Will Many Be Saved?: What Vatican ll Actually Teaches and Its Implications for the New Evangelization

by Ralph Martin

The question of whether and how people who have not had the chance to hear the gospel can be saved goes back to the beginnings of Christian reflection. It has also become a much-debated topic in current theology. In Will Many Be Saved? Ralph Martin focuses primarily on the history of debate and the development of responses to this question within the Roman Catholic Church, but much of Martin's discussion is also relevant to the wider debate happening in many churches around the world.
In particular, Martin analyzes the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church , the document from the Second Vatican Council that directly relates to this question. Contrary to popular opinion, Martin argues that according to this text, the conditions under which people who have not heard the gospel can be saved are very often, in fact, not fulfilled, with strong implications for evangelization.

Genres: Catholic, Theology, Christianity, Spirituality, Religion

332 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 1988

About the author

Ralph Martin has been a leader in renewal movements in the Catholic Church for many years. After graduating from the University of Notre Dame, he did graduate work in philosophy at Princeton University and holds an MA in Theology from Sacred Heart School of Theology in the Archdiocese of Detroit, a Licentiate in Sacred Theology (S.T.L.) from the Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C., and a Doctorate in Sacred Theology (S.T.D.) from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas (the “Angelicum”) in Rome. He worked for a number of years for the National Office of the Cursillo Movement and subsequently became a leader in the national and international development of the charismatic renewal movement in the Catholic Church. He was the founding editor of New Covenant Magazine, as well as the founding director of the International Catholic Charismatic Renewal Office, currently located in Rome.

Currently, Ralph is president of Renewal Ministries, an organization devoted to Catholic renewal and evangelization (www.renewalministries.net). Ralph is also the host of “The Choices We Face” a widely viewed weekly Catholic television and radio program distributed throughout the world. Renewal Ministries is accountable in its work to a Board of Directors in the United States, which Archbishop Robert Carlson of St. Louis, serves as Episcopal Advisor, and to a Board in Canada that Cardinal Thomas Collins of Toronto, serves as Episcopal Advisor. Renewal Ministries is also actively involved in assisting the Church in more than 30 different countries through leadership training, evangelistic conferences and retreats, and the publication and distribution of Catholic resources.

Ralph is also an associate professor and Director of Graduate Theology Programs in the New Evangelization at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in the Archdiocese of Detroit (www.shms.edu) and a Visiting Professor of Theology at the Franciscan University of Steubenville. He was named by Pope Benedict XVI as a Consultor to the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization and was also appointed as a “peritus” to the Synod on the New Evangelization in October of 2012.

He and his wife Anne have six children and 14 grandchildren and reside in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Reviews

[Christopher Blosser · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Catholic blogosphere is atwitter with discussion of a recent dustup between Mark Shea and Michael Voris regarding the latter's criticism of Fr. Barron, over Barron's continued receptivity toward a theory advanced by Hans Urs Von Balthasar that it is acceptable to have good hope that Hell may be empty. Boniface at Unam Sanctum has the blow-by-blow for those interested.

Appropos of the topic, I have just finished reading Ralph Martin's Will Many Be Saved?: What Vatican II Actually Teaches and Its Implications for the New Evangelization (Eerdmans, 2012).

The question of whether and how people who have not had the chance to hear the gospel can be saved goes back to the beginnings of Christian reflection. It has also become a much-debated topic in current theology. In Will Many Be Saved? Ralph Martin focuses primarily on the history of debate and the development of responses to this question within the Roman Catholic Church, but much of Martin's discussion is also relevant to the wider debate happening in many churches around the world.

In particular, Martin analyzes the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, the document from the Second Vatican Council that directly relates to this question. Contrary to popular opinion, Martin argues that according to this text, the conditions under which people who have not heard the gospel can be saved are very often, in fact, not fulfilled, with strong implications for evangelization.

I was very impressed by Martin's survey of the subject and the praise from Timothy Dolan, Francis Cardinal George, Peter Cardinal Turkson and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia, O.P. seems to me warranted.

After a detailed explication of the doctrinal development and scriptural basis of section 16 of Lumen Gentium, Martin proceeds with a detailed analysis and criticism of Rahner's "anonymous Christian" and the larger part of his book to Balthasar's Dare we Hope that all may be saved?.

Martin's negative evaluation of Rahner's theology was to be expected, howbeit what I found interesting was how Rahner in his later years admitted to some critical reservations about his earlier position -- as well as a "too euphoric" evaluation of humanity and the human condition at the Council. Likewise,

So the Council’s decree Gaudium et Spes can be blamed, despite all that is right in it, for underestimating sin, the social consequences of human guilt, the horrible possibilities of running into historical dead-ends, and so on.

Martin's devastating critique of Balthasar, however, comes as more of a surprise. For even with figures as highly esteemed as Avery Dulles, Pope John Paul II, and Pope Emeritus Benedict giving a stamp of theological toleration (and/or approval) to Balthasar's hope for universal salvation -- Martin's detailed exposition of Balthasar's tendency to ignore, misquote or mischaracterize his sources (whether from the Scriptures, the Fathers or the mystics) as well as his questionable theological reasoning should give pause for all.

Consider for example:

At this point we can no more than mention that patristic scholars have raised serious questions about the accuracy of Balthasar’s interpretation of these Fathers, particularly his attempts to enlist them as sympathizers or teachers of universalism. Brian Daley, for example, challenges Balthasar’s assertion that Methodius was a universalist. He traces both Origen’s thought and its influence on Methodius and Gregory of Nyssa and he concludes that, not only does Methodius not teach this openly, but he does not even hold it secretly. [...]

O’Connor identifies instances where Balthasar clearly misrepresents the teachings of the Fathers in order to claim precedents for his own theory. For example, Balthasar claims: “Let us return to the Church Fathers. At first, the view still existed among them that no Christians, even if they had sinned grievously, end up in hell. Cyprian already seems to suggest this; Hilary as well; Ambrose remains formal on the matter, and Jerome no less so.”137

O’Connor comments: “This statement is disappointingly inaccurate. . . . There is no Father of the Church, up to the time of Origen, who teaches that all Christians, even those who sinned grievously, are saved.” He finds Balthasar’s citation of Cyprian particularly egregious, for the actual text of Cyprian teaches the very opposite; the Christian sinner who sins grievously and then repents can be saved.138 He also points out that, contrary to Balthasar, the earliest Christian writing outside of the NT that attests to the reality of hell was not the Martyrdom of Polycarp (c. 156) but the even earlier Second Epistle of Clement ...

Manfred Hauke also raises questions about Balthasar’s invocation of various Fathers in support of his theory, noting that it is precisely those ambiguous teachings of various Fathers that were never accepted by the Church that Balthasar cites for support.

Martin devotes a substantial amount of his book to exposing what appears to be, from a standpoint of academic integrity, a rather questionable treatment by Balthasar of myriad sources -- the Scriptures, the Fathers, the mystics, in support of a position that is squarely at odds with the weight of Catholic tradition. Indeed, my experience o Martin was not unlike that of reading the late Ralph McInerney's "Praeambula Fidei": Thomism And the God of the Philosophers, in which he laid bare Henri De Lubac and Etienne Gilson's (mis)interpretation of Cajetan and Aquinas.

Is Martin (and Daley, and O'Connor, and Hauke, et al.) correct in his assessment of Balthasar? Balthasar strikes me as being neither ignorant nor a fool, and Martin's portrayal imputes an element of brazenness in advancing his position, at once professing his orthodoxy and repudiating apokatastasis while covertly hinting at it:

O’Connor describes the situation like this:

Although he rejects the theory of apokatastasis, von Balthasar is so categorical in denying that we know that there are or will be humans who are to be eternally damned, and so forceful in defense of a hope for the salvation of all that he appears to be saying that, in fact, no one will be eternally lost.

Roch Kereszty makes a similar observation:

Does his understanding allow for a definitive free refusal of God’s love on the part of any human being? He repeatedly insists on this possibility, but the inner consistency of his thought does not seem to admit it. . . . My reservation regarding his position comes from the suspicion that the logic of his thought leads not just to hope, but to a (consciously denied but logically inescapable) certainty for the salvation of all.142

The charges practically scream for a rebuttal. (Paging qualified Balthasar scholars ...).

For a theological movement that styles itself Ressourcement must be, if anything, honest in the treatment of its sources. If Martin's critique of Balthasar is correct (as McInerney is in his criticism of De Lubac) -- if their scholarship on this particular subject is simply not to be trusted, and found wanting -- it casts some doubt upon the integrity of their work as a whole. Where else could they have gone wrong?

At the very least, I do find myself reading the work of both De Lubac and Balthasar with a more cautious eye, and a more attentive ear to those sounding the alarm.

* * *

One final piece of theological trivia worth noting -- Balthasar ends Dare we Hope with a lengthy citation from the unpublished theological speculations of Edith Stein, "“which expresses most exactly the position that I have tried to develop.” Stein asserts that while the possibility of the soul's refusal of grace and consequent damnation in principle cannot be rejected, "In reality, it can become infinitely improbable — precisely through what preparatory grace is capable of effecting in the soul." According to Stein,

The more improbable it becomes that the soul will remain closed to it. . . . If all the impulses opposed to the spirit of light have been expelled from the soul, then any free decision against this has become infinitely improbable. Then faith in the unboundedness of divine love and grace also justifies hope for the universality of redemption, although through the possibility of resistance to grace that remains open in principle, the possibility of eternal damnation also persists.

But here's the catch: While Balthasar identifies himself completely with this passage from the saint, Stein herself moved beyond it and revised her position in later years:

Schenk, “Factical Damnation,” p. 150, n. 35, points out that while Balthasar makes this his final position, it was not the final position of Edith Stein herself. Schenk points out that these were passing comments in a work that she herself never published, and that in 1939 in her spiritual testament, she significantly modifies. “The possibility of some final loss appears more real and pressing than one which would seem infinitely improbable.” Hauke, “Sperare per tutti?” pp. 207-8, makes the same point as well as the additional point that not everything a saint or Doctor wrote is honored when they are recognized as saints or Doctors.

Book Reviews of Ralph Martin's Will Many be Saved?

Who Will Be Saved, How Many and How?, by Fr. C. John McCloskey. National Catholic Register 9/28/13.
Review: Will Many be Saved?, by Peter A. Huff. Xavier University. Homiletic and Pastoral Review March 2013:

Martin’s timely and provocative study is likely to shake up the theological and pastoral establishment. Critics will find a scholarship that is derivative in spots, and a prose that occasionally borders on turgid. Some will dismiss the work as biblicist. Historians will demand harder evidence to establish a link between professional theologians’ ideas, and a mood allegedly dominating a Catholic generation or two. The erosion of belief is overdetermined, as Freud would say. One can cease to believe in hell, without marching orders from a German-speaking theologian.

The thrust of the book’s bold thesis, however, cannot be ignored, or easily denied. Universal salvation is an unofficial article of faith in the mainstream Catholic theological academy. Martin’s claim that it has no basis in the teachings of Vatican II demands a serious and self-critical response. His book restores evangelization to its proper status as a genuine Vatican II theme. Every seminarian, priest, college professor, and administrator should read it. It may not be the best book on Vatican II released during the Year of Faith, but it could be the most important.

Oh, Hell, by Dr. Philip Blosser. The Pertinacious Papist 12/14/12.
Review: Will Many be Saved?, by Rev. Andrew McLean Cummings. Archdiocese of Baltimore. Fellowship of Catholic Scholars Quarterly, Fall/Winter 2012.
Saving the Hell Out of You, by Fr. Robert Barron. RealClearReligion. 12/13/12.

Responses to Fr. Barron

Comments by Dr. Ralph Martin on Fr. Robert Barron’s Review of Will Many Be Saved?, by Ralph Martin. 12/7/12.
Hurts and Hopes Regarding the Recent Debates on Hell, by Msr. Charles Pope.

The Flight from Hell, by William Doino, Jr. First Things "On the Square" 10/08/12.
Will Many Be Saved?, by Dr. Jeff Mirus. Catholic Culture 9/19/12. "If you can read only one book on this topic, which is so critical for a continuing Catholic renewal and the salvation of souls, read Ralph Martin’s Will Many Be Saved?. You will find it a valuable exercise in spiritual growth, and a vital means of setting the record straight."
“Blatant Censorship” and Ralph Martin’s Will Many Be Saved? - On Mark Brumley's pulling of David Paul Deavel's review from The Catholic World Report.

Related discussions of Dare We Hope?

Von Balthasar and Salvation, by James T. O'Connor. Homiletic and Pastoral Review July 1989. Comprehensive analysis of the late Fr. Hans Urs von Balthasar's last book, Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved?.
Freedom and Universalism, by Dr. Scott Carson. The Examined Life 05/09/07.
Who Can Be Saved?, by Avery Cardinal Dulles. First Things December 2008.
The Population of Hell, by Avery Cardinal Dulles. First Things May 2003.
Will All Be Saved?, by Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus. First Things August / September 2001.

Personal note -- I found it refreshing to revisit the research of Avery Cardinal Dulles on this subject (referenced above), where he gives what I think is fair treatment to both sides. Cardinal Dulles had a calming presence about him, conveying a sense of both scholarly neutrality (letting the research speak for itself) as well as Christian charity (presenting each position in the best light and not imbuing the other party with dubious motives).

It seems to me that the voices in these times have gotten increasingly more shrill (Mark Shea and Michael Voris strike me as prime examples). As Catholic blogs renew these theological debates (at times ad nauseum), Dulles' tone and presentaton is one worth emulating.

And Alyssa Pitstick vs. Balthasar over Christ's descent into Hell

Was Balthasar a Heretic? R.R. Reno First Things October 2008.
Responses to Balthasar, Hell, and Heresy First Things' Readers. October 2007.
More on Balthasar, Hell, and Heresy Alyssa Lyra Pitstick/Edward T. Oakes, S.J. First Things January 2007.
Balthasar, Hell, and Heresy: An Exchange First Things December 2006.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE CHARISMATIC RENEWAL LEADER LOOKS CRITICALLY AT UNIVERSALISM, ETC.

Ralph Martin has been a leader in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal for many years; he has written a number of books, such as 'A Crisis Of Truth: The Attack On Faith, Morality, And Mission,' 'Is Jesus Coming Soon?: A Catholic Perspective on the Second Coming,' etc.

He wrote in the Preface to this 2012 book, “The question of whether human beings who have not had the chance to hear the gospel can be saved goes back to the beginnings of Christian reflection… While this book is focused particularly on the situation of the Catholic Church in facing this question today, there is much in it that is relevant to the wider debate happening in many churches. There is a long history of debate and development on this question, part of which we will trace in this book. The focus of the book, though will be a particular text from ‘Lumen Gentium [LG], the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church’ of the Second Vatican Council… Because this is a position that is not often argued---namely, that the conditions under which people can be saved who have never heard the gospel are very often, in fact, not fulfilled---the approach and the methodology must be suited to the task.”

In the first chapter, he acknowledges, “One reason why evangelization may be stymied is that there seems to be in the minds of many Catholics, and other Christians as well, a lack of conviction that being a Christian is really necessary in order to be saved. If it is not really necessary to become a Christian in order to be saved, why bother to evangelize? The reasons often given for evangelizing include appeals to a ‘greater richness’ or a ‘greater fulness,’ or ‘making explicit what is already implicitly there.’ In a culture that is characterized by hostility to claims of absolute truth and unique means to salvation, many Catholics apparently find these reasons to be less than compelling. But, of course, this lack of conviction finds a certain basis in the Church’s own teaching. The Church definitely teaches that it is possible for non-Christians to be saved without hearing the gospel or coming to explicit faith in Christ. There is a certain tension between the call to evangelize and the acknowledgement that conversion to Christ and the Church is not absolutely necessary in order to be saved.” (Pg. 5)

He outlines, “The Council is … teaching that under certain very specific conditions salvation is possible for non-Christians. What are these conditions? 1. That non-Christians be not culpable for their ignorance of the gospel. 2. That non-Christians seek God with a sincere heart. 3. That non-Christians try to live their life inconformity with what they know of God’s will. This is commonly spoken of as following the natural law or the light of conscience. It is important to note… that this is possible only because people are ‘moved by grace.’ 4. That non-Christians welcome or receive whatever ‘good or truth’ they live amidst---referring possibly to elements of their non-Christian religions or cultures, which may refract to some degree the light that enlightens every man (Jn 1:9). These positive elements are intended to be ‘preparation for the Gospel.’ One could understand this mean either a preparation for the actual hearing of the gospel or preparation for, perhaps, some communication of God by interior illumination.” (Pg. 9)

He notes, “there are some remarkable ‘revelations’ given to Catherine of Siena … that pertain to this possibility of a final illumination at the point of death: ‘At this end point of death… the worm of conscience … begins to see again. And in the realization that their own sins have brought them to such an evil end, this worm of conscience gnaws away in self-reproach. If such souls would have light to acknowledge and be sorry for their sins… they would still find mercy…’ The question of how God might act to save outside the ‘normal channels’ remains open.” (Pg. 22-23)

He recounts, “Fr. Feeney, the Catholic chaplain at Harvard, taught a very strict interpretation of the theological axiom ‘Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.’ He believed that only those visibly joined to the Catholic Church could be saved. This excluded not only non-Catholic Christians but everyone else as well… The response of the Holy Office made these important points… 1. Fr. Feeney does not correctly understand or interpret the theological axiom. 2. Private interpretation of magisterial teaching cannot take precedence over the teaching authority of the Church… 3. Regarding the sacraments of baptism and of penance… the graces they confer can also be obtained in certain circumstances … ‘only in desire and longing.’ … 4. This desire for union with the Church need not always be explicit… 5. An authoritative interpretation of ‘Mystici corporis christi’ is given…. 6. A rather ‘high level’ of implicit desire is required for the possibility of salvation.” (Pg. 48-50)

He summarizes, “Some points that we must particularly keep in mind… are as follows: … Just as those who lived before the coming of Christ could be saved if they responded with saving faith to the light they were given and acted in accordance with conscience,,, likewise those who are inculpably ignorant of the gospel today also have the possibility of salvation under similar circumstances… what must be involved in this saving assent to God… It must involve supernatural faith … It must involve a dedication to do the will of God… Just because salvation is possible for people who… have not heard a presentation that is adequate does not mean they are thereby saved.” (Pg. 53)

He notes, “LG 16 states that ‘very often’ people who are not Christian… are not sincerely seeking God and living according to the light of their consciences… This statement… [flies] in the face of a mentality that presumes that almost everybody is a ‘good person’… and that God could not really be a good God and let people go to hell.” (Pg. 90)

He argues, “even from an empirical point of view it is difficult to understand [Karl] Rahner’s optimistic view of human beings’ response to what he postulates as the supernatural existential… [Rahner] spent virtually his whole priesthood … first under Nazi rule and then… with half of Germany under Soviet communism… Consider… the firebombing of Dresden… the campaign to exterminate the Jews… Did this not give pause to his theory that almost everybody says ‘yes’ to the offer of salvation … apart from any hearing of the gospel?” (Pg. 103)

He points out, “[Rahner] does not claim to find the theory of the ‘anonymous Christian’ as he presents it, in the tradition before Vatican II. After tracing the history of the development, declares that the ‘final stage is the teaching of the Second Vatican Council.’” (Pg. 106) Later, he adds, “Rahner is very aware that his theory of the ‘anonymous Christian’… seems to have serious negative consequences for evangelization… Rahner’s theory recognizes that this is a question that immediately springs to mind. If people can be saved without hearing the gospel, and if except for a few, rare exceptions we can presume that almost everybody is saved, why bother to preach it?” (Pg. 113)

Martin states, “It is unsettling that Rahner would call his understanding of universal salvation more Christian than a central element of Jesus’ own teaching… It seems that Rahner … has reached the point … where the words of the gospel have become reversed---and the many headed towards destruction have now become the few, and the few headed to salvation have now become the many.” (Pg. 125-126)

Turning to Hans Urs von Balthasar, he observes, “While we cannot judge the state of anyone’s soul and what transpires at the moment of death, it certainly appears… that many people persevere to the end of their rejection of God and/or in a life of immorality. Balthasar acknowledges as much, but then posits the possible chance(s) after death, for which there is no basis in Scripture or the magisterium.” (Pg. 155) Later, he adds, “Balthasar… claims that Christ’s descent into hell was actually so that he could experience total rejection by God and experience damnation/hell on behalf of the whole human race so that no human being would have to suffer this fate.” (Pg. 162)

He goes on, “Balthasar claims that because we do not know for sure that there is anyone in hell, not even Judas, and because the will of God is to save all men, and because of the nature of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice, we not only can, but have the duty, out of Christian charity to hope that every human being is saved… [Balthasar] seems to end up… that it is extremely unlikely that there is anyone in hell.” (Pg. 165) He continues, “Balthasar speculates that perhaps everyone will be pardoned anyway, even if they die unrepentant, or perhaps another chance will be given after death for repentance to happen… Of course, as we have noted, the view that conversion is possible after death is not in harmony with Scripture or the magisterium of the Church.” (Pg. 180)

He summarizes, “The popularization of theological theories … that give the impression that almost everybody is saved, and that perhaps only a few especially evil people end up in hell, and that there are many ways to salvation, has done much to contribute to a ‘culture of universalism’ not only in Western society as a whole but within the Church as well… when a ‘practical universalism’ holds sway… the zeal for holiness and evangelization will certainly be reduced.” (Pg. 196)

He concludes, “it is easy enough to drift into speculation that eventually departs from both the letter and spirit of Scripture or to adopt a pastoral strategy that does so… We have not seen that ‘biblical-thought world’ or its ‘spirit’ adequately ‘handed on’ in the postconciliar years. This omission needs to be corrected if the urgent call for a new evangelization is to achieve its considerable promise in the traditionally Christian nations that are now in massive apostasy and in the reenergizing of primary evangelization to the unevangelized peoples of the world.” (Pg. 207-208)

This book will be of great interest to any Christian (not just Catholics) studying such questions of salvation, universalism, etc.

[Rachel Thooft · Rating 5 out of 5]

The ideas in this book are critical to the Church's understanding of evangelization. Ever since Vatican II there has been a major swing towards the dangerous doctrine of universalism. We need to under stand that Hell is a real place and that it is not inconceivable that a good number of people are there because of their sin. Without a knowledge of the gravity of sin and its consequences, there will be no motivation to save either ourselves or others from it!

[Thomas Walsh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Will many be saved? The short answer is a resounding, "No!" Ralph Martin uses the clear teaching of the Catholic Church, the Sacred Scriptures and the revealed truth of approved apparitions to make his case in a clear and sobering manner.

[Clare · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thorough response to theologians like Karl Rahner who claim that more or less everyone will be saved. Martin references John Paul II and many papal and Vatican II documents extensively.

[Sengole Gnanaraj · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most challenging books on the New Evangelization; the need to preach the Name in the context of a relativistic plural world of many views of salvation.

[FR ADRIAN G HEAD · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very informative

Many cardinals and bishops and lay men and lay women in prominent positions in the Church have recommended this book, written by a layman, Ralph Martin. His knowledge and information due to his wide studies give us a clear idea of what Vatican II actually taught and how missionary evangelisation is still so important.

[Lawrence R]

Good review and analysis of what the Vatican II documents actually teach about salvation.

[Michal Paszkiewicz · Rating 5 out of 5]

I won't spoil the conclusion, but this was a very interesting read covering modern Theology, particularly LG 16 and its plausible interpretations. Highly recommended for the searching reader.