On God willing our salvation more than we do:

Citation needed. What does it mean for God to will something for us more than we do, especially if it could fail to obtain?

God gave Himself up to a most painful death for our sake, not for His own; would you or any man be willing to go through what He went through in order to save your soul; and even then, the suffering would be for our own sake, and not for those of our enemies.
Mike:

Eternal damnation for an indeterministic choice? The usual defenses don't persuade me.

Why "indertiministic"? Men do not fall into Hell by accident; they deliberately choose it.

[JJoseph]

The mentality I'm proposing is, "I'm willing to practice Catholicism (go to Mass, confess my mortal sins) for fear of going to hell (imperfect contrition), but deep down, given my lack of certainty that revelation indeed teaches Catholicism, I hope Catholicism is wrong and that apokatastasis is true."

Catholicism is 100% right, not wrong. It is proven infallibly by such things as Messianic Prophecies, Eucharistic Miracles, Marian Apparition Miracles witnessed by 10s of thousands, or with Supernatural Icons (e.g. Fatima, Guadalupe etc), the Shroud of Turin, the Miracles of the Saints etc etc.

St. Gregory of Nyssa was a devout Catholic Christian and is a Church Father and Doctor of the Church. He defended the Truth of the Catholic Faith against heathenism and heresy. But he was, as St. Augustine calls him, a compassionate or merciful Christian, and wanted as many people as possible to be saved, and prayed and hoped for all.

The Catholic must always pray, "not my will, Heavenly Father, but Thy will be done". And God's will is that as many as possible be saved. We will know all mysteries on Judgment Day.

[james03]

I'm supposed to love God while having a problem with how He glorifies Himself (vindicating His justice in the form of eternal torment)?

St. Thomas kind of wrote about God sending evil doers to hell "to show His Justice", or words to that effect.  It's an error, or sloppy.  St. Augustine would never write that.  "To show" or "to vindicate" requires cause and effect.  Thus it requires God to change and be therefore temporal.  Completely wrong.

God IS Justice itself.  God's Existence IS His Essence; He doesn't "do" something "for" something.  He Is.  He is Justice itself.  But He is also Charity and therefore Mercy.  People don't understand Justice, which is why we get such stupid phrases as "Social Justice" which should be called "Social Mercy".  In a society of perfect Social Justice, handicapped people starve to death.  Anyhow, God doesn't do X for the purpose of Y.  He Is.

As far as getting ticked off because of Hell, understand that by definition Hell must be Just, and likely the damned are shown some Mercy.  Wabu t'-(click-click) obanuoaltsu the nake savage is not in hell getting his skin peeled off by demons and having hot lead continuously poured down his throat.  This view is not my own, but is the Catholic view since before Dante.

And I'll give you an example.  Suppose you are on the jury hearing the case for a faggot that put on a dress and then sodomizes an 8 yr. old boy.  The faggot was unaware of the security camera, which video the jury has to review.  The time comes for the verdict.  Do you stand up and say, "Everyone makes mistakes, so we're letting him off."?  Of course not.  And yet God sees every disgusting, evil, filthy thing that goes on, and you should judge Him for His Justice?  Shameful.

Furthermore, every sinner has already rejected God, Who is Goodness Itself.  Why would they all of a sudden accept God?  They throw themselves into hell to escape Him, as they can't bear to be in the presence of Perfect Beauty when they see their own ugliness.  The excuses stop on judgement day.  And the worse are those Christians in Mortal Sin, who see the Love of Christ to save them on the horror of the Cross, and yet they spat on Him.  They will run the fastest to jump into hell.

[KreKre]

St. Catherine of Genoa wrote that Purgatory is completely voluntary (meaning a soul chooses it gladly) because for an impure soul which is burdened by the guilt of sin, the bright and brilliant splendor of God is unbearable to behold. Therefore, in spite of the immense pain, the fires of Purgatory are welcomed gladly by the impure souls because of their guilt, shame, and the overwhelming desire to be pure in the sight of God.

I think of the Purgatory as that burning feeling of shame and guilt when you genuinely say "I'm sorry" to a friend you've wronged. Even when you know you're forgiven, you're still miserable because of the guilt and because you know you don't deserve forgiveness. You almost wish you weren't forgiven, at least you could then be comfortable in your resentment. When it is God whom you've wronged, a being who is infinitely good and deserves all your love, that feeling of remorse in the face of His infinite love and mercy must be worse than any fire imaginable. That is Purgatory. In the end, it is a happy thing, because every soul in Purgatory finds itself in the loving embrace of God, like in the parable of the prodigal son from Luke 15. But it must hurt, it would have no value if it didn't.

The damned souls, on the other hand, find God revolting and hate Him with all their passion. They feel no remorse. This is because they love sin, and since they cannot both love God and sin at the same time, they choose sin. There can be no compromise between virtue and sin, sin always wins out in any such arrangement. It is unthinkable for them to ask for God's forgiveness, because that would mean giving up sin. The idea of voluntarily suffering in Purgatory out of love for God is equally unthinkable for them. So, they would find Heaven to be more torturous than Hell, because of the hatred, pride, envy and all other rotten feelings they have towards God and the blessed souls. The presence of Saints would only get in the way of their attachment to sin, and would be nothing but a constant rebuttal, humiliation, and a reminder of how rotten they are. Even if they were permitted entry into Heaven, they wouldn't be able to take any pleasure from it, they would only seek to corrupt it and turn it into Hell. So, in the end, both justice and mercy will be fulfilled. No soul gets damned to Hell by accident, it's a voluntary rejection of God. Therefore, no soul will think it has been judged unfairly. Not even Satan, the demonic lawyer, will be able to come up with an objection to God's verdict. Of course, the damned ones will hate the fact they are damned, but they will fully understand that God is infinitely just and merciful (and will hate Him even more because of it).

It may seem contradictory that a damned soul both envies the blessed soul and is also disgusted by it, but anyone who has experienced feeling envy knows that this is not contradictory at all.

[Bonaventure]

Apokastasis was condemned by the Church; case closed.

 

[Michael]

I talked to a priest about this. He said as long as I understand the difference between what I wish and what's true, then I can still be a good Catholic. I'll trust a moral theologian (which this priest is) over Internet strangers.

[KreKre]

There are moral theologians who write heretical things like the Blessed Virgin was not a virgin, or even that Jesus Christ is not God in a supernatural sense, in the capacity of professors at "prestigious" Catholic universities and seminaries. I wish we lived in a time when saying: "he is a moral theologian" constituted some kind of proof of authority on the subject, but such times are long gone.

Frankly, I'd sooner believe a stranger on the internet, if he is logically consistent and backs up his claims with easily verifiable quotations from Church fathers and saints. But that's just me.

However, I do trust my priest. But I'm talking about a specific priest, not all priests are like him. Everyone should find a priest who can be trusted, life is much easier that way.

[Greg]

If that shit were true there would be no harm in voting democrat or going to the new rite of mass.

Besides, those Indian call centre workers are going to need some company in Hell.  Who better to welcome them than Father Bob, AOC and the Clintons?

[Michael Wilson]

I talked to a priest about this. He said as long as I understand the difference between what I wish and what's true, then I can still be a good Catholic. I'll trust a moral theologian (which this priest is) over Internet strangers.

That is a very sound position to take i.a. Trusting a priest (if he is a good, sound, traditional priest) over internet strangers. But why then come on here and ask us about this if you had this priest to consult all along?
Secondly, his response is the equivalent of telling you that you have to know how to distinguish between the teaching of the Church and fantasy i.e. the imaginary scenarios that you make up in your mind.