Osama bin Laden and universal salvation: all vs. each
A Florida parish is in some hot water because they accepted a request to offer a Mass for the repose of the soul of Osama bin Laden. Although praying for bin Laden’s salvation is clearly acceptable within Catholic theology, some do not believe it appropriate to pray for the salvation of this notorious mass murderer. One commenter even asks,
So Adolph Hitler is next? Why not masses for Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse Tung, too?
Well, actually, there would be nothing theologically wrong with that either. We do not want anyone to go to hell, not even our worst enemy.
Some fear that such an attitude reflects a belief in universal salvation – that all men and women (and even demons!) will eventually be saved. Known also as Apocatastasis, the doctrine of universal salvation is most associated with the Church Father Origen (although St. Gregory of Nyssa also seemed to accept this doctrine), and has been condemned by the Church. In recent times, Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar seemed to flirt with this doctrine as well, although his position is a bit more nuanced than a simple acceptance of the salvation of all people (von Balthasar also explicitly acknowledged the eternal damnation of the devil).
Do we want bin Laden to go here?
However, praying for the salvation of the worst that the human race has produced – Hitler, Stalin, bin Laden – does not necessarily imply a belief in the salvation of all. There is a difference between hoping for the salvation of each person and believing in the salvation of all persons. Let me use an analogy that I’ve used here before.
My favorite baseball team, the Cincinnati Reds, is supposed to be good this year (and so far they are playing well). Before every game, I hope that they win. However, never would I believe that they could win all 162 games, as I know that is a hope for something that is simply not possible. The reality is that they will lose some games no matter how good they are.
The problem with believing in universal salvation is that it effectively negates human freedom. If all men are saved, then in truth there is no human element in the process of salvation, something which goes against Catholic teaching. To return to my analogy, if the Reds did somehow win all 162 games, I (along with everyone else) would suspect that something had been rigged. Likewise, if all men are saved, I would have to suspect that man is not truly free – his salvation is predetermined regardless of the choices he makes. And freedom is a necessary component of love; without freedom, we are simply slaves of a benevolent master, not children of a loving father.
So we can (and should) hope that Osama bin Laden is saved, as well as Hitler, Stalin or any other person who has committed terrible public sins (as well as ourselves, who commit terrible private sins). But that does not mean that we believe that all men are saved, for we know that God as our loving father respects our human freedom too much to force us even into something as blessed as eternal salvation.
Fr. Barron has a great article on the universalism debate, comparing the views of Origen, Aquinas, Augustine, and Von Balthasar. He leans toward the position of the latter.
http://www.wordonfire.org/WoF-Blog/WoF-Blog/March-2011/Theology-Is-Hell-Crowded-or-Empty.aspx
I would add this: I pray for them in the hope that my prayers can change their hearts and the certainty that it will change mine.
“In the face of a man’s death, a Christian never rejoices, but reflects on the serious responsibilities of each person before God and before men, and hopes and works so that every event may be the occasion for the further growth of peace and not of hatred.” – Vatican spokesman on killing of Osama bin Laden http://bit.ly/mJNlip
I believe it is possible for Osama bin Laden to have been saved, if he cooperated with God in achieving a perfect contrition for his sins when he died. After all, he clearly demonstrated invincible ignorance of God’s will with regard to faith and morals, i.e., the teachings of the Catholic Church and a proper understanding of the Ten Commandments. The people whose salvation I fear for the most are Catholics who receive the sacraments and yet knowingly do not follow the moral teachings of the Church.
I see no problem with praying for the dead, no matter what the “dead” did here on earth during their life. The type of torture and death Jesus went through was heinous yet He asked his Father to forgive them. How? Why? “Love your enemies.” “Deny yourself, pick up your cross, and follow me.” Very difficult concepts. I will say a prayer for those with the hardened hearts. They are still alive and most likely need prayers more than those who are dead and already faced judgment, whatever that judgment might be. Certainly not for me to decide.
I know it’s necessary to pray for dead, but wouldn’t it have been far better for that parish to pray for UBL while he was alive?
Saint Gregory the Great (a Doctor of the Church) said that we only pray for those whom have died if we communicated (i.e. in sacris) with them in this life.
In other words, we pray for the dead who have been in communion with us on earth.
I doubt that Saint Paul was offering Holy Mass for the repose of the soul of Alexander the Great, Antiochus IV, or Caligula.
The Church prays, “May the souls of the FAITHFUL departed through the mercy of God rest in peace.”
ad Jesum per Mariam,
Taylor Marshall
PS: Balthasar’s theology of “hope that all might be saved” is related to his teaching that Christ descended into Gehenna and experienced solidarity with the damned. This teaching is contrary to what the Eastern (especially) and Western Church Fathers teach about Christ’s VICTORIOUS descent into the Limbo of the OT Fathers. Balthasar’s teaching is also contrary to the teaching that Christ held the beatific vision during His Passion and during His descent. According to the Doctors of the Church, the Catechism, and Saint Thomas Aquinas, Christ could never have experienced the despair of Gehenna. Saint Thomas Aquinas hammers out all this neatly and clearly.
Those who want to endorse Balthasar’s “hope that all might be saved,” need to carefully man up to Balthasar’s teaching on the descent of Christ. It’s a can of worms and stands outside the life-giving river of Sacred Tradition.
Out of respect, I don’t think his name nor attention should be made so to respect others. Notorious criminals I thought didn’t get public Mass, why should someone be mentioned after they are dead that has done what he did?
…and if the Pirates won their division, I would be equally astonished
@annabahpa:
I would like to respectfully point out that not all ignorance is invincible. Several possibilities exist: Bin Laden may have knowingly done evil, he may have been “vincibly” ignorant, or he may have been “invincibly” ignorant. However, it is likely that all of his ignorance was not invincible (cf. Romans 1:20)
“Ignorance is termed vincible if it can be dispelled by the use of ‘moral diligence’. This certainly does not mean all possible effort; … however, the diligence requisite must be commensurate with the importance of the affair in hand, and with the capacity of the agent…”
“But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you: That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.” (Matt 5:44,45)
I think that the Church traditionaly has denied a Public funeral and burial to notorious criminals in order to avoid
scandal. Having public masses said for such persons would seem to be under the same stricture. While we judge not so as not to be judged it would cause great grief and harm to those who were victimized to publically pray for these souls. To me this is another case of mis-placed compassion. While we do not celebrate OBL’s death we may express our great relief that he is no longer in a position to bring evil into the lives of so many
innocent victims around the world. Our compassionate prayers might be better offered for all those who were victimized by
his evil policies and to pray for an end to all forms of terrorism rampant in much of the world.
seems to me that if one believed in the salvation of all souls, universal salvation, one would not need to pray for anyone. No one would need prayers or intercession.
Pardon me if I’m displaying my ignorance. As a recent convert, I’m still on the steep part of the learning curve. I understand that at the instant of one’s death, one receives their unalterable, personal judgement. If you are going to hell, that’s it. If you are going right to heaven, or, perhaps doing some time in purgatory first, that’s it. If Bin Laden was not in communion with the Church, had not accepted Christ as his Savior, waa not in a state of Grace, etc….it’s more than likely that his sentence was to hell. That being the case, praying for him is a waste of time. Pray for someone who has a chance. Someone who still has time on this earth to mend their ways….someone in purgatory, whom you loved, or someone who has no one left to pray for them. I think we all know, in our heart of hearts, where he went, and praying for him won’t help. Our Messiah lives. His prophet is dead and buried. Like him. And I think they’ll both stay that way.
I thought what Dr. Peters has written from a canon law perspective was interesting and note, a non Catholic should not have his name printed nor said.
http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/re-osama-bin-ladens-name-in-parish.html
Well, that’s not exactly what Dr. Peters said. The issue with not saying a non-Catholic’s name during the Eucharistic prayer (i.e., “Remember N., whom you have called from this life. In baptism, he/she died with Christ, may he/she now share in his resurrection.”) is different from putting the person’s name in the bulletin. There is no legal prohibition on publicly announcing the particular intention of a Mass. Whether or not it is prudent to make public all the intentions is the issue…
It seems to me that the Church, whether Catholic or Protestant, is entirely too interested in social sensitivities (i.e., “political correctness”) and is not entirely plugged into its own theology, not if it is worried about PR. Perhaps the priest who led such a Mass, even by request, saw the necessity of bringing the faithful away from the hatefulness so many have had against bin Laden. It is not now a matter of the repose of bin Laden’s soul; it is entirely about us and our repentance from such raw hatred, the same raw hatred that continues to perpetrate this needless jihad in which so many innocents are dying. Whether bin Laden is saved or not is NOT for us to decide, let alone waste time debating. “Let the dead bury their own dead.”
After the initial shock my first inclination was to pray for his soul – as is always the case when I learn of someone’s death.
What has happened to the idea that praying for the damned increases the suffering of those in hell???
It is like heaping coals of fire on their heads.
I think part of why people don’t like the idea of praying for bin Laden is that they think he’s uniquely awful, that he doesn’t deserve heaven. But I think that’s pride; one of the fundamental lessons Christianity has to teach the natural man is that he is not intrinsically better than a murderer, or whatever kind of uniquely awful person he points to and says, I’m basically good, and I should go to heaven, but he’s beyond the pale. We’re all fallen; we’re all beyond the pale. “There but for the grace of God,” etc.
Relatedly, as someone mentioned above, the Bible says “Judge not,” etc. I think part of what that means is that we can’t know who is going to heaven and who to hell—that we can’t know the state of anyone’s heart or soul. Again, I think it would be pride for us to think we knew. For all I know, bin Laden had the best of intentions, thinking he was on the right side of a holy war, for the sake of God, to save the world from evil and corruption. I’m not saying he was right, or even possibly right. But I think if he genuinely was doing the best he knew, following God the best he knew how (as messed up as that was), then he goes to heaven to be with Him, basically. I think that may be the same thing you call “invincible ignorance”.
C. S. Lewis says, “Every one says forgiveness is a lovely idea, until they have something to forgive, as we had during the war. And then, to mention the subject at all is to be greeted with howls of anger. It is not that people think this too high and difficult a virtue: it is that they think it hateful and contemptible. ‘That sort of talk makes them sick,’ they say. And half of you already want to ask me, ‘I wonder how you’d feel about forgiving the Gestapo if you were a Pole or a Jew?’
“So do I. I wonder very much. Just as when Christianity tells me that I must not deny my religion even to save myself from death by torture, I wonder very much what I should do when it came to the point.” (Mere Christianity, chapter on Forgiveness.) But what’s right is right, whether we live up to it or not.
More specifically, I guess the question here is whether a Catholic church ought to hold a mass to pray for the repose of bin Laden’s soul. Not being Catholic, I can’t offer an opinion on that.
The Lord put His mark on Cain, the first murderer, as His own to deal with –no one was to kill Cain.
That should tell us everything we need to know.