The Divine Comedy: God as the Ultimate Sinner

a research paper for my Dante class from Grad School.

 

Life is full of paradigms.  Structures set up to show us where we belong, to guide us along and to give us something to work toward (moving up).  Logically then one could say that death is also full of paradigms.  Death mirrors life; this is a pattern that is obvious in Dante’s famous Divine Comedy.  Set up as the most intricate view of the structure of death, the Divine Comedy is the perfect contrapasso to life.  In the middle of this complex structure is the one thing that causes all, God.  He is the reason for the concrete, the chaos, and the structure.  It is my theory that Dante sets up this world with in The Divine Comedy and (finally) shows God for what he truly is, the ultimate sinner. 

This seems like an incredibly radical thing to think, let alone to want to prove.  However, the more of Dante’s famous words that are read the more sense there is to see God for what he truly is.  First will be an explanation of how Dante has set up this world, and then how I have come to this simple conclusion.  In this paper there will be an explanation of the contrapasso in relation to sin and then hopefully in the end all will see Dante’s world as it really is.

 

Awaking in the dark wood, Dante has strayed from the path of the good (the path to God) and needs to be saved now before he is doomed to hell for all eternity.  In telling us that the pilgrim is halfway through our life, Dante poet is inviting the readers along for the journey as well, inviting us to be saved as well.  This shows that even from the very beginning Dante believes that people (for the most part) are sinners, and need saving.  The pilgrim is confused as to where he is, and how he is to return to the straight path, when his guide arrives.  The poet Virgil, a pagan, has been chosen to help guide Dante back to the straight path.  Some have suggested that Virgil represents one of the aspects of Satan (the Prometheus aspect[i]), however I believe that it is more likely that Virgil represents poetry.  This is supported by the fact that the Pilgrim calls Virgil poet several times in the Comedy, for example:

 

And I to him: “Poet, I beg of you,

In the name of the God, that God you never knew,

Save me from this evil place and worse,

Lead me there to the place you spoke about

That I may see the gate Saint Peter guards

And those whose anguish you have told me of.[ii]

 

Dante is supporting that fact that poetry, including his epic poem, will help to guide you back to the straight path.

Dante Pilgrim, astray from the straight path, is then lead through Hell by Virgil.  The Pilgrim circles his way down through Hell meeting perpetrators of all sins on his way, speaking to some and just observing others.  It is at this point that we must discuss the contrapasso and its relation to Dante’s text. 

 The word, contrapasso, is derived from the Latin contrapassum which, as used by St. Thomas Aquinas, meant “he who has suffered something in return”, which leads to the Latin sense of the word meaning “retribution” or “retaliation.”  In an article devoted to the subject of contrapasso, scholar Kenneth Gross[iii] points out the thing that the peculiarity that will be significant for Dante is that the translator (Aquinas) chose to join the prefix contra with the noun passum- meaning “pace” or “step” – rather than with the more likely passio, meaning “suffering.”  So then for Aquinas contrapassum (retaliation):

 

 denotes equal passion repaid for previous action; and the expression applied most properly to injurious passions and actions, whereby a man harms the person of his neighbor for instance, if a man strike, that he be stuck back.

 

Thus showing the ideal of an eye for an eye. It is the same in Dante, the sinners are punished relative to their crime, the lustful are blown around by the wind, the thieves have the bodies stolen from them and transformed, the schismatics are literally cut accordingly and so on. 

Gross goes on to relate the contrapasso with the sinner who first spoke it in Dante, Bertran de Born.  In brief explanation, Bertran was a poet who once told King Henry that he had more intelligence than he needed.  When Bertran was reminded of this boast after the death of the “young king” (Prince Henry) and being imprisoned by Henry, Henry asked him if he had no need of all of his wit (now that he was imprisoned) and Bertran replied that he had lost all of his wit when the “young king” died.[iv]  And thus in Dante, Bertran is actually separate from his wits, carrying his head in his hand, swinging it “like a lantern.”

However, as Gross has pointed out Aquinas would not have imposed this paradigm on a world such as Dante’s Comedy.  The reason is because this law of an eye for an eye is overturned by Christ in Matthew 5 lines 38-39, the “New Law of Retaliation”[v]:

 

You have heard the commandment, ‘An eye for and eye, a tooth for a tooth.’ But What I say to you is: offer no resistance to injury.  When a person strikes you on the right cheek, turn and offer him the other.

 

Therefore, according to Aquinas the idea of punishment by contrapassum would fall outside of the Christian dispersion of Grace and Love.  Thus, Hell should be punishing the sinner by ignoring its sin or by being unaffected by the sin, such that if you have hit someone on the cheek you should be offered the other for a fresh start, according to Matthew.  This, to me, sounds more like Purgatory where the sinner is able to make retribution for his sin.  The sinner is offered a second chance.

However what should give us pause in applying the contrapasso on Dante is that the word is uttered by a damned soul (Bertran De Born[vi]).  As we have learned, the damned, even the most eloquent, have major blind spots in their understanding of religion, philosophy and language.  They have been place in Hell by Dante for a reason; if they had perfect understanding of the paradigm of the world they would be in paradise with the souls who have direct knowledge of the mind of God rather than as far from God as possible. This is Infernal Irony; we should be viewing these “distinguished souls” that Dante puts in hell at a distance.

Medieval thought had several theories concerning the motion of the soul.  One theory is the idea from Aquinas this is the circular theory.  The circular theory states that we desire to return to where we started i.e. Paradise, and God.  Thus the punishments of the Inferno, insofar as they reflect sin, show a deviation from the soul’s proper motion.  The sole of the foot is literally pulled upward toward God.  The soul’s in Hell can no long strive forward, like the souls in Purgatory, but are rather suck to repeat the same cycles over and over until judgment day. 

Kenneth Burke’s model of Aquinas’ theory states, “Thus the sinful soul is one that has wrongly turned itself aside or askew, that has turned away from God and so has turned against the true, rational, and divine good.” [vii]  This turning is reminiscent not only of the souls punished by Dante but of the Pilgrim himself who has wrongly turned off the path to Divine good and now must take the long journey to correct this wrong turn.

Gross further explains these two theories and their relation to Dante:

 

Implicit in Dante is also the conviction that sin inverts or parodies two processes that are central to Augustine’s theology: the divine act of Grace, symbolized by the Incarnation of Christ, and the human act of conversion.  These two acts, which always entail each other in the work of salvation, represent respectively the turning of love from God to man, and the turning or returned of love from man to God.  The states of the damned, then can be read not so much as simple retributive punishments, but instead as various incarnations of false love or as emblems of false, downward, or paradic conversion. 

 

The reason for this is because there can be no real conversion after death.  This becomes the punishment of the shades in Hell: they are enslaved by the incessant repetition of the contrapasso of their sin. But as Gross points out:

 

“Dante’s idea of the infernal state transforms theological concepts of sin into central poetic principles, or, … exposes the allegorical or figurative logic that is already at work in traditional accounts of the negative, imitative, or grotesque process of sin.”

 

Further, Gross says the pains of the damned are more revelation than retribution.  This is to point out to the reader that we should be deterred from these sins not because of the punishments we will endure in Hell but rather because of how horrifying the crimes are within themselves in the eyes of God.

However, instead of correcting sin, Dante’s symbolic ironies show how the infernal states actually facilitate the spiritual disorder which comprise sin.  It is my theory that if the damned are punished with the contrapasso, the eye for an eye, that would make not only them guilty of this sin but their punisher would be guilty of their sin as well.  Meaning of course that God, who punished, sins each sin in direct relation to each sinner.  God is the ultimate ruler of Hell, as is shown in Inferno canto 34 when we come face to face with Lucifer:

 

 

The king of the vast kingdom of grief

Struck out with half his chest above the ice;[viii]

 

Dante shows us that Lucifer, who is supposedly the “king” of Hell, is punished just as the rest of the sinners are punished.  He (Lucifer) cannot move, or make things happen any more than any other sinner, and cannot affect the other sinners.  This proves that God is the true king of Hell.  God created Hell and chooses the punishment for each sinner.  Therefore, God sins each sin.  Think of it like a large corporation, and God is the President of the corporation.  He’s is the one that makes all the decisions (in heaven and hell), even if he doesn’t carry out each action.  It is this way in Hell and in Purgatory.  God chooses what punishment each round of sinners will be punished with, and then assigns demons to carry these out.  Yet, it is through God that the sin is distributed by means of contrapasso.  Therefore, God is the ultimate sinner.  He sins against every person in Hell.

Relative to this idea would then be that God also is redeemed again through each sinner in Purgatory.  Purgatory is the opposite of the contrapasso, more likely Dante’s way of relating Christian theology to the comedy.  As stated before, the theory of an eye for an eye was over turned later on in the bible.  So for Dante the contrapasso is overturned later on in the comedy.  God first says that the sinners must be punished according to their sins, and then says that sinners must be offered a second chance in accordance with the ideal of “turn the other cheek.”  Thus we have Hell and Purgatory, Old Testament and New.  God is purged of all of the sins in Hell with all of the sinners in Purgatory.  It would then be safe to say that God is also the ultimate saint.  His goodness is reflected in all of the souls in Paradise, and therefore, God is saved with each of these souls. 

Dante’s paradigm of the afterlife supports God to be both the ultimate sinner, and the ultimate saint.  He (Dante) reflects what he sees to be the truth in God’s paradigm:

 

“It is always better to hold one’s tongue than speak

a truth that seems a bold-faced lie when uttered,

since to tell this truth could be embarrasing;

but I shall not keep quiet; and by the verses

of my Comedy-so may they be received

with lasting favor, Reader- I swear to you

I saw a figure coming…”[ix]

 

Dante swears upon his text that what he says is true, and I then will swear upon mine in saying God is Dante’s ultimate sinner.

---

[i] Milton’s Paradise Lost, and Greg’s paper.

[ii] Dante’s Inferno, Canto I ln’s 130-135 as translated by Mark Musa.

[iii] “Infernal Metamorphoses: An Interpretation of Dante’s “Counterpass” by Kenneth Gross (see Works Cited list for full bibliographic information)

[iv] Dante’s Inferno as translated by Mark Musa Canto XXVIII pg 333 note 142.

[v] The Holy Bible, Catholic Edition, The Book of Matthew: New Law of Retaliation, pg 1146 ln's 38-42.

[vi] See footnote: iv.

[vii] Kenneth Burke, The Rhetoric of Religion pp66-64, 86-117.

[viii] Dante’s Inferno, Canto XXXIV ln’s 28-29.

[ix] Dante’s Inferno, Canto XVI ln’s 124-130.

 

 

Works Cited

 

Alighieri, Dante. The Divine Comedy Vol. I: Inferno. Translated by Mark Musa. IN: Indiana University Press, 1971.

 

Burke, Kenneth. The Rhetoric of Religion. CA: The University of California Press, 1961. Pp66-64, 86-117.

 

Coffman, Elesha. The Root of All Kinds Of Evil. IL: Christianity Today, 2001.

 

Gross, Kenneth. Infernal Metamorphoses: An Interpretation of Dante’s “Counterpass”. MA: MLN (Johns Hopkins University Press), Vol. 100, No. 1, Italian Issue (Jan.,  1985), 42-69.

 

Holy Bible: The New American Bible. TN: Memorial Bibles International, INC., 1976.

 

Kerlin, Michael J. Evil in Modern Thought: An Alternative History of Philosophy. WA: Theological Studies, 2004.

 

Stream, Carol.  Dante’s guide to heaven and hell: Why the Divine Comedy still haunts and enchants us. IL: Christianity Today, 2001.

 

Stump, Eleonore. Dante’s Hell, Aquinas’ Moral Theory, and the Love of God. CA: Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 1986.

 

Zimmerman, J.E. Dictionary of Classical Mythology. NY: Bantam, 1971.

 

 

 

 

Author's Note

Sorry about the formatting, writerscafe is weird like that!

Reviews

[Nik Dendera]

You've pretty much said exactly the same thing as I once remarked. Only you've obviously done the research and have put it into much better words than the ones I used!

A fantastically intellegent, well thought out piece.

You've backed up your thoughts with well placed details and quotes, and what can I say other than I hope you got the grade you deserved for this?

I'm going to pass this on... I know someone who'd love to read this.

[Pax Analog]

Ingenious logic, not unlike what enabled Descartes to posit that animals were machines without feelings. ;-)
I semi-jest. This is a well-conceived grad school paper, I grok. But don't you suspect the entire Western dualistic tradition is a towering house of cards, sorely in need of Buddhic or Advaita Vedantic help? It starts
with the word "God." Upon repeatedly seeing "Jesus is God. Read the Bible." bumper stickers, I conjured "Existence is God. Read the Moment." The problem is in the arbitrary objectification. Why doesn't the all-inclusive formless Mystery suffice?

One definition of "sin" is "missing the mark." By that "marker," this is a matter for radical contemplative insight, transcendent of the rational machinations of monkey mind, as a Zen master might say.

It's been "new aged" to death, and contains a reductionist kernel, but nonetheless a significant clue to Consciousness lurks in quantum physics. The previously hard little atom is revealed to be a mini-realm of subatomic particle/wave paradox, wherein materiality itself vanished into "tendencies," and any scientific assertions are unavoidably conditioned by the angle of the observer. Core science defeats ratiocinations reign of error.

Yes, I know, I've ventured far afield from Dante, but I think I've indicated why. I'm into conversations about Reality. As in, history, with rare exceptions, really IS The Matrix, that sci-fi version of ancient Gnosticism.

Pardon, if this exceeds the boundaries of what interests you. For me, God's the mad artist, free of form, appearing as all beings, so of course, "sinner," "saint" -- all and frickin' everything.

Look at me, I'm shattered. Or as the Buddha said when asked if he was a man or a god: "I'm Awake."

[The Rock And Roll Cowbo..]

WOW this is so well researched and thought out... I have to admit I don't know much in the way of Dante till now but you really gave me quite an insight so thank you for that. I might have to read this a couple more times just to fully take in everything. This really is incredible work.

[Mark D. Chevalier]

I always found it interesting that Dante showed retribution in prorpotion to the sin incurred, making God both the ultimate sinner and saint, while the Devil is really blameless. It certainly goes against christian theology. What is astounding however from a historical perspective is that monotheism didn't become widely accepted until after the time of Christ except in Judaism. And even then the contradiction between Christ in the New Testament, and the wrathful God depicted in the Old Testament seems grown from entirely different sets of belief systems.
On the one hand we are told, "Thou shall not kill," while on the other a mass killing by God is accepted as just punishment.
I like Milton on this as well when he said, "Extol him equal to the Highness in Heaven. Nor failed they to express how much they praised that for the general safety he despised His own: for neither do the spirits damned lose all their virtue; lest bad men should boast."
I loved it Lee, good paper. Thoughtful and introspective.
Mark

[Angel's Lady]

Awaking in the dark wood, Dante has strayed from the path of the good (the path to God) and needs to be saved now before he is doomed to hell for all eternity. -- Oh boy, have we.

God is purged of all of the sins in Hell with all of the sinners in Purgatory. It would then be safe to say that God is also the ultimate saint. His goodness is reflected in all of the souls in Paradise, and therefore, God is saved with each of these souls.

I believe you have written a most remarkable paper, definitely theoretically sound. I liked it.
(Excellent bibliography, by the way, giving me the occasion to want to read Elesha Coffman's book as well as Carol Stream's book.)

Two typos:
in the end all will see Dante's world it really is. (I think you left out the word AS, ...world AS it really is.)
since to tell this truth could be embarrasing; but I shall not keep quite; (I shall not keep quiet).