Dr Rowan Williams said that although his vision was not that of the traditional inferno, being alone with his “selfish little ego” for all eternity would be torment enough.
He also admitted he is sometimes embarrassed by the time the Church of England takes to keep up with changes in society.
Archbishop Nichols’ defense of the Church’s teaching on contraception was limp. Hasn’t he heard of the studies that show that condom distribution actually increases high-risk behavior. And the ABC is embarrassed by how long it is taking the COE to approve of women bishops. These are our defenders of the Faith! God save us.
For some, being alone for eternity would not be hell. For hell to be real, it must be hellish for absolutely everyone.
Setting aside for the moment the literal interpretations of hell as being physically tormenting, I submit that hell is the withdrawal of all goodness from the soul, and eternal separation from God. To the soul who finally refuses to belong to God, He will say, “all right then, thy will be done. But He is not happy about it. He wills that no one is lost to hell.
But some will be.
If you do not believe in an afterlife, then I suppose it does not really matter what heaven and hell might be like. But if you do, then I would say that, perhaps, Dr. Williams’ definition and DaveW’s are not that far apart.
To live alone with one’s ego, would imply separation from God. The idea that one would be separated from God for all eternity would be truly terrifying.
The Archbishop’s view of hell is rather anemic, not based on a full-orbed interpretation of Scripture. Yet the context of this TV program did not permit a full explication of the doctrine, only sound bites typical of modern media.
Isn’t the Archbishop simply restating what CS Lewis described Hell as in some of his writings like the Screwtape Letters?
#5 — It’s The Great Divorce; but basically, yes. Also, since the torments in Dante’s Hell are simply the sin itself considered objectively and without illusion, Dante comes to much the same point.
As in #4, I argue that ABC’s view of hell in this article is far from complete. If some conclude he is merely restating the position of C.S. Lewis in fiction like The Great Divorce, I question why a trained theologian cannot do better than an English literature scholar writing fiction that incorporates theological themes that he admits are “an imaginative supposal.†[TGD, Preface]
Why can’t ABC be more comprehensive in his explanation than the “Oh Lonesome Me” approach. The biblical view of hell includes a description of real torment (e.g., Jesus’ references to Gehenna as well as the passages in Revelation) that extends beyond existential angst.
In short, ABC advances what I would call a minimalist and man-centered (PC-translation: human-centered) perspective. Next, he may well contend that those students reading the academic tomes he has produced when alone are indeed experiencing glimpses of what hell is really like. And he may be right.
Dick Wire
I believe this is an echo of Edith Sitwell’s “There are nought in hell but little, rotting souls”
Perhaps he envisions the littleness of Lord Voldemort in Kings Cross?