0:00

Recently, Pope Francis has said he likes

0:02

to think hell is empty, and Bishop

0:04

Robert Barron has also defended the view

0:06

that we can reasonably hope that all

0:08

men will be saved. In response, a

0:10

lot of Catholics have called this heretical,

0:12

but they focused on secondary issues more

0:15

than the primary problem with this view.

0:17

So let's talk about the real problem

0:19

with Christians who say that they hope

0:21

hell is empty. First, we need to

0:23

distinguish what Pope Francis and Bishop Barron

0:25

say about hell from a heresy known

0:27

as universalism. This is the view that

0:29

we can have definite knowledge that every

0:32

single human being, or even every single

0:34

creature, including the devil and all the

0:36

demons, will eventually be saved

0:38

and spend eternity in heaven, even

0:41

if they have to go through purgatory

0:43

first. But if that's true, then those

0:45

who reject the gospel would not be

0:47

the lost that Jesus came to save,

0:50

as it says in Luke 19.10. They

0:52

would just be the delayed who have

0:54

to wait a little bit longer for

0:57

their heavenly rewards. That's one reason why

0:59

universalism has been rejected throughout

1:01

church history. The

1:03

Protestant scholar Richard Baucom writes, until

1:05

the 19th century, almost all Christian

1:07

theologians taught the reality of eternal

1:10

torment in hell. Here

1:12

and there, outside the theological mainstream, were

1:14

some who believed that the wicked would

1:16

be finally annihilated. Even fewer

1:18

were the advocates of universal salvation. Universalists

1:21

cite passages in scripture that speak about

1:23

Christ dying for everyone, which is true.

1:26

But that doesn't mean everyone will freely accept

1:28

the graces that Christ's death on the

1:31

cross merited for them. Universalists also cite

1:33

passages like 1 Corinthians 1522,

1:36

where Paul says, for as in Adam, all

1:38

die, so also in Christ shall all be

1:40

made alive. But this doesn't mean through Christ,

1:42

all people shall be brought to eternal life.

1:45

What it means is that all who are

1:47

in Christ, which is a

1:49

term Paul often uses for the saved or

1:51

the elect, they shall be brought

1:53

to eternal life. So the definite knowledge that

1:55

all will be saved is off the table

1:58

for Catholics. But what Pope Francis and

2:00

Bishop Barron are talking about is

2:02

something that we could call the dare we

2:04

hope view. It's named after

2:06

the late Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar's

2:09

1987 book, Dare We

2:12

Hope That All Men Be Saved. Balthasar

2:14

said we have no right to assume

2:16

everyone is going to heaven. He

2:18

writes, we stand completely and utterly under

2:21

judgment and have no right, nor is

2:23

it possible for us to peer in

2:25

advance at the judge's cards. In other

2:28

words, we don't know exactly what everyone's

2:30

fate will be at the final judgment.

2:33

If we did, like that we knew everyone was going to

2:35

heaven, then we would know what

2:37

cards the judge holds. Or to put

2:39

it more accurately, we would know what

2:42

names are written in the book of

2:44

life in heaven, everybody's names. But von

2:46

Balthasar says there is a possibility all

2:49

men are saved. And so we should at

2:51

least hope that is the case. He

2:53

writes, Thomas Aquinas taught that one

2:55

can hope for eternal life for the other

2:57

as long as one is united with him

3:00

through love. And from which of our brothers

3:02

would it be permissible to withhold this love?

3:04

This coheres with the Fatima prayer said at

3:06

the end of every decade of the Rosary,

3:09

since if we love all people, then we

3:11

should pray for all people to be saved.

3:14

Oh my Jesus. Forgive us

3:16

for our sins, save us from

3:18

the fires of heaven, and

3:20

lead us so that we can

3:22

be saved. On

3:26

Bishop Barron's Word on Fire resource page,

3:29

it asks, does Bishop Barron teach we

3:31

can have a reasonable hope all will

3:33

be saved? If so, what does he

3:35

mean by reasonable? Here's part of the

3:38

answer. Yes, Bishop Barron is

3:40

convinced we have a reasonable hope that all

3:42

will be saved. He means reasonable

3:44

in the sense that we have good reasons

3:46

to ground our hope, namely the

3:49

cross and resurrection of Jesus and his

3:51

divine mercy. He isn't making

3:53

any sort of probabilistic judgment as

3:55

if to say reasonable means very

3:58

likely or quite probable. we

4:00

have what Pope Francis said in a recent

4:02

interview. This is not a dogma of the

4:04

faith that I tell you. It is my

4:06

personal thing that I like. I

4:09

like to think of an empty hell.

4:13

Some people argue against the Dare We

4:15

Hope view by claiming that the Church

4:17

has infallibly taught that some people are

4:19

in hell, like Judas Iscariot, who is

4:21

called the Son of Perdition in Scripture.

4:23

However, while the Church has a canonization

4:25

process to say who is in heaven,

4:28

it has no similar process to infallibly teach

4:30

who is in hell. Avery

4:33

Cardinal Dulles, who was a sound theologian,

4:35

said, This Dare We Hope

4:37

position of Balthasar seems to me to

4:39

be orthodox. It does not

4:41

contradict any ecumenical counsels or definitions of

4:43

the faith. It can be reconciled

4:45

with everything in Scripture, at least if

4:48

the statements of Jesus on hell are

4:50

taken as minutary rather than predictive. Minutary

4:53

means a warning. Jesus' teachings about

4:55

hell under this view would be

4:58

conditional. They won't necessarily come to

5:00

pass in the same way that

5:02

when Jonah said God would destroy

5:04

Nineveh, that included the Proviso unless

5:07

the Ninevites repent. Now, I

5:09

personally find all of this hard to

5:11

accept. When you look at the weight of

5:13

the tradition from Scripture, the Church Fathers,

5:15

the doctors of the Church, it

5:17

seems pretty likely that at least

5:19

some people will spend eternity apart

5:21

from God in hell. It seems

5:23

overwhelmingly likely. But that's a

5:26

lot different from saying the contrary is

5:28

impossible. Plus, the big

5:30

problem with this view isn't really

5:32

about whether all people

5:34

are saved. A Dare We

5:36

Hope person could just modify his view and say,

5:38

Yeah, I guess you're right that Judas Iscariot is

5:40

in hell. But I think that 99.999% of all

5:42

people who ever lived will be saved and only

5:48

the worst handful of people will go to

5:50

hell. Most people would

5:52

still call such a view heretical,

5:55

or at least a clear denial of Jesus'

5:57

teaching about the way of destruction being wise.

6:00

that many will choose. But we aren't

6:02

in a position to say how large

6:04

the many are. You see, the

6:06

real problem with the dare we hope view isn't

6:08

that we will get a certain

6:11

fact about hell's population wrong or

6:13

misunderstand what happened to Judas Iscariot.

6:16

The problem is that if this view becomes

6:18

a serious part of one's worldview and not

6:20

just a passing hope, then it

6:23

can be spiritually damaging to a person's soul

6:25

and the souls of others. That's why I

6:27

would treat the dare we hope view like

6:29

we treat Powerball or any lottery whose odds

6:32

of winning are something like 80 million to

6:34

one. There's nothing wrong with

6:36

hoping you win the lottery. If

6:38

you can spend the money wisely, that would be

6:41

a great blessing. You don't have a reasonable

6:43

hope of winning the lottery because

6:46

of the long odds, but

6:48

I would say you can have a rational

6:50

hope because winning the lottery is not impossible

6:52

even though it's highly highly improbable. Look, if

6:54

it makes you feel better to think about

6:57

winning every now and then before you go

6:59

back to the hard work of making a

7:01

living, that's fine. But

7:03

it's not fine if you stop

7:06

focusing on making a living because

7:08

you think you have a reasonable

7:10

hope you will win the lottery.

7:13

It's possible, but only a

7:15

fool would make major life plans based

7:17

on such a fantastically small probability. The same

7:20

is true of the dare we hope view.

7:22

There's nothing wrong with hoping all people

7:24

will be saved. If I got to

7:26

heaven and found out that all people

7:28

were saved and then God explained to

7:30

my finite brain why I couldn't understand

7:32

that in this life, I would rejoice.

7:34

I would rejoice that everything turned out

7:36

so well. Look, if it makes

7:39

you feel better to occasionally think about the

7:41

hope of everyone being saved and praying for

7:43

that before you go back to the

7:45

hard work of evangelization, that's fine.

7:47

But it's not fine if you

7:49

stop focusing on evangelization because you

7:52

have a reasonable hope everyone will

7:54

be saved. It's possible, but

7:56

only a fool would neglect the fate

7:58

of his neighbors he... eternal soul based

8:01

on such a fantastically small probability.

8:03

Now I disagree with Bishop Barron's

8:05

use of the phrase reasonable hope,

8:08

because even though he says that it's

8:10

not related to probabilities, most people

8:12

do think of a reasonable hope

8:14

as one that has conceivable probabilities,

8:16

something at least above 10%. But

8:19

if the odds are 80 million to one,

8:22

as in the case of Powerball, or even worse

8:24

than that, and it may very well be worse

8:26

than that for the dare we hope view, then

8:29

you just can't have a reasonable hope, or

8:31

at least what most people understand a reasonable

8:33

hope to be. You can have a rational

8:36

hope because it's not impossible. You

8:38

can have a rational hope that

8:40

you might win the lottery or that all

8:42

people might be saved, but not

8:44

a reasonable hope. To give another example,

8:46

imagine you are tasked with finding a

8:48

group of survivors from a shipwreck who

8:50

are floating out in the ocean. Someone

8:53

says to you in the rescue team,

8:55

you know what, we can have a

8:57

reasonable hope that the survivors ended up

8:59

on a desert island, and are now

9:01

listening to coconut radios and playing basketball

9:03

with the Harlem Globetrotters. So

9:05

let's stop worrying about these rescue

9:07

missions and focus instead on the

9:09

more important task of making the

9:11

ocean more welcoming or fixing inequality

9:13

among boaters. It's possible the

9:15

survivors are fine on a luxurious tropical

9:17

island, but the odds are probably

9:19

80 million to one. So

9:21

it's reckless, negligent, and lazy to

9:24

forego your duty to save those

9:26

people based on the thinnest hope

9:28

they don't need saving. Likewise, given

9:30

the sheer weight and common sense

9:32

understanding of what Jesus and the

9:34

apostles said about hell, as well

9:36

as the church fathers, the saints,

9:38

and the magisterium, it would be

9:40

equally reckless, negligent, and lazy to

9:42

forego our duty to evangelize those

9:45

who have rejected God and his

9:47

church based on the thinnest hope

9:49

that they don't need saving. And

9:51

we will put our own souls in

9:53

danger if we spend too much time

9:55

fantasizing about how everyone will be saved

9:57

and realize that our own salvation must

10:00

be worked out in fear and trembling, as

10:02

St. Paul says in Philippians 2.12.