ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume V, Issue 263, 17 May 1878, Page 7

ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.

(Eev. Father Weniger in the CatUlic Review) bOME of our readers will probably not perceive the whole strength of our argument, but all logical thinkers, all trained philosophers, will perceive it, and for these especially we write this paragraph. The deist, believing in a creator and ruler of the world — God, — must acknowledge in Him a being who is also capable, under all circumstances, of ruling rational and immortal beings, if He was pleased to create them free, as He did create man, whom He left free to obey Him or to disobey Him. Such immortal beings, if they chose to be disobedient, God could not rule if He would not confirm His law by everlasting punishment. Listen to my reason why He cotild not. The reason is that whatever is temporary, and therefore has an end, is of no avail for an immortal being who has before him eternity. No matter how long the punishment may last, one hour or millions of years, when passed they are equally gone. An immortal being, therefore, could defy his Creator and Euler, and prefer the temporal enjoyment of sin in defiance of mere temporary punishment. That he would do so is evident from the conduct of all those Catholics and Protestants who, while believing in everlasting punishment, still dare to remain in mortal sin.

What then would men care about sin if, on the contrary, they believed, that there is no such thing to be feared as everlasting punishment. Nothing less than the sanction of divine law by the everlasting punishment of those who rebel against it is commensurate for beings who are themselves immortal. A government which, has no power to control the wickedness of the transgressors of its laws by the infliction of punishment sufficient to deter them, is a miserable one. And that is what the government of God would be in regard to immortal beings rebelling against Him, if there were no everlasting punishment. Moreover, as God is omniscient, how could He do otherwise than ordain the eternal punishment of immortal beings of whom He forsaw that, left to their own dispositions, many never would cease through all eternity to offend Him. God knows if that was not already the case with all the fallen angels. Do you understand the bearing of my argument 1 Abstracting from all revelation, if you do not, you do not reason. But it may be that infidels are pantheists, neither believing in a personal God nor in personal immortality of men. For these, of course, the question of the existence of hell is out of place, The other part of the question, in regard to the kind of punishment in hell, is equally out of place, because reason by itself never can answer this question, and revelation ■was not given to satisfy our curiosity. No explicit definition in this regard has ever been given by the Church, It perfectly suffices to perceive, by faith and reason, that the punishment of men who, having died in the state of mortal sin, have been condemned to hell, will affect body and soul, as they have sinned with both, and that their punishment will be eternal. Any punishment that never ends must be for men the same awful warning to try by all means to avoid it, whether it be punishment by fire or otherwise. Besides, for those who firmly believe all that God has revealed to men, proposed to them by the legitimate teaching authority, and live accordingly, they are on the way of salvation, and for them" it is of very little interest what kind of punishment God inflicts on sinners in hell. They rather divert their thoughts to the joys that await them in heaven. But those who wilfully err, or who do not live as they believe, proceeding in the way of damnation, will soon enough know, by experience, what eternal punishment in hell means. Yes, those Ingersollians and all other blasphemous scoffers at religion, if they refuse to listen to reason and revelation, will each, have, we are afraid, shortly to exclaim, « Yes, there is a hell, and lam there. Too late then to ridicule hell.