Discernment of Faith and the Reality of Hell
By Joseph Andrew Settanni
Nowadays, anything at all that anybody is willing to believe in gets called faith; and, the blinder the faith, the better, or supposedly so, in the minds of many people. Also, all beliefs tend, increasingly, to get assigned, one assumes, the exactly same degree of validity with emotions and feelings added, directly or indirectly, into the general mix. No effort, furthermore, is made to get beyond or much beyond degrees of relativism and subjectivism, in the basic or overall (illogical) approach to this matter.
Today, the fundamentally popular notion of faith is that it is (just) groundless, blind faith, nothing needs to support it; and, moreover, it is often considered impolite, as if bad contemporary manners or in poor taste, to wish to seriously question even (oddly) faddish ideas; and, this is no longer considered an extremist view, which is, nonetheless, a rather radical approach toward (religious) faith, as compared to past eras.
Mere belief in belief totally satisfies this existential and phenomenological condition of thought as to modern human psychology, or so it is often just (irrationally) assumed. Centuries ago (or less), this would have been thought of as being axiomatic nonsense simply unworthy of all truly rational intellects. Having a sense of theology used to mean something. People such as St. Joan of Arc knew the burning consequences of religiously motivated decisions; they could be fatal to one’s mortal existence.
But, for many people in this present era, if they feel something must be true, then it appears so for them and, for quite a number, even without any question; reason be damned, as in the past thinking of Martin Luther who, quite revealingly, said: “Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has …” Thus, the modernist and, necessarily, anti-Catholic disconnect, fatal disassociation, between reason and belief occurred, which has become successfully codified (read: normalized) by modern social psychology and cultural sociology, among other disciplines. Through intense study, it can be seen that Max Weber, e. g., was a modern disciple of the doctrine of moral schizophrenia when done through its absurdly proper institutionalization.
One then comes to perceive that, more or less, all things get so subjectively lumped together and are, thus, generally assumed to be synonyms, such as belief, credence, faith, conviction, persuasion, etc., that really are not synonymous upon analysis, when put into a critical religious context. If something seems to be, e. g., psychologically or emotionally true for that person, then such a feeling, passion, or thought often passes, nonetheless, for a kind of belief or faith of some type or other.
It has been said, in addition, that one man’s (deeply held) religion is just (equal to) another’s mere cultic fanaticism, which point may represent a reductionist assertion. One can believe, of course, that the moon is made of green cheese but that has nothing to do with truth or reality itself. There is often the asinine assertion that if someone truly believes something to be true, then it is perfectly true for that believer. But, is all of this to be just then blindly accepted as being both logical and true, rational and accurate (read: verifiable)?
In contrast, clear lines of solid reasoning and substantive argumentation are here needed, however, for requisite clarification and the seeking of definition as an aid for refined cognition.
Conditions and Knowledge of Faith: Precision Wanted
Not all faith is to be indiscriminately thought of as simply being equivalent to religious belief, as with, e. g., a young child’s credulous or naïve thinking that Santa Claus is for real; nor should true religion be confused or confounded with ideology, a secularized kind of pseudo-religion or, perhaps, ersatz religion demanding fanatical adherence regardless of any/all truth to the contrary. However, the inability to reason properly about such matters easily covers millions of people, with a wide diversity of opinions and views, covering an enormous spectrum of thoughts and speculations.
As a direct result of such poor reasoning, superstition, e. g., is also said to be a kind of faith; faith is or, moreover, get equated as being a form of superstition, though, presumably, at times on a higher level than would be simple or mere superstitious belief or an entire haphazardly-constructed belief system of some kind or other. Levels of misunderstanding and misinterpretation, thus, appear to be limitless.
All of the above is further too often needlessly and unfortunately confused and confounded terribly when considering the heretical (read: Protestant) notion that, for instance, salvation is just a sola fide matter, when all is said and done; all one is supposed to do is to just believe in Jesus Christ to get saved, though there may be the presumption that a profound repentance could have occurred as a part of the process of salvation.
Nonetheless, as a popularized or generalized notion, this is no better than a kind of superstitious perception of a theological assertion no better than the heresy of universal salvation when examined intelligently. Rationalization, furthermore, is involved as is based upon nominalism in cognition, though critical analysis is here needed.
The doctrine of sola Scriptura goes well with sola fide, though both contradict the Roman Catholic Faith, which insists upon Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium, as being all necessary for sustaining proper orthodox Christian belief, in a substantial and substantive manner; all three pillars of the Faith confirm and uphold each other, none contradict the other two.
With their deformed or radicalized doxology, many Protestants, of course, condemn Tradition and/or Magisterium as just papist nonsense or simple superstition, which often demonstrates their way of rationalizing Christianity, though this admission is usually not ever made by them in specific terms of apologetics and exegesis.
But, truly genuine faith is not at all the same as (absurd) superstition; it is, one must note critically, the very opposite of it. The latter is, especially in its core essence, childish nonsense based upon a supine willingness to be simply credulous to whatever degree thought necessary to secure belief; and, this is regardless of any or all sound evidence, reasoning, argumentation, etc. that can or does easily discredit or disprove any notions connected to a mere superstition/delusion. What distinction, therefore, needs to be rightly made for encouraging proper cognition and cogent analysis?
Faith, as it its inherent genuineness, requires reasons on its behalf that are not dependent solely or mostly upon a belief or beliefs that could, in fact, be all totally irrational and without any empirical foundation as to substantial and substantive proof of integral veracity, of real truth. Ideologies can have this same result, as one can correctly perceive by reading, e. g., Eric Hoffer’s interesting book intriguingly titled: The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. Being a willing believer is not a test of truth, though it too often appears so today.
Thus, for instance, a rabbit’s foot philter/charm can be taken here as easily illustrative of a superstition that shows just how far and different from genuine faith, meaning religion, anything having to do with superstition really is. In point of fact, any type, form, shape, or kind of object, as a sort of pseudo-religious fetish, can be suitably made, in the minds of different people, easily subject to enough symbolic significance to be then made worthy of such primitive/crude belief. The use of, e. g., holy water alone as a legitimate means of salvation (minus good works, prayer, humility, seeking of grace, holiness, etc.) would be just as clearly ridiculous.
What is properly indicative of true faith, on the contrary, requires, therefore, a theology that, in turn, necessitates a system of thought predicated upon reason, not simply a “faith” in (just) faith alone. The modern misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and plain confusion now surrounding faith has ended up equating all beliefs as being simply equal in value or meaning to all other beliefs.
Cults, fanaticisms, superstitions, delusions, worships, fantasies, devotions, etc. are subjectively made the equal of religions and vice versa, of course. But, worse than all that, it is now “objectively” supposed that, e. g., a mere radical cult such as is Mormonism, on the extreme fringe of Protestantism, is to be made the equivalent of a true religion.1 (see: Notes)
The proper discernment of faith is best seen in terms of being able to credibly form a sound judgment, predicated upon the assembling of reasons, which can then translate the supernatural order into a language called a theology that human beings can understand. Faith is definitely not a blind belief, otherwise it wouldn’t matter in the slightest if all people suddenly decided, e. g., to become magic crystal worshippers. All opinions, as an analogy here, would then be as equal in value as supposedly all “religions” are assumed to be today, usually in terms of popular or general opinion. One sees that the road toward mental chaos and consequent spiritual destruction can be made broad and wide beyond any rational or reasonable limits.
So, a, e. g., Lutheran’s beliefs are said to be equivalent to a Mormon’s; a Muslim’s religious opinions are to be taken as being of exactly the same value as are a Buddhist’s or Shintoist’s. Nice, kindly, or good people can disagree, regardless of religious differences, it is said, because all sorts of paths toward salvation do and can exist for millions upon millions all across the earth. But, is this assertion true?
This raw notion is, however, either faith in indifferentism or support for latitudinarianism or, perhaps, affirmative of various Protestant varieties of Universalism or Unitarianism, which can be much worse in terms of defective theology and its rather always baleful consequences. For Catholicism, of course, the theological doctrine of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus holds absolute sway in a definitive manner, as St. Peter only was given the Power of the Keys as witnessed by the testimony of the Christ Himself.
But, the sophisticated or “wise” thinkers, academicians, intellectuals, cognoscenti, commentators, pundits, etc. increasingly claim or blandly asseverate that it is prejudicial, bigoted, or even irrational to claim that one can discern the true faith versus all other beliefs, which, by definition, become seen as being necessarily false notions. One can, nonetheless, seek out true and hard empirical, not abstract or symbolic, tests of veracity by seeing which faith has called forth absolutely and unquestionably true miracles, well beyond any attempted human rationalizations or explanations set to the contrary.
Discernment of the True Faith
On August 6, 1945, it is an undisputed historical and empirical fact that a United States bomber had dropped an atomic weapon on Hiroshima, Japan. This particular atomic bomb, it can be factually noted, was the greatly destructive equivalent of 20,000 tons of TNT. One may guess, perhaps, that this was a fair enough test as to its inherent empirical-moral gravity in that some 80,000 people died as a direct result. At least poetically speaking, the power of Hell was put on public display by such an event.
What was then the greatest weapon yet invented by man inaugurated the nuclear age, in a spectacular manner, as to the capacity of human beings to achieve a heightened degree of mass extermination; just a few centuries ago or less, it would have been thought totally inconceivable and a clear act of black magic by which the very forces of nature, through nuclear fission itself, could be so readily commanded into existence by scientific and technological will and mastery.
People, today, need to be so critically reminded as to the truly great enormity of what had, thus, actually there occurred, so that both the proper understanding and comprehension can exist, as to the notable dimension and horror of it all. At a minimum, the tremendously enhanced and highly scientific power to significantly kill human beings wholesale had made quite a quantum leap into the present and future of the human race.
The incredible and awesome, powerful and horrific, magnitude and scale of such an event, which was once thought impossible, ought, therefore, not to be ever minimized. All that has been said helps to present the requisite context of what had incredibly occurred on this planet; it rather obviously was, of course, a previously unprecedented event that had forever changed the course of human history in this world. And, so far, not since the end of World War II (and as of/up to the year 2012) have any such devices been used again in either the conduct of war or terrorism.
But, by the always and everywhere overriding power and supreme will of God and the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in particular Our Lady of Fatima, there were eight Jesuit priests in a presbytery, just a mere eight blocks from the ground zero of the explosion, who had miraculously, astoundingly, survived such a manifestly inordinate detonation of massive atomic fury.
For instance, Father Hubert Schiffer, (1915 - March 27, 1982) was one of those eight German Jesuits who had survived that horrific nuclear weapon’s blast; and, furthermore, all were found to be totally free of radiation poisoning, though, days later, many thousands died from that cause up to ten miles surrounding the epicenter of the noted explosion. Our Lady knows Her own.
At a basic minimum, it is impressive evidence in strong favor of Catholicism, and this incident can be independently investigated and verified if needed. After this and many other empirical (not theoretical or solely argumentative in terms of rhetoric) and actual proofs of the divine Truth of the Roman Catholic Faith, it ought not be rationally or otherwise doubted as to the fact that Catholicism is the only true Faith. It is not, as often alleged, a mere backwards blind belief in oddly assumed or absurd abstractions signifying nothing of solid substance.
Such a miraculous occurrence offers a spectacular testimony, overwhelmingly eloquent of how one can tell the remarkable veracity involved, of what had been and is believed as to the righteous validity of the superior religion held by those clergymen, contrary, e. g., to the totally meaningless skepticism of any militant atheists. Another problem is also the widespread neo-Pelagianism, the secularization or, perhaps, ideologicalization of all those doctrines that deny Original Sin by promoting various forms and degrees of human perfectionism (e. g., Communism/Utopianism) on earth, in the modern world that further corrupts the human mind and soul.
And, e. g., even regardless of what has been described as invincible ignorance, the lack of adhering and following the true faith as to an authentic religion leads, if willfully manifested as to such intentional resistance, to damnation of one’s soul, according to the doctrine of free will; if someone is presented with the truth as to which religion actually possesses the fullness of truth but rejects that theology as being wrong, then the judgment becomes self-fulfilling, as no one gets put into Hades, the horrid fiery netherworld, against their own will (to go there).
Hell and Its Hellish Reality
In the New Testament, Jesus mentions Hell many more times than Heaven, which would give sentient beings more than just a big hint as to what was being genuinely warned against as to types of behavior meriting eternal punishment, perpetual agony. Of course, rationalist sentimentalists, as they should be rightly called, can supinely look back at the truly geometric scale of bloody shocking barbarism in the past 20th century and still think that the Burning Place is a mere figment of the theological imagination.
The pain, suffering, anguish, injustice, violence, torment, and much else often experienced by people on earth acts as only a means of slightly hinting at the reality of the existence of the Infernal Regions. Oddly enough, many people who think they’re going to some sort of paradise or, perhaps, a rather pleasant astral plane after their death do not believe in Hell. 2 Of course, thoughts of this nature are not difficult to generate in societies and cultures dedicated to self-congratulation and overall hubris, besides a lack of humility seen as a virtue.
Many others who do think they accept its existence refuse to consider the idea that they, in fact, will be going there as a direct consequence of their own life choices, including the notion that only faith in Jesus is enough to save them. Millions really do think that being good or nice people in their own or others eyes or, perhaps, along with just having Christian faith will save them, which is a consequence of the nominalism inherent to such beliefs. 3
Nonetheless, the vast majority of Americans, as is also true of the rest of the people of the world, seem bound and determined to go to Hell. How can this be confidently stated?
Even if one were to totally set aside Catholic teachings, what can be yet reasonably known by consulting classical Natural Law, right reason, and even, at times, common sense dictates against the evil choices made in favor of what is called mortal sin; all manner of evil practices (abortion, infanticide, artificial contraception, sterilization, sodomy, etc.) and related thinking (rationalism, materialism, positivism, hedonism, nihilism, etc.) that leads to the further and further debasement and degradation of man’s humanity is being substantively and substantially embraced and encouraged.
Equally, the mortal sin of presumption, as with heretical belief in universal salvation, will lead millions toward their quite well-deserved damnation. There are also those who insist that a “clear conscience” could justify even murder as being acceptable, if so judged to be a positivist or, perhaps, pragmatic necessity of some kind, which is in line with blatant neo-Pelagianism.
Few, if any, people, however, have the equivalent of an informed conscience in the manner of a St. Thomas Aquinas or St. Francis of Assisi. It is then, of course, far better to sincerely repent, profoundly pray, and studiously seek out the one true Faith, while one is still alive and able to do so; of course, the proper and needed cultivation of humility and the genuine desire to accept grace from God have become foreign thoughts to the both the masses as well as to the intellectuals/cognoscenti.
Admittedly, of course, there are still many who, e. g., have come through the tremendously blood-stained history of the recent 20th century who were unable to find any indications of the existence of Hell after World War I, World War II, Nazi, Soviet, and Maoist extermination camps, fairly numerous genocides, etc. Such wanton blindness, however, is no excuse for accepting a rather naïve disbelief in the real power of evil, in the substance of sin. Communism alone has consumed at least 100 million human lives and still counting.
Perhaps, this shallow or vain attitude, however, has been deliberately encouraged by both so-called Enlightenment and, also, post-Enlightenment thinking, in the suggestion by the enlightened ones among the people, that the abstractionized afterlife is just a suppositional or hypothetical “reality” uplifted by, at most, supposedly spurious moonbeams. While the evil welfare states with their overt hedonism and materialism, greatly favored by such people as Obama, do help send tens of millions to Hell, modernists and postmodernists, through putting the fear of death out of their deracinated minds, simply laugh at discussions focused upon the final things.
The Catholic Church explicitly teaches, on the contrary, that since Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary had their physical bodies, not just their souls, transported directly to Heaven, it must then logically be a real physical place, not a theoretical or abstract supposition of any kind. Spiritual salvation has a reward for those who merit it in that a definite location awaits those who had, on earth, fulfilled all of the righteous requirements demanded by God.
Conversely, with all the requisite logic involved, all the evil souls (and after the Final Judgment their bodies as well) will go to the direct opposite destination to there eternally burn in the unquenchable fires, as they so richly do deserve; both moral and immoral choices have quite real consequences and, furthermore, lead to either one of two endpoints, meaning definite habitations, for eternity, contrary to the hubristic and destructive optimism of neo-Pelagianism.
But, since all of time qua historical chronology is equidistant to God, the actual immediacy of such punishment is logical; time being only something that mortal creatures (aka human beings) use for a measuring purpose, though totally meaningless, of course, to the Eternal Deity and angels and Heaven.
Conclusion
For earthly rational intelligences, therefore, it is spiritually imperative, not simply morally important, to have the correct and proper discernment of genuine, not ersatz, faith, as has been above covered in this article; this is for appropriately and cogently realizing that there is the certainly significant need to avoid eternal damnation, meaning a, thus, perpetual future in Hell.
Concern for thinking about the authentic implications and ramifications of moral teleology and the then so consequent actualization of a practical eschatology is, moreover, not really superstitious nonsense or irrational speculation for any sentient beings on this planet.
Material existence, after all, is not the be all and end all of everything, as, for instance, even the ancient pagans Plato and Aristotle had so noted. But, the advance over and advantage of Christianity against paganism had, thus, made the unavoidable question of the disposition of the soul much more central to the lives of the Christians who were willing to die for Christ, while Socrates, no matter how proverbially wise, was only willing to give up his life for philosophy. He was a rare or exceptional individual.
In contrast, Plato and Aristotle, though possessing great learning and intellects, were never at all really interested in doing the same. Genuine martyrdom and holiness, one can guess, are Christian qualities, within the Western-Christian tradition, as to rather definitive life choices made thence beyond simple philosophical adoptions or quite extraordinary affections. Philosophy qua basic metaphysics is not, one suspects, enough as to a proper faith, meaning especially for many tens of millions of people.
That is why it has been said, e. g., that those who are willing to give up their lives for Christ will gain their lives in the world to come. One can, then, truly rely upon Catholic theology by fully being a believing-practicing Roman Catholic unto death. Thus, the four last things are listed and known to believers as: Death, Judgment, Heaven, and Hell. Q. E. D.
Athanasius contra mundum!
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Notes
1.) Nominalism V. Catholicism: Cults V. Religion; And Sedevacantism - see: www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/08oct/article056.htmlCached; Latin Mass V. Demonic-Charismatic Catholicism latinmasscharismatic.blogspot.com/.../latin-mass-v-charismatic-catholi...Cached By Joseph Andrew Settanni
2.) www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/07aug/article042.htmlCached Defending Limbo, Purgatory, and Hell. By Joseph Andrew Settanni, Aug. 27, 2007.
3.) nominalismdenounced.blogspot.com/Cached Jul 27, 2012 – Nominalism: Denunciation of Vatican Council II By Joseph Andrew Settanni.
