Quotes from Hans von Balthasar’s ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Salvation of All?’

 

Quotes from Hans von Balthasar’s ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Salvation of All?’

I find the following quotes of the Catholic theologian Hans Urs Von Balthasar quite interestingly similar to some of the quotes found in the Pali suttas of the Theravada Buddhist tradition (see e.g.: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/06/the-pali-suttas-on-problem-of-universal.html ):

"It is generally known that, in the New Testament, two series of statements run along side by side in such a way that a synthesis of both is neither permissible nor achievable: the first series speaks of being for all eternity; the second, of God's will, and ability, to save all men." (Hans Urs von Balthasar, ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Shall be Saved? With a Short Discourse on Hell’, chapter 2, p. 26)

“…that the fear of the possibility of being lost, as called for by the first series of texts, is by no means superseded, in favor of a knowledge of the outcome of judgment, by those of the second aspect; but that the Old Testament image of judgment—which, with few exceptions, is strictly two-sided—may well have become clearer (the Judge is the Savior of all) and that, as a result, hope outweighs fear. This remains a theologically

grounded existential statement and in no way a theoretical-systematic one. It also should not, therefore—as in system-building theses such as those put forward by Karl Barth—be interpreted as meaning that Jesus, as God’s chosen One, is rejected in place of all sinners, “so that, besides him, no one may be lost”. This comment is, to be sure, surrounded by others whose tone is less absolute, and the term apokatastasis, or “universal reconciliation”, is carefully avoided, even rejected. Still, one ought to stay well away from so systematic a statement and limit oneself to that Christian hope that does not mask a concealed knowing but rests essentially content with the Church’s prayer, as called for in 1 Timothy 2:4, that God wills that all men be saved.” (Hans Urs von Balthasar, ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Shall be Saved? With a Short Discourse on Hell’, chapter 2, pp. 33-4)

“All of us who practice the Christian faith and, to the extent that its nature as a mystery permits, would also like to understand it are under judgment. By no means are we above it, so that we might know its outcome in advance and could proceed from that knowledge to further speculation.” (Hans Urs von Balthasar, ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Shall be Saved? With a Short Discourse on Hell’, chapter 1, p. 16)

“The most ancient formulas of the faith contain, along with the avowal of Christ’s Resurrection (vivus a mortuis; DS 10), that of his judgment “of the living and the dead” (ibid.). Before the fifth century, there is no such formula that makes any mention of the twofold outcome of that judgment; this is done in the PseudoAthanasianum, originating after 430 in southern Gaul, and in the so-called Fides Damasi (end of the fifth century, also originating in France; DS 72). These became models for various later formulas of the Creed, such as that of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 (DS 801), of the First (1245) and Second (1274) Councils of Lyons (DS 858) and finally that of Florence (1439-1445; DS 1306). All these formulas are nothing but the abbreviated formulation of the Parable of Judgment in Matthew 25, with its separation of the sheep from the goats, after which the former are admitted to the kingdom of heaven while the latter are dispatched to the eternal fire. Every Christian creed can take no other position than that under the judgment of Christ and must therefore confront the believer with “both ways”, the two possible outcomes of his destiny.

From this position under judgment, the liturgy not only of the earliest centuries but of all Christian times can only repeat incessantly the prayer of supplication to be rescued, through God’s grace, from becoming lost and to be led into heaven. It is important here that the word infernum was long able to signify, without further differentiation, not only the “netherworld”, the “kingdom of the dead” (Sheol) and its lost souls, but also the Christian “hell” in its narrower sense. Without exception, the liturgical texts turn to God with the plea to be led out of the world of lost souls and into salvation and blessedness, whether they speak on behalf of those still leaving or of the deceased. They would like “to be rescued from eternal damnation” (Gelasianum III, 17, 1247), “free [his soul] from the place of punishment” (ibid., 91, 1621), “that the threatened vengeance may pass over into salvation” (vet. Gelasianum I, 43, 440), “whom you rescued from the abode of perpetual death” (Gelasianum I, 57), “(God) who redeemed both sexed from the destruction of everlasting death” (Gelasianum, ed. Cagin, 1850), “who wishes no one to perish” (Gelasianum I, 41, 413), “may you rescue the souls of your servants from the flame of burning fire” (Mozarabicus Liber ordinum 427), and so on. How could the Church, being under judgment, pray otherwise?” (Hans Urs von Balthasar, ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Shall be Saved? With a Short Discourse on Hell’, chapter 3, pp. 35-36)

“The enduring gravity of the situation emerges perhaps most clearly in the threats contained in the Letter to the Hebrews, which seems to despair of salvation for those who are not satisfied with the faith of Christ and fall away from it—however, after the offering up of his Son, God has no other grace to confer (6:4-8; 10:26-31), although a word of consolation and encouragement is always added to these most extreme threats (6:9ff.; 10:32ff.). The same thing must be said about the passage on judgment in the Gospel according to John (5:28f.), which supplements other, opposing words—to be discussed shortly here—and yet, in the logion about condemnation not by Jesus but by his word on the Last Day (12:48), both are left hanging in the balance. Now, this does not hinder the fact that the universalist series of texts possesses an ineradicable gravity. The “all” that recurs again and again in them cannot be limited to a merely “objective redemption” that would simply leave open the matter of acceptance by particular subjects. If it is said of God that: “God our Savior. . . desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all” (1 Tim 2:4-5), then this is the reason for the fact that the Church should make “supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings. . . for all men” (1 Tim 2:1), which could not be asked of her if she were not allowed to have at least the hope that prayers as widely directed as these are sensible and might be heard.3 If, that is, she knew with certainty that this hope was too widely directed, then what is asked of her would be self-contradictory.” ?” (Hans Urs von Balthasar, ‘Dare We Hope That All Men Shall be Saved? With a Short Discourse on Hell’, chapter 3, pp. 29-30)

Given the similarity of the content of those of the previous post, I’ll report the same question I made there:

 If we are destined to either a positive or a negative end no matter what we choose, where does one find the urgency to follow a spiritual path?

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ in Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ [1] in  Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia Introduction In this text, witnesses of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s and Diodore of Tarsus’ eschatological ‘universalist’ views, are reported.  As shall we see, the attestations of Diodore’s endorsement of a form of apokatastasis are always accompanied by an attestation of his disciple, Theodore, endorsing the same view. All these common testimonies are from Syriac sources, both Eastern-Syriac - Isaac of Nineveh (fl. 7 th century in his Second Part, 39.7-14; for Theodore only in his Second Part, 3.3.94 ), Solomon of Basra (fl. 13 th century in his book of the Bee, 60 ), Theodore bar Konai (fl. 8 th century in his Liber Scholiorum 2.63 ) - and Western-Syriac - John of Dara (fl. 9 th century in his On the Resurrection of Human Bodies 4.21 ). There is a brief comparison of a passage in Isaac’s Third Part (discourse 6) about eschatological punishments and the cont...
Read more

On the presence of universalism in East Syrian tradition

On the presence of universalism [1] in East Syrian tradition East Syrian theologians were influenced by Diodore of Tarsus (fl. 4 th century), his disciple Theodore of Mopsuestia (fl. 4-5 th century) who is called the ‘Interpreter/Exegete/Expositor’ in the East Syrian church (also called ‘Church of the East’), and Evagrius Ponticus (fl. 4 th century) [2] .  The point of this text is to show that there a was significant prevalence of the idea in this tradition (this doesn’t necessarily mean that it was a majority view). For more details about Diodore and Theodore see my previous post: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/01/ancient-and-medieval-witnesses-of_28.html An updated version of this post can be found here:  https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/03/on-presence-of-universalism-in-east.html  A testimony of an opponent: Babai the Great (fl. 6 th century): Let me start with the testimony of an opponent of ‘universalism’ in the East-Syrian Ch...
Read more

On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors

  On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors Introduction In what follows, I’ll present some evidence for the presence of a doctrine or a sympathy of universalism (i.e. the belief that all human beings will be ultimately saved) in some Latin Fathers. There are some suggestive passages in the writings of Ambrose of Milan and John Cassian. Also, Rufinus of Aquileia, in his quarrel against Jerome of Stridon, while admitting that the fate of the wicked is a mystery shows a clear sympathy for the doctrine of universalism. However, it should be noted that none of the figures I quote in this post have been cited as universalists (as far as I know) before the 19 th century and, also, the interpretation of their texts never seem to have caused controversy among later writers (again, as far as I know) about the possible presence of genuine universalist beliefs or interpolations in their texts. While this fact alone doesn’t exclude an universalist...
Read more