Divine Judgment

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

This subject will be treated under two heads:

I. Divine Judgment Subjectively and Objectively Considered;
II. Pre-Christian Beliefs Concerning Judgment after Death.

Particular Judgment andGeneral Judgment will be treated in separate articles.

Divine judgment subjectively and objectively considered

Divine judgment (judicium divinum), as an immanent act ofGod, denotes the action ofGod's retributivejustice by which the destiny ofrational creatures is decided according to their merits and demerits. This includes:

It is clear, of course, that the judgment, as it is inGod, cannot be a process of distinct and successive acts; it is a single eternal act identical with the Divine Essence. But the effects of the judgment, since they take place in creatures, follow the sequence of time. The Divine judgment is manifested and fulfilled at the beginning, during the progress, and at the end of time. In the beginning,God pronounced judgment upon the whole race, as a consequence ofthe fall of its representatives, the firstparents (Genesis 3). Death and the infirmities and miseries of this were the consequences of that original sentence. Besides this common judgment there have been special judgments on particularindividuals and peoples. Such great catastrophes as the flood (Genesis 6:5), the destruction of Sodom (Genesis 28:20), the earthquake that swallowed up Core and his followers (Numbers 16:30), the plagues ofEgypt (Exodus 6:6;12:12), and theevil that came upon other oppressors ofIsrael (Ezekiel 25:11;28:22) are represented in theBible as Divine judgments. The fear ofGod is such a fundamentalidea in theOld Testament that it insists mainly on the punitive aspect of the judgment (cf.Proverbs 11:31;Ezekiel 14:21). Anerroneous view of thesetruths led many of the rabbis to teach that all theevil which befalls man is a special chastisement from on high, adoctrine which was declaredfalse byChrist.

There is also a judgment ofGod in the world that is subjective. By his acts man adheres to or deviates from thelaw of God, and thereby places himself within the sphere of approval or condemnation. In a sense, then, each individual exercises judgment on himself. Hence it is declared that Christ came not to judge but to save (John 3:17;8:15;12:47). The internal judgment proceeds according to a man's attitude: towards Christ (John 3:18). Though all the happenings of life cannot be interpreted as the outcome of Divine judgment, whose external manifestation is therefore intermittent, the subjective judgment is coextensive with the life of the individual and of the race. The judgment at the end of time will complement the previous visitations of Divine retribution and will manifest the final result of the daily secret judgment. By its sentence the eternal destiny of creatures will be decided. As there is a twofold end of time, so there is likewise a twofold eternal judgment: theparticular judgment, at the hour of death, which is the end of time for the individual, and thegeneral judgment, at the final epoch of the world's existence, which is the end of time for thehuman race.

Pre-Christian beliefs concerning judgment after death

Theidea of a final readjustment beyond the grave, which would rectify the sharp contrast so often observed between the conduct and the fortune of men, was prevalent among all nations in pre-Christian times. Such was thedoctrine ofmetempsychosis or the transmigration ofsouls, as a justification of the ways ofGod to man, prevailing among theHindus of all classes andsects, the Pythagoreans, the Orphic mystics, and the Druids. Thedoctrine of a forensic judgment in the unseen world, by which the eternal lot of departedsouls is determined, was also widely prevalent in pre-Christian times.

TheEgyptianidea of the judgment is set forth with great precision of detail in the "Book of the Dead", a collection of formulae designed to aid the dead in their passage through the underworld (EGYPT). The Babylonians and theAssyrians make no distinction between the good and the bad so far as the future habitation is concerned. In the Gilgames epic the hero is marked as judge of the dead, but whether his rule was the moral value of their actions is not clear. An unerring judgment and compensation in the future life was a cardinal point in the mythologies of thePersians, Greeks, and Romans. But, while these mythological schemes were credited as strict verities by theignorant body of the people, the learned saw in them only the allegorical presentation oftruth. There were always some who denied thedoctrine of a future life, and this unbelief went on increasing till, in the last days of the Republic, skepticism regardingimmortality prevailed among Greeks and Romans.

With theJews. the judgment of the living was a far more prominentidea than the judgment of the dead. ThePentateuch contains no express mention of remuneration in the future life, and it was only at a comparatively late period, under the influence of a fuller revelation, that thebelief inresurrection and judgment began to play a capital part in thefaith ofJudaism. The traces of thistheological development are plainly visible in theMachabean era. Then arose the two great opposing parties, thePharisees and theSadducees, whose divergent interpretations of Scripture led to heated controversies, especially regarding the future life. TheSadducees denied all reward and penalty in the hereafter, while there opponents encumbered thetruth with ludicrous details. Thus some of the rabbis asserted that the trumpet which would summon the world to judgment would be one of the horns of the ram which Abraham offered up instead of his son Isaac. Again they said: "WhenGod judges theIsraelites, He will stand, and make the judgment brief and mild; when He judges theGentiles, he will sit and make it long and severe." Apart from such rabbinical fables, the currentbelief reflected in the writings of the rabbis and the pseudographs at the beginning of theChristian Era was that of a preliminary judgment and of a final judgment to occur at the consummation of the world, the former to be executed against the wicked by the personal prowess of theMessiah and of thesaints ofIsrael, the latter to be pronounced as an eternal sentence byGod or theMessiah. Theparticular judgment of the individualperson is lost sight of in theuniversal judgment by which theMessiah vindicate the wrongs endured byIsrael. With AlexandrianJudaism, on the contrary, with that at least of whichPhilo is the exponent, the dominantidea was that of an immediate retribution after death. The two dissentingsects ofIsrael, theEssenes and theSamaritans, were in agreement with the majority ofJews as to the existence of a discriminating retribution in the life to come. TheEssenes believed in the preexistence ofsouls, but taught that the after-existence was an unchanging state of bliss or woe according to the deeds done in the body. Theeschatological tenets of theSamaritans were at first few and vague. Theirdoctrine of theresurrection and of the day of vengeance and recompense was atheology patterned after the model ofJudaism, and first formulated for thesect by its greatesttheologian, Marka (A.D. fourth century)

CONTACT US |ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT