George MacDonald: "To Be More Blessed in the Pains of Hell"

As I have written about before, what drew me to George MacDonald was his amazing vision of the love of God. Last night while reading MacDonald's sermon 'Love Thy Neighbor' from Unspoken Sermons I was struck by the following passage. It is one of those images--that Christ would not abandon us to hell but would go in after us--that took my breath away as a college student:

When once to a man the human face is the human face divine, and the hand of his neighbour is the hand of a brother, then will he understand what St Paul meant when he said, "I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren." But he will no longer understand those who, so far from feeling the love of their neighbour an essential of their being, expect to be set free from its law in the world to come. There, at least, for the glory of God, they may limit its expansive tendencies to the narrow circle of their heaven. On its battlements of safety, they will regard hell from afar, and say to each other, "Hark! Listen to their moans. But do not weep, for they are our neighbours no more."
First, I like the phrase "the narrow circle of their heaven." It describes a lot of Christians. Second, this is what I could never get about the traditional doctrine of hell: How could you rest at ease in heaven knowing that friends and family were burning forever in torment? MacDonald goes on to note that any decent human would be miserable in heaven knowing such torments were going on:
St Paul would be wretched before the throne of God, if he thought there was one man beyond the pale of his mercy, and that as much for God's glory as for the man's sake.
And if that is the case for Paul and you and me, how much more would Christ be distressed about the pain of the lost? Would not love compel us to leave heaven to go sit with the suffering and the damned? Isn't leaving heaven the only humane and moral thing to do? Of course it is:
And what shall we say of the man Christ Jesus? Who, that loves his brother, would not, upheld by the love of Christ, and with a dim hope that in the far-off time there might be some help for him, arise from the company of the blessed, and walk down into the dismal regions of despair, to sit with the last, the only unredeemed, the Judas of his race, and be himself more blessed in the pains of hell, than in the glories of heaven? Who, in the midst of the golden harps and the white wings, knowing that one of his kind, one miserable brother in the old-world-time when men were taught to love their neighbour as themselves, was howling unheeded far below in the vaults of the creation, who, I say, would not feel that he must arise, that he had no choice, that, awful as it was, he must gird his loins, and go down into the smoke and the darkness and the fire, traveling the weary and fearful road into the far country to find his brother?—who, I mean, that had the mind of Christ, that had the love of the Father?

But it is a wild question. God is, and shall be, All in all. Father of our brothers and sisters! thou wilt not be less glorious than we, taught of Christ, are able to think thee. When thou goest into the wilderness to seek, thou wilt not come home until thou hast found. It is because we hope not for them in thee, not knowing thee, not knowing thy love, that we are so hard and so heartless to the brothers and sisters whom thou hast given us.
Those are powerful images. I just can't shake these lines in particular:
Who, that loves his brother, would not...arise from the company of the blessed, and walk down into the dismal regions of despair, to sit with the last, the only unredeemed, the Judas of his race, and be himself more blessed in the pains of hell, than in the glories of heaven?

Who, I say, would not feel that he must arise, that he had no choice, that, awful as it was, he must gird his loins, and go down into the smoke and the darkness and the fire, traveling the weary and fearful road into the far country to find his brother?

This entry was posted by Richard Beck. Bookmark the permalink.

12 thoughts on “George MacDonald: "To Be More Blessed in the Pains of Hell"”

  1. Richard,
    I have to admit that this rendition of "life" is un-real, bitter and it de-values reality, as I have come to understand it. Perhaps it is because I do not think that I can believe in God, much less the love of God. In fact, this post seems contrived and I wonder how I used to read such and believe it to be in touch with reality.

    I have questioned what produced such unbelief. And I honestly think it is a multi-faceted answer, which I can't pull apart without it connecting to other issues.

    Many think that belief in God is a choice, like choosing which dress to wear in the morning, but at least in my experience, it just seems to be more reasonable.

    I really never thought I would be an un-believer, neither did my husband. But, whatever "belief" I have, it is not as it once was.

    I have thought that perhaps, with life experience, education, and my background, it has culminated in re-affirming my "role" in my family of origin, which is what I thought I had been delivered from :). I am sure you are aware of "family systems theory".

    So, my reality is dealing with my dysfunction, not religious belief. And that takes one to a new place in reality, which is connected to real people and real problems in this world.

  2. I love that MacDonald was not afraid to challenge the prevailing doctrines of his (and our) day, which have produced "men whose presentation of Christianity is enough to drive the world to a preferable infidelity. ... She saw that if what this man said was true, then the gospel was represented by men who knew nothing of its real nature, and by such she had been led into a false judgment of it." (MacDonald, from Marquis of Lossie)

  3. Patricia,
    Great quote. Thanks.

    Angie,
    Thanks for sharing a bit of your story. However, defending how I see this sermon from MacDonald, I don't think faith has to lead us into other-worldliness. In fact, all of Jesus' teaching forces us into loving engagement with "real people and real problems in the world." Dietrich Bonhoeffer's letters from prison are amazing in elucidating the "this-worldliness" of the church.

    So when I read MacDonald saying Who, that loves his brother, would not...arise from the company of the blessed, and walk down into the dismal regions of despair, to sit with the last, the only unredeemed, the Judas of his race, and be himself more blessed in the pains of hell, than in the glories of heaven? I hear a call for how to live today, to move into the real lives of people in despair, to leave the "blessed heaven" of Christian gated communities into the mess of life. That was the way of Jesus and is the way of all who follow him.

  4. This notion has a venerable tradition behind it. I have a friend doing a whole dissertation on the resignatio ad infernum, beginning, I think, with early Christian stories about Mary's descent into Hell to ask pardon for the damned. Fascinating stuff!

  5. Richard,
    A great value to me is honesty, which is trustworthiness, meaning that another will not try to "dupe" me, or "use" me for any other ends, than my own. This is not only a value that I hold for myself but also for others. Deception is not what I would call "loving".

    What I find in Christian communities is what you describe of Detrich Bonhoeffer's "discipleship program". This type of thinking is totally other oriented, which I think is unhealthy. An individual himself must value and decide to "enter into whatever realities of another" that THEY' choose. No one should "prepare a place" for any one else, otherwise it is deterministic and controlling, without any understanding of the implications upon those so "controlled". Our government has understood this to be tyranny.

    Therefore, faith has to personal choice and commitment, which does lead to commitment to values, which impact other areas of life. But, no one can determine another's life, without arrogant insensitivity.

  6. Angie,

    I'm not sure how you can make the leap from "move[ing] into the real lives of people in despair, to leave the 'blessed heaven' of Christian gated communities into the mess of life" to "determining another's life".

  7. In evolutionary thinking, many want to investigate this "frame". When do others choose to do altruistic deeds? What causes them to choose such "self-denial"? Such investigation takes experimentation. "Control groups" must also be used to compare and constrast in the real world aluristic "concern".

    Capitalism is based on self interst, but is also based on survival of the "fittest", which is abohorrent to humanitstic concern and values. Therefore, the Marxist ideology is useful to balance and equalize outcomes that are not "fair".

    Fairness has to be defined. I believe that fairness is openness in regards to contractual business dealings. Fairness gives opportunity, but does not prescribe outcome. Those that are "concerned about balancing material ends, will be interested in these issues.

    The "problem" has been historically that those nations not ordered under democracy or some form of it, are not going to do business where there is equal opportunity, BECAUSE there is NO regard for EQUALity Under Law, which is blind justice, in equal opportunity. Corruption survives when there is no accountability or abuse of power in regards to posittion, etc.

    Christian "discipleship" means that one "takes up the Cross" which was injustice personified in the life of Christ. Some think that Jesus "character" was what drove his moral action and choice, and think that this is what should be THE "moral model" of Christian communities. This is very short-sighted, as it does limit and determine where and how another's life is to manifest "character", or what one's work of service "should be". (Chrstians are good with the "shoulds")...

    Therefore, when scientific investigation driven by religious zeal and humanistic ideology drive political agenda, we dissolve our "Bill of Rights" and undermine ourselves as a nation state....for the "common good" or the "general Will in global concern as a value. There is no question that when we systemize government, which beauracracies MUST do, we limit individuality, values and choice. Those at the "Bottom of these Systems" are doomed to be determined, because of "survival of the fittest"...and then they will be useful for "discipling those in such despair"...and the cycle goes on....

  8. A similar theme (those in heaven retaining compassion for those in hell) runs through CS Lewis' The Great Divorce. In fact, Lewis uses George MacDonald as his narrator's guide (like Dante used Virgil). In The Great Divorce, it is possible to leave hell by choosing to repent, and those who dwell in heaven plead and reason with the damned, but cannot force them. Those who continue to refuse (for various reasons) to repent remain in hell.

    I especially like the fact that, as he did in Screwtape Letters, Lewis admits that he has no real clue what heaven or hell will literally be like, so he is playing with ideas and imagery.

  9. @ Angie,

    I'm not sure I'm following you there, but for what it's worth, I appreciate your heart-felt responses.

  10. Dr. Beck, I hope that in your MacDonald series you will post about MacDonald's understanding of how justice and mercy are not at opposition. I particularly liked the way he illustrated with the scenario of the thief and the stolen watch, and what it takes to atone and make right. Just a wish list request.
    Patricia

  11. Richard (and Patricia on "justice"), I love the MacDonald quote.

    That people in the highest percentiles on empathy scales (e.g., MMPI) are automatically drawn by the torque of their empathy (not by theology) to this very hell of feeling the feelings of others in hell – all around – only means that therapy advises detachment in such cases. It’s hell – really hell – working clinically and in legal interventions for battered women to get restraining orders against those from whom they need to detach.

    Alas. Though the word is not all writ in the erotics of MacDonald’s empathy, he's here addressing the abusers: justice means mercy to the abused.

    “... And what he has to tell
    on each return from hell
    is this: that dying is what the living do,
    that dying is what the loving do,
    and that dead dogs are those who do not know
    that hell is where, to live, they have to go.”

    Alistair Reid

    Cheers,

    Jim

  12. Exactly. Have you read the book "What Dreams May Come"? This is exactly what the man did after his death. He left his personal heaven to trek across the vast expanse to locate his wife (who had committed suicide after his death) living in her own personal hell. And even though he was warned that if he stayed long, he would lose his grip on reality and be stranded there in hers--he chose to do that rather than to leave her alone there with her terrors. It was that completely selfless love that suddenly woke her up to who he was--and saved them both.

Leave a Reply