I'll be back soon with more on our recent World Youth Day pilgrimage. For now a quick post on the Gospel reading for this Sunday.
"Lord, will only a few people be saved?"
As usual Jesus doesn't give a straight answer to this question. I wonder if, at least in this case, our Lord is indirect because the nameless person is asking wrong question. A couple of years ago the hot question to ask in Evangelical and Catholic circles was, is hell empty or full? Personally, I think this is the wrong question to ask, because much like the query possed by our anonymous interlocutor of the Gospel passage, it distracts us from looking at the real issue, which is how to properly live God's word now, so we don't have to worry about hell later.
In brief, an Evangelical writer (whose name I can't remember) put out a book in the early years of this decade arguing that if any one is in hell they, along with all people, will eventually be reconciled to God in the heavenly kingdom. This teaching is not a new one, and is sometimes called universal reconciliation or Christian universalism. This teaching goes against Catholic doctrine, which holds that once a person is condemned to hell it's an eternal sentence from which there is no return. In other words, there's no parole from the underworld. Many Evangelicals were upset, because even though they don't always have the doctrinal uniformity (some would say rigidity) of Catholics, they by and large reject this idea as well.
This prompted a Catholic response, highlighted by then Fr. Robert Barron, who argued along the lines of the great Swiss theologian Hans Urs von Balthazar, that there is a reasonable hope that all men are saved, and we should indeed hope that hell is empty. This differs from the doctrine of universal reconciliation, because von Balthazar and his disciples don't deny that eternal damnation is a possibility, nor do they question the existence of hell. What they are saying is that there is a reasonable hope that no one has actually rejected God definitively - refusing to repent of their sins, the condition that makes damnation not only possible, but necessary. Out of charity our hope should be that no one has made that firm choice against God and for eternal separation from Him that we commonly call hell. We then got counter arguments from both Catholic and Protestant apologists stating that since Jesus talks about the reality of hell and condemnation quite plainly, and (from the Catholic side) since private revelations such as the Blessed Mother's words spoken at Fatima, also mention hell and damnation as near and present dangers (and that there are people already suffering these torments), we should take these word at face value, that at least some are indeed lost.
As I wrote above, I've always found this a pointless argument. That hell is a reality, and condemnation a possibility, is good enough for me. Whether hell is full or not is above my pay grade. My job at this point is to cooperate with God's grace so I'm not condemned, and as a priest I'm here to help others, through my ministry, to avoid that fate as well. I'm not offended or scandalized by the discussion, and I don't question the orthodoxy of those who hold the von Balthazar thesis, I just see it as being besides the point, like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I will admit that I've often thought what it would be like if von Balthazar was right, and up to now no one has actually been condemned. What if I end up being the first? Won't I feel stupid? (and pretty lonely)
Anyway, what Jesus does say in response to the question is that we should be more concerned with the road that leads to salvation and less about what the success rate is of those who travel it. This is the moment to accept Jesus, and we shouldn't lose a moment. He does say that of those who try, many will fail, as well as that the time to respond is limited, which should give us pause.
But there is a wider issue at work as well. Jesus makes reference to people standing outside looking in at the eschatological banquet, people who assumed that their ticket the the feast was already punched. He is making direct reference to the Jews of His own age who assumed that because they were children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that salvation was all but secured, and it's the gentiles that would be excluded. But here the roles are reversed, and it is the gentiles sitting at the table and the children of Israel locked out.
We need to be careful here. We believe that the Jewish people will eventually recognize Jesus as Lord and Messiah, taking their rightful place in the Kingdom (it is in fact the prerequisite for Jesus' return in glory according to CCC. 674). But just as some Jews of Jesus' time forgot the words of Isaiah that we hear in the first reading, that the Lord comes to gather all the nations into his Kingdom, and Israel is meant to prepare the way, we as Catholics can take our salvation for granted because we are Catholics.
We have valid Sacraments, the Apostolic Succession, the fullness of the truth: all this is true. But we are called to be a light for the world, making the invitation to others to join us in enjoying these graces. We are called to live the works of mercy, continuing Jesus's mission to proclaim the presence of the Kingdom by word and deed. If we don't do these things the door will be closed on us, whether anyone has actually been excluded in the past or not. And if not, I sure don't want to be the first.
Jesus calls us to perseverance. He calls us not to be slack in following the Gospel. The time is short, and the moment is now to take the initiative in living the faith we profess with our lips. There is an enemy, not of flesh and blood, who wishes to divert us off the path. We must stay on course, while at the same time being a sign of hope to others. There isn't any time for a break or turning back. We must keep on following the Lord where He leads.
I'm reminded of General Patton - that towards the end of World War II he followed a policy of nonstop pursuit of the enemy, never stopping to consolidate forces or turning back to reinforce already conquered land. His philosophy was to keep the enemy on the run, never allowing them a chance to regroup or catch their breath for a counter offensive. When asked why he did this, since the war seemed to be winding down, he reputedly answered that those who lay back a bit, assuming the enemy is already defeated risk a rude awakening. Many of his fellow officers, by his estimation, did't seem to realize that "we can still lose this war!"
Whether hell is empty of full, the possibility of eternal loss is real. I certainly pray that all people return to the Lord and enjoy the eternal light of the heavenly Kingdom, and the new heaven and earth we are promised in the Resurrection. But the possibility of loss shouldn't be denied. Of course, we should return out of love and not fear. But these are Jesus' words, not mine. He is the one speaking of doors being closed, and the anguish of separation. It is for us to heed these words, and allow His grace to transform our lives, so we may follow perseveringly along the narrow road in love. If that happens, then the question of who is damned and who is saved truly becomes moot.
In brief, an Evangelical writer (whose name I can't remember) put out a book in the early years of this decade arguing that if any one is in hell they, along with all people, will eventually be reconciled to God in the heavenly kingdom. This teaching is not a new one, and is sometimes called universal reconciliation or Christian universalism. This teaching goes against Catholic doctrine, which holds that once a person is condemned to hell it's an eternal sentence from which there is no return. In other words, there's no parole from the underworld. Many Evangelicals were upset, because even though they don't always have the doctrinal uniformity (some would say rigidity) of Catholics, they by and large reject this idea as well.
This prompted a Catholic response, highlighted by then Fr. Robert Barron, who argued along the lines of the great Swiss theologian Hans Urs von Balthazar, that there is a reasonable hope that all men are saved, and we should indeed hope that hell is empty. This differs from the doctrine of universal reconciliation, because von Balthazar and his disciples don't deny that eternal damnation is a possibility, nor do they question the existence of hell. What they are saying is that there is a reasonable hope that no one has actually rejected God definitively - refusing to repent of their sins, the condition that makes damnation not only possible, but necessary. Out of charity our hope should be that no one has made that firm choice against God and for eternal separation from Him that we commonly call hell. We then got counter arguments from both Catholic and Protestant apologists stating that since Jesus talks about the reality of hell and condemnation quite plainly, and (from the Catholic side) since private revelations such as the Blessed Mother's words spoken at Fatima, also mention hell and damnation as near and present dangers (and that there are people already suffering these torments), we should take these word at face value, that at least some are indeed lost.
As I wrote above, I've always found this a pointless argument. That hell is a reality, and condemnation a possibility, is good enough for me. Whether hell is full or not is above my pay grade. My job at this point is to cooperate with God's grace so I'm not condemned, and as a priest I'm here to help others, through my ministry, to avoid that fate as well. I'm not offended or scandalized by the discussion, and I don't question the orthodoxy of those who hold the von Balthazar thesis, I just see it as being besides the point, like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I will admit that I've often thought what it would be like if von Balthazar was right, and up to now no one has actually been condemned. What if I end up being the first? Won't I feel stupid? (and pretty lonely)
Anyway, what Jesus does say in response to the question is that we should be more concerned with the road that leads to salvation and less about what the success rate is of those who travel it. This is the moment to accept Jesus, and we shouldn't lose a moment. He does say that of those who try, many will fail, as well as that the time to respond is limited, which should give us pause.
But there is a wider issue at work as well. Jesus makes reference to people standing outside looking in at the eschatological banquet, people who assumed that their ticket the the feast was already punched. He is making direct reference to the Jews of His own age who assumed that because they were children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that salvation was all but secured, and it's the gentiles that would be excluded. But here the roles are reversed, and it is the gentiles sitting at the table and the children of Israel locked out.
We need to be careful here. We believe that the Jewish people will eventually recognize Jesus as Lord and Messiah, taking their rightful place in the Kingdom (it is in fact the prerequisite for Jesus' return in glory according to CCC. 674). But just as some Jews of Jesus' time forgot the words of Isaiah that we hear in the first reading, that the Lord comes to gather all the nations into his Kingdom, and Israel is meant to prepare the way, we as Catholics can take our salvation for granted because we are Catholics.
We have valid Sacraments, the Apostolic Succession, the fullness of the truth: all this is true. But we are called to be a light for the world, making the invitation to others to join us in enjoying these graces. We are called to live the works of mercy, continuing Jesus's mission to proclaim the presence of the Kingdom by word and deed. If we don't do these things the door will be closed on us, whether anyone has actually been excluded in the past or not. And if not, I sure don't want to be the first.
Jesus calls us to perseverance. He calls us not to be slack in following the Gospel. The time is short, and the moment is now to take the initiative in living the faith we profess with our lips. There is an enemy, not of flesh and blood, who wishes to divert us off the path. We must stay on course, while at the same time being a sign of hope to others. There isn't any time for a break or turning back. We must keep on following the Lord where He leads.
I'm reminded of General Patton - that towards the end of World War II he followed a policy of nonstop pursuit of the enemy, never stopping to consolidate forces or turning back to reinforce already conquered land. His philosophy was to keep the enemy on the run, never allowing them a chance to regroup or catch their breath for a counter offensive. When asked why he did this, since the war seemed to be winding down, he reputedly answered that those who lay back a bit, assuming the enemy is already defeated risk a rude awakening. Many of his fellow officers, by his estimation, did't seem to realize that "we can still lose this war!"
Whether hell is empty of full, the possibility of eternal loss is real. I certainly pray that all people return to the Lord and enjoy the eternal light of the heavenly Kingdom, and the new heaven and earth we are promised in the Resurrection. But the possibility of loss shouldn't be denied. Of course, we should return out of love and not fear. But these are Jesus' words, not mine. He is the one speaking of doors being closed, and the anguish of separation. It is for us to heed these words, and allow His grace to transform our lives, so we may follow perseveringly along the narrow road in love. If that happens, then the question of who is damned and who is saved truly becomes moot.
No comments:
Post a Comment