Kierkegaard and the Catholic Tradition: Conflict and Dialogue

5 Must All Be Saved? A Kierkegaardian-Catholic Response to Theological Universalism

125 five Must All Be Saved? A Kierkegaardian-Catholic Response to Theological Universalism That God could create beings free in relation to himself is the cross which philosophy could not bear but upon which it has remained hanging. Kierkegaard Once again we are hit with the weirdness of it all: we get an inkling of an inner contradiction in sin, we feel its absurdity. Josef Pieper In my experience, many people who react strongly to what they perceive to be authoritarianism in the Catholic tradition are often surprised to learn that the tone of its theologians and even of its popes on the issues of hell and damnation has been quite gentle of late. Indeed, as we shall see in what follows here, it appears to be an open question for contemporary Catholicism whether anyone, even Judas, Christ’s own betrayer, is or will be finally lost. Thus, while an individual’s own pursuit of holiness in the Catholic tradition can be rigorous and demanding, theologians often urge a policy of compassion on the question of whether anyone else will be finally lost in hell. This impulse in the Catholic tradition, exhibited in an interesting way by the Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar, harmonizes very well with Kierkegaard’s own thought.1 Indeed, Balthasar returns, again and again, to this idea in Kierkegaard, 126 · Sin, Justification, and Community that an individual should be rigorous with herself and lenient with others.2 However compassionate Kierkegaard’s approach to such questions may be, his larger reception has been similarly enigmatic. On the one hand, his rescue of “New Testament Christianity” often endears him to traditional Christians. At the same time, Kierkegaard’s polemical attack on the Christianity of his day was so vociferous that he crept close to direct criticism of the New Testament apostolic community itself.3 Some are inspired by his harsh critique of so-called Christendom but wish he had seen through to a rejection of Christianity, or at any rate, to a much more critical stance with regard to traditional Christianity. This mixed reception situates Kierkegaard’s thought at an interesting place between traditionalism and secularism, or perhaps religious liberalism. I think that this interesting place is where Kierkegaard intended himself to be seen. In this chapter, however, I will use the resources of Kierkegaard’s writings, along with some help from the Catholic intellectual tradition, to provide a response to one tenet sometimes associated with religious liberalism, namely the strong doctrine of universal salvation, or, alternatively , strong theological universalism. The question of universal salvation has been a topic of great interest of late in the Catholic tradition, as it has been in philosophical and theological circles generally. In many ways, this question came to a head in Catholic circles with Hans Urs von Balthasar’s book Dare We Hope “That All Men Be Saved”? Although Balthasar’s position received a good deal of animated discussion,4 I think that his position on the isolated issue of whether all human individuals might possibly end up in heaven is one tenable option for Catholics in the contemporary Church.5 I will be calling this position, as I understand it, Cautiously Moderate Theism (CMT). I believe that both Kierkegaard and Balthasar hold versions of this position, and I think they can be mutually reinforcing in its de­ fense. This is the most cooperative chapter in this book. In many ways, it is also why Luther does not play any central role in this chapter.6 This issue does not clearly divide the Protestant and Catholic traditions, although related issues in succeeding chapters will. I say this not because I wish to resort to polemics in foregoing or subsequent chapters, but because there are differences in many other issues between the Catholic tradition Must All Be Saved? · 127 and Kierkegaard, and the dialogue on these points should not ignore the differences. However, I believe that on the present question, Kierkegaard and the Catholic tradition have not only a largely harmonious vision, but a common foe, namely, strong theological universalism. Kierkegaard appears to think that the possibility of eternal damnation , a person’s supernatural punishment, can reach the ears of human beings only through an authoritative proclamation (on which, see the previous chapter). Indeed, Anti-Climacus appears to advance this very claim (PC, 229). In addition, Kierkegaard himself regarded the doctrine of eternal damnation as a doctrine that was...