A Reply to Alejandro Bermúdez: Yes, God Does Punish

“So great is the generosity of divine goodness, that we can satisfy God the Father through the grace of Jesus Christ not only by the penances we willingly undertake as satisfaction for sin, or by those which the priest imposes according to his judgment in proportion to the offense; but also — and this is a very great token of love — by the temporal punishments which God sends, which we bear with patience.” (Council of Trent, Session XIV, Decree on Penance)

Yes, here we have the solemn Magisterium of the Church affirming that God not only can send us temporal punishments, but that He in fact does so. But we will return to that further on, so let us begin at the beginning…

I recently wrote an article responding to the question: Does God punish or not? — in which I analyzed the error that has been infiltrating the Catholic faithful: the belief that God never punishes. In that article I mentioned that even illustrious figures in Catholic media (such as Frank Morera, a Catholic apologist, and Alejandro Bermúdez, director of ACI Prensa and host of various EWTN programs) had committed the same error, contradicting what the ordinary and extraordinary Magisterium of the Church has taught throughout the centuries. Today, thanks to some readers of ApologeticaCatolica.org, I have learned that Alejandro Bermúdez has published a podcast in which he responds to some of my arguments, and I have found it necessary to publish a response to his.

Before beginning, I believe it necessary to clarify once again that this should not be taken as a personal attack on Alejandro Bermúdez or on Frank Morera, for I consider that both carry out an honorable ministry within the Church. I myself have shared their videos, talks, and conferences on more than a few occasions, both on my blogs and on ApologeticaCatolica.org.

But precisely because I value their work, I consider it necessary to correct them when what they teach departs from the truth and may lead to confusion among those who turn to them for formation. Given that they are at the helm of prestigious and influential Catholic media, an error on their part can confuse a great number of Catholics.

According to the Popes… Does God Punish Only in the Old Testament?

I begin with this question because at the start of my article I began by citing Popes Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI to show how even the pontiffs of our own era, like all the Popes throughout history, have taught that God can punish if He so decides — as a merciful means of correcting the sinner, or to expiate the offense inflicted upon God and to restore the moral order disturbed by sin. In response to these citations, Alejandro replies:

“Correct, but in this text, taken completely out of context, Pope Benedict XVI was referring to the God of the Old Testament, where God is revealed as a punishing God. It is obvious that in the Old Testament God punishes — the examples abound, even in the case of the great friend of God: Moses, who for having lost his patience at Meribah and having struck the rock twice with his staff so that water would come out from a single blow — out of fury — God punishes him and does not allow him to see the Promised Land. Lot’s wife turning into a pillar of salt. The flood itself.”

Well, we see that on the one hand Alejandro acknowledges from the outset that God did indeed punish during the Old Testament, but then affirms that the God of the New Testament is different and no longer does so. The problem is that in these very comments there are already several errors — some more serious than others — that are important to analyze, and I will do so as I proceed. I will begin with the citation from Pope Benedict XVI that Alejandro claims I have taken out of context, and I will do so by citing the text in a broader context to dispel all doubt, so that the reader may judge for himself whether this is true.

Pope Benedict XVI says the following (emphasis mine):

“What this Gospel page denounces challenges our way of thinking and acting. It speaks not only of the ‘hour’ of Christ, of the mystery of the Cross at that moment, but of the presence of the Cross in every age. In a special way, it speaks to the peoples who have received the proclamation of the Gospel. When we contemplate history, we are compelled to note, often, the coldness and rebellion of inconsistent Christians. As a consequence of this, God, without ever failing in his promise of salvation, has had to resort frequently to punishment.“

“In this context it is natural to think of the first proclamation of the Gospel, from which flourishing Christian communities arose, which later disappeared and today are only remembered in history books. Could not the same happen in our time?”

Let us pause for a moment on what I have underlined. The Pope begins by speaking of how throughout history there has been coldness and rebellion on the part of inconsistent Christians — and note that when he speaks of Christians, he is not speaking of people who lived during the Old Testament, and so what follows cannot in any way be limited to the Old Testament. He then says: “As a consequence of this, God, without ever failing in his promise of salvation, has often had to resort to punishment.“

I draw attention to the words “as a consequence of this,” because they reveal that precisely because there have been inconsistent Christians, God has had to resort to punishment — which is to say: God has had to resort to punishment as a consequence of the fact that inconsistent Christians have existed. I now ask: were there Christians in the Old Testament? Or is the Pope speaking in general of the whole of human history? In fact, if we read even further back, we see that the context confirms this, for the text says: “He is not speaking only of the ‘hour’ of Christ, of the mystery of the Cross at that moment, but of the presence of the Cross in all ages. He addresses in a particular way the peoples who have received the announcement of the Gospel.” It is unnecessary to point out that the peoples who received the announcement of the Gospel were not precisely the peoples of the Old Testament. And as if that were not enough, he concludes: “Could it not be that the same thing is happening in our day?”

It is Alejandro who has not carefully verified the context of this quotation from Pope Benedict XVI, which in no way can be understood as referring only to divine punishments that occurred in the Old Testament alone. Let us say it plainly: it could not be clearer.

With my next citation from Pope John Paul II, Alejandro argues in the same manner, saying that it refers to the Book of Tobit, which is in the Old Testament, and therefore must be dismissed as an example of the New Testament God punishing — overlooking the fact that John Paul II cites the same book to convey that just as God punishes He is also compassionate. Nevertheless, in order to prevent our good friend from entrenching himself in that argument, let us cite Pope John Paul II from another of his audiences where there is no way to attribute it to the Old Testament alone. I refer to his Wednesday Audience of September 29, 1999, where he writes:

“The paternal love of God does not exclude punishment, though this must be understood within a merciful justice that re-establishes the violated order for the sake of the good of man himself (cf. Heb 12:4-11).”

Note, dear reader, that Pope John Paul II speaks of a God whose love does not exclude punishment — a paternal love with a twofold purpose: to re-establish the violated order for the sake of man’s own good, and to apply the merciful justice of God.

According to the Bible, Does God Punish Only in the Old Testament?

Another error that Alejandro makes in his podcast is to claim that only the God of the Old Testament punishes, and that there is no text in the entire New Testament where God is seen to punish with any punishment other than eternal condemnation after the Final Judgment. Alejandro states verbatim:

“The New Testament contains the 27 books that include the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Letters of Saint Paul, the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letter of James, the First Letter of John, the Second Letter of John, the Letter of Jude, and the Book of Revelation. In none of them is there mention of punishment outside of the final penalty.”

However, in my initial article I demonstrated that this is not so — and I suppose that Alejandro did not reach that part, since in his podcast he limited himself to commenting only on the first paragraph of a multi-page article. Well then, I recall once again that I showed that Saint Paul admonishes those who received the Eucharist unworthily and tells them that for this reason they were being punished with illness and even death:

“For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body is eating and drinking his own condemnation. That is why many of you are weak and ill and a good number have died.” (1 Cor 11:29-30)

I also cited the very clear case of Herod, who for having consented to a blasphemy was struck by an angel of God and died eaten by worms (Acts 12:21-23).

“On an appointed day Herod put on his royal robes and took his seat on the throne, then made a formal speech to them. The people acclaimed him with, ‘It is a god speaking, not a man!’ And at that instant the angel of the Lord struck him down, because he had not given the glory to God. He was eaten by worms and died.” (Acts 12:21-23)

And I also cited the punishment suffered by Ananias and Sapphira for having lied to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:1-10).

As can be observed, none of these cases necessarily implies eternal condemnation resulting from final judgment as their punishment — they are temporal punishments imposed in this life for specific sins.

On Private Revelations

We must also recall that in the great majority of private revelations approved by the Church, the Virgin Mary and even Our Lord Jesus Christ have warned of divine punishment for sins — for example, Our Lady of Fátima, Our Lady of Akita, the revelations of Divine Mercy to Saint Faustina, and many others.

Alejandro also adds that private revelations do not form part of the faith of the Church, and that is true; but it is also true that when the Church approves a private revelation, she approves the fact that it contains nothing contrary to the faith. And if the approved apparitions speak of divine punishment for sin, it is evident that divine punishment for sin is not contrary to the faith.

Alejandro Bermúdez’s Citations of Benedict XVI and Saint John Paul II

To support his viewpoint, Alejandro Bermúdez cites in his favor the encyclical Dives in Misericordia and the apostolic exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia of John Paul II, and the encyclical Spe Salvi of Benedict XVI, claiming that in none of these documents do the Popes affirm that God punishes, and that the citation I made from one of these documents was taken out of context.

“… as Pope John Paul II says in Dives in Misericordia — that is, in Rich in Mercy — the passages in which God punishes and even puts to the test are not comprehensible in the light of the New Testament. That is what he says: they are not comprehensible.”

But this is not true, and that is not what Pope John Paul II says there, as the reader may verify personally in the document freely available on the Vatican’s official website. The problem with analyzing these documents is that Alejandro reads only the part he wants to read and ignores the rest — what I called in my article “selective reading.”

There, the Pope is not affirming that God does or does not punish; in fact, the word “punishment” does not appear in the entire text of Dives in Misericordia. What the Pope is saying there is that the passages in the Old Testament in which God punishes and even tests are not fully comprehensible in the light of the New Testament revelation alone — which is very different from saying that God does not punish in the New Testament.

He does the same with the other cited documents. In Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, the word “punishment” likewise does not appear even once; and in Spe Salvi it appears only twice and not precisely in the way Alejandro reads it. What is truly significant is that, in that very podcast, Alejandro himself cited Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI for punishments — thereby directly contradicting himself.

Alejandro subsequently cited another document of Pope Saint John Paul II to attempt to demonstrate that the Pope was saying that God does not punish. I refer to the Angelus of Sunday, February 13, 2000. I invite the reader to look it up on the Vatican’s official website and read it for themselves, for there too one can clearly see that the Pope says nothing of the sort.

A “Punishing” God in the OT versus an “All-Love” God in the NT?

Perhaps the most serious error in all of Alejandro’s argumentation is the erroneous distinction he draws between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament. It is true that in the Old Testament God manifested Himself more fully through temporal punishments, and that in the New Testament the revelation of God’s merciful love reaches its fullness in Jesus Christ; but this does not mean that the God who punishes in the Old Testament and the God who loves in the New Testament are two different Gods with opposing or exclusive attributes.

As regards the topic of punishment, already in the Old Testament the notion was clear that God punishes man out of love and in order to correct him, as the Psalmist recites: “You punish us for our guilt, what we treasure most crumbles away like a moth-eaten rag; each person is no more than a puff of wind.” (Ps 39:12). In the same way, the New Testament does not propose a God without justice, but rather a God whose mercy and justice are perfectly harmonized in the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ.

Why Do the Wicked Prosper While the Good Suffer?

To attempt to demonstrate that God does not punish, Alejandro mentions the fact that there are sinners who receive no punishment in this life while there are righteous people who do suffer. He says textually:

“If God were to punish, why do there exist people who commit so much evil and cause so much harm? Why are there so many corrupt individuals who are not punished? And why are there people who are very good yet suffer greatly in this life?”

Well, let us first clarify two points:

First: We do not say that God always applies a temporal punishment to sinners in this life. It may be so, if that is His will; but it may also not be so. The fact that God can punish does not mean that He always does, or that He punishes every sin in this life. And the absence of punishment in this life does not mean that punishment will not come in the next.

But to this question, as old as the world itself, the saints and fathers of the Church have responded not by denying that God punishes, but by explaining that God’s justice operates on a different timeline than human expectations. Saint Thomas Aquinas, for instance, explains that God can delay punishment for specific reasons, such as to give the sinner time to convert:

“For there are men who pay for their sins only in this life, like those of whom Saint Paul speaks in a first letter to the Corinthians: ‘That is why many of you are weak and ill and a good number have died.’ (1 Cor 11:30). Others pay in this life and in purgatory. And yet others — those who are perfect — pay neither here nor there, but go directly to heaven.” [T.N.: approximate paraphrase; original source in the author’s manuscript not precisely identified — *trad. prop.*]

“God punishes certain sinners, destroying their malice and decreeing a lighter penalty for them; He separates them from others and prevents them from doing greater harm. He thus draws good from evil.” [T.N.: approximate paraphrase — *trad. prop.*]

Saint Basil also explains in this regard:

“It is proper to divine mercy not to inflict punishments silently, but first to proclaim its threats, stirring men to repentance — as it did with the Ninevites, and now with the farmer, saying, ‘Cut it down,’ prompting him to tend it, and stirring the barren soul to bring forth the fruit that is due.”

Second: To the readers who have written to me expressing a certain concern that this debate might in some way be a cause of scandal, give the impression that Catholics are disunited, or cause division — I want to say to them that this debate is not personal; it is doctrinal. And doctrinal debates, when conducted with respect and charity, are a sign of a Church that thinks, and not of a disunited Church.

But the fact that we cannot know — except through a special revelation — whether a particular evil is a punishment, or whether from our exterior perspective it seems that a certain sinner was not punished, does not in any way imply that God would not come to punish if his will so determined, as Scripture itself attests, not only in the Old Testament, but also in the New.

Conclusions of the First Part

Let us now return to what the Dogmatic Council of Trent teaches:

“The holy council teaches furthermore that so great is the liberality of the divine munificence that we are able through Jesus Christ to make satisfaction to God the Father not only by punishments voluntarily undertaken by ourselves to atone for sins, or by those imposed by the judgment of the priest according to the measure of our offense, but also — and this is the greatest proof of love — by the temporal scourges inflicted by God and borne patiently by us.”

But if those who hold our position are truly “traditionalists,” Alejandro must explain whether he also considers the Roman Rite’s Book of Blessings to be “traditionalist” — a product of the liturgical reform — which includes among its prayers:

In this case, Alejandro’s argument is that Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI in certain encyclicals deny that God punishes — when in fact those very encyclicals contain nothing of the sort — while here we have reproduced verbatim and in-context quotations from those same Popes, where they explicitly confirm what the ordinary and extraordinary Magisterium has repeatedly insisted upon.