Chapter 13 – Refinery: Historical Overview

To some extent my ignorance of other views of postmortem judgment makes sense. Since the time of Augustine, eternal conscious torment has been the dominate view of the Catholic Church. And John Calvin gave this view his stamp of approval for the Protestant world.[i]

A Third View

After I began thinking about annihilationism, I found myself reflecting on another position, which I had always thought completely contradicted the plain teaching of the Bible. This view is called various terms, such as Christian universalism, restorationism, ultimate reconciliation, and ultimate redemption. Sometimes it is referred to by the Greek term apokatastasis, meaning restoration.

According to this view, at some point in the ages to come, after a period of purification and pain, all will accept the light of Christ and be saved.[ii] In other words, hell is a temporary refinery leading all to Christ. This view should not be confused with universalism in general, which asserts that all will eventually be saved no matter what. Christian universalism affirms the unique and essential role of Christ in salvation—all will be saved by Christ. Contrary to the traditional view, however, Christ continues to extend mercy to sinners in the afterlife.

Hopeful Christian universalism is the less-confident version of ultimate reconciliation. It claims that Scripture gives us enough reason to hope for the salvation of all, but not enough reason to be certain that all will be saved.[iii]

How could I even consider a view that denied the basic teaching of Scripture? In fact, this belief is considered a heresy or false teaching by many.[iv] How could my thinking change so much from being certain of eternal conscious torment for most of the people I knew to wondering if all would be saved? The short answer is I kept reading.

Ancient Advocates

According to the church historian, Philip Schaff (1819–1893):

There never was in the Christian church any difference of opinion concerning the righteous, who shall inherit eternal life and enjoy the blessed communion of God forever and ever. But the final fate of the impenitent who reject the offer of salvation admits of three answers to the reasoning mind: everlasting punishment, annihilation, restoration (after remedial punishment and repentance).[v]

Moreover, ultimate restoration was held by influential Christian leaders.

Clement of Alexandria (150–215)

Clement of Alexandria was one of the early leaders of the Catechetical School of Alexandria in North Africa, which according to Jerome, was founded by St. Mark. Clement was a teacher and, perhaps even dean, at this ancient center of the Christian faith. John R. Sachs comments,

Although Origen counts as the chief representative of the doctrine of apocatastasis, in actuality it is Clement (d. between 211-216), Origen’s predecessor at Alexandria, who first presents this doctrine, thereby providing a foundation for the thought of his famous successor. In order to understand this particular teaching, it should be seen in the context of his view of the nature and purpose of divine punish- ment in general. Clement has no doubt that everyone will be judged by God according to his or her deeds, not only at a “great and final judgment” but apparently also at other “preliminary judgments.” The fate of unbelievers is compared to the chaff of wheat “which is driven from the face of the earth by the wind.” He speaks in a very traditional manner of the penalty of “external punishment by fire” which awaits those, for example, who fail in generosity and thereby neglect the needy who are the beloved of God. And yet, in actuality, such punishing fire seems neither simply punitive nor eternal for Clement. It is not like the devouring fire of everyday life, meant to destroy the sinner, but a “discerning” or “rational flame” which serves to sanctify the sinful souls who must pass through it.[vi]

In Book 7 of The Stromata or Miscellanies, Clement writes,

And how is He Saviour and Lord, if not the Saviour and Lord of all? But He is the Saviour of those who have believed, because of their wishing to know; and the Lord of those who have not believed, till, being enabled to confess him, they obtain the peculiar and appropriate boon which comes by him. (chap. 2)[vii]

Notice the phrase “till, being enabled to confess him.” In Clement’s mind, all will get there, all will confess that Jesus is Lord as Paul says in Philippians 2. In the same section he says, “all men are His; some through knowledge, and others not yet so” (7.2). His faith in a universal conclusion comes through in the big ideas and in the small words—till, not yet.

How will all get there? Clement states, “God’s punishments are saving and disciplinary, leading to conversion” (6.6). Why does God use this process? Because “all things are arranged with a view to the salvation of the universe by the Lord of the universe, both generally and particularly” (7.2).

Gregory of Nyssa (335–395)

Gregory of Nyssa (or Gregory Nyssen) was a bishop in Cappadocia for more than twenty years. He is one of the three Cappadocian Fathers who helped to establish orthodox Christian beliefs, including the doctrine of the Trinity. He participated in the second ecumenical council in Constantinople (381), which adopted and expanded the Nicene Creed of 325. The modified statement, also known as the Nicene Creed (technically, the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed), is perhaps the most important creed in Christianity because of its widespread acceptance throughout the Christian world: the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, the church of the East, and much of Protestantism.[viii] For his theological work, Gregory of Nyssa was called the “father of fathers” at the seventh ecumenical council. Additionally, this “father of fathers” was also unique in his condemnation of the institution of slavery. If he was not the first ancient abolitionist, he appears to have been the most vociferous.[ix] In other words, Gregory’s moral compass was more than a millennium ahead of his time. And his devout life and teachings resulted in his sainthood in Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Lutheranism.

Gregory of Nyssa’s book, On the Soul and the Resurrection, written around AD 380, is a dialogue between his sister, Macrina, and him. He calls her “the Teacher” and conveys her insights throughout the book. The Teachers says,

His end is one, and one only; it is this: when the complete whole of our race shall have been perfected from the first man to the last,—some having at once in this life been cleansed from evil, others having afterwards in the necessary periods been healed by the Fire, others having in their life here been unconscious equally of good and of evil,—to offer to every one of us participation in the blessings which are in Him . . .

“His end is one,” “the complete whole of our race shall have been perfected,” and “every one of us” will participate in God’s blessings. Gregory was never condemned for these all-embracing views.

Not Eccentric

I have introduced the views of two ancient Christian leaders, but the idea of ultimate redemption went far beyond two people. Christian universalism was actually quite popular.[x] Edward Beecher (1803-1895), pastor of historic Park Street Church in Boston, says of the early centuries:

There were at least six theological schools in the Church at large. Of these six schools, one and only one, was decidedly and earnestly in favor of the doctrine of future eternal punishment. One was in favor of annihilation of the wicked. Two were in favor of the doctrine of universal restoration on the principles of Origen, and two in favor of universal restoration on the principles of Theodore of Mopsuestia. It is also true that the prominent defenders of the doctrine of universal restoration were decided believers in the divinity of Christ, in the Trinity, in the incarnation and atonement, and in the great Christian doctrine of regeneration . . .

Thus in five out of six of the early theological schools we do not find the doctrine of future eternal punishment. Nor do we find any assault on the schools of Alexandria, Cesarea, Antioch, Edessa, and Asia Minor, from any quarter, for their unfaithfulness to that doctrine, nor any general combination against them, nor any general excitement and controversy in behalf of the doctrine of future eternal punishment.[xi]

In The City of God, Augustine, writing in AD 426, acknowledges believers who held a different view on this matter than he espoused:

I must now, I see, enter the lists of amicable controversy with those tender-hearted Christians who decline to believe that any, or that all of those whom the infallibly just Judge may pronounce worthy of the punishment of hell, shall suffer eternally, and who suppose that they shall be delivered after a fixed term of punishment, longer or shorter according to the amount of each man’s sin. . . . Very different, however, is the error we speak of, which is dictated by the tenderness of these Christians who suppose that the sufferings of those who are condemned in the judgment will be temporary, while the blessedness of all who are sooner or later set free will be eternal. Which opinion, if it is good and true because it is merciful, will be so much the better and truer in proportion as it becomes more merciful. Let, then, this fountain of mercy be extended, and flow forth even to the lost angels, and let them also be set free, at least after as many and long ages as seem fit! Why does this stream of mercy flow to all the human race, and dry up as soon as it reaches the angelic? And yet they dare not extend their pity further, and propose the deliverance of the devil himself. (XXI.17)

Rather than condemning these tenderhearted believers or the misercordi nostri (“our own compassionate ones”) as heretics, Augustine has an “amicable controversy” with them. He attempts to rebut their view with a slippery slope argument. If we open the river of God’s mercy, how can we keep it from reaching fallen angels and Satan? How should we respond?

Since the texts that refer to universal salvation are primarily focused on humans, this is not an especially relevant point and it takes us deeper into speculative theology. This issue is hard enough with only humans in view; we don’t have to bring in demons and Satan.

For our purposes, here’s the key question: How many of these merciful Christians existed in Augustine’s day? In Enchiridion, written about six years earlier, Augustine says:

It is quite in vain, then, that some—indeed very many—yield to merely human feelings and deplore the notion of the eternal punishment of the damned and their interminable and perpetual misery. (XXIX.112)

The answer, then, is that 1600 years ago the influential Augustine knew of “very many” Christians who rejected the idea of endless punishment. This matches with Basil the Great’s observation, which we encountered in chapter 7, regarding the majority of Eastern Christians who viewed “eternal punishment” as temporary in duration. Augustine continues,

They do not believe that such things will be. Not that they would go counter to divine Scripture—but, yielding to their own human feelings, they soften what seems harsh and give a milder emphasis to statements they believe are meant more to terrify than to express the literal truth. “God will not forget,” they say, “to show mercy, nor in his anger will he shut up his mercy.” This is, in fact, the text of a holy psalm. But there is no doubt that it is to be interpreted to refer to those who are called “vessels of mercy,” those who are freed from misery not by their own merits but through God’s mercy. Even so, if they suppose that the text applies to all men, there is no ground for them further to suppose that there can be an end for those of whom it is said, “Thus these shall go into everlasting punishment.” Otherwise, it can as well be thought that there will also be an end to the happiness of those of whom the antithesis was said: “But the righteous into life eternal.” (XXIX.112)

Augustine recognizes that these merciful believers supported their view with Scripture, but he argues that they applied the verses too broadly to “all men,” when, in fact, the verses should be limited to the “vessels of mercy.” For support, he appeals to the phrase in Matthew 25:46, which, as we have seen, does not have to be translated as “eternal punishment.” Intriguingly, even Augustine, in this argument, offers “some little respite” to the damned in their eternal afflictions:

But let them suppose, if it pleases them, that, for certain intervals of time, the punishments of the damned are somewhat mitigated. Even so, the wrath of God must be understood as still resting on them. . . This is not to put an end to their eternal afflictions, but rather to apply or interpose some little respite in their torments. (XXIX.112)

Modern Advocates

In the past two centuries, influential Christians have expressed universal beliefs or universal hope, including George MacDonald[xii] (1824–1905), Sadhu Sundar Singh[xiii] (1889­–1929), William Barclay[xiv] (1907–1978), and David Bentley Hart.[xv]

Summary

Maybe you’re thinking, who cares that some believed in universal restoration?[xvi] The teaching of final judgment is obvious in Scripture. I know how you feel.

But I came to realize three things: (1) there was a thread of universal thinking within Christianity that can be traced back to the earliest centuries, (2) this view was held by respected Christian thinkers who spent their lives studying and teaching the Scriptures, (3) therefore, I should at least consider it.

————

[i] See Fudge, chaps. 29–30.

[ii] For more on Christian universalism see Heath Bradley, Flames of Love: Hell and Universal Salvation (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2012); David Burnfield, Patristic Universalism: An Alternative to the Traditional View of Divine Judgment, (Boca Raton: Universal-Publishers, 2013); Gregory MacDonald, The Evangelical Universalist, 2nd ed. (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2012); Thomas Talbott, The Inescapable Love of God, 2nd ed. (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2014), and Alvin Kimel Jr., Destined for Joy: The Gospel of Universal Salvation (2022).

[iii] For more on hopeful Christian universalism see Hans Urs von Balthasar, trans. David Kipp and Lothar Krauth, Dare We Hope “That All Men Be Saved”? with a Short Discourse on Hell (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988); Bradley Jersak, Her Gates Will Never Be Shut: Hope, Hell, and the New Jerusalem (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009).

[iv] Regarding whether universalism was condemned at the Second Council of Constantinople in AD 553, also called the Fifth Ecumenical Council, see Kimel, chap. 16 and Talbott, chap. 2. In short, many see this council as condemning a specific form of universalism that included the pre-existence of souls. Further, this condemnation was initiated by an emperor (Justinian) and not the pope. Brittanica says, “Pope Vigilius of Rome, who had been summoned to Constantinople, opposed the council and took sanctuary in a church from May to December, but he at last yielded and formally ratified the verdicts of the council on February 23, 554.” (www.britannica.com/event/Second-Council-of-Constantinople-553). From a Protestant perspective, controversy about this council is basically a moot point because many Protestants only accept the first four ecumenical councils.

[v] Quoted in Burnfield, chap. 6.

[vi] John R. Sachs, “Apocatastasis in Patristic Theology,” in Theological Studies 54 (1993), 618.

[vii] Quotes from The Complete Works of Clement of Alexandria by Philip Schaff, (Omaha: Patristic Publishing, 2020).

[viii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed#Niceno-Constantinopolitan_Creed

[ix] See his Fourth Homily on Ecclesiastes. Also Jennifer A. Glancy, Slavery as a Moral Problem: In the Early Church and Today (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), chap. 4.

[x] John Wesley Hanson contends that universalism was the prevailing teaching of the church during the first five centuries.

[xi] Edward Beecher, History of the Opinions on the Scriptural Doctrine of Retribution (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1878), Kindle 3145-3245.

[xii] Kerry Dearborn, Baptized Imagination: The Theology of George MacDonald (New York: Routledge, 2016).

[xiii] Singh said, “If the Divine spark in the soul cannot be destroyed, then we need despair of no sinner . . . Since God created men to have fellowship with Himself, they cannot forever be separated from Him . . . After long wandering, and by devious paths, sinful man will at last return to Him in whose Image he was created; for this is his final destiny.” New World Encyclopedia, accessed Feb. 28, 2020, https://bit.ly/39EtCvH.

[xiv] William Barclay, A Spiritual Autobiography (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 65–67. You can read his affirmation of Christian universalism at www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/barclay1.html.

[xv] David Bentley Hart, That All Shall Be Saved: Heaven, Hell and Universal Salvation (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2019). Also Simeon Zahl and David Bentley Hart, “An Exchange on Christ’s ‘Rabble:’ Continuing the Conversation,” Commonweal, accessed Aug. 25, 2017, www.commonwealmagazine.org/exchange-christs-rabble.

[xvi] More examples of Christian universalists can be found in Ilaria L.E. Ramelli, A Larger Hope? Universal Salvation from Christian Beginnings to Julian of Norwich (Eugene: Cascade, 2019) and Robin A. Parry with Ilaria L.E. Ramelli, A Larger Hope? Universal Salvation from the Reformation to the Nineteenth Century (Eugene: Cascade, 2019).