The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Pope Francis seems even closer to UR than previous 2 Popes!

"]"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all!Wow!

If you’re on Twitter, I highly recommend following him (@Pontifex) as most of his tweets are very encouraging. Here are some examples:

I’ve been checking into the Divine Mercy movement that JP2 helped foster and rescue from denouncement, back when he was archbishop of Poland. It has a lot of connection to Catholic universalists of the past, and quite a few modern RC heavyweights connected to Polish Roman Catholicism have been found talking in ways which sound very universalistic. Benedict and Francis aren’t Polish of course but they’re both big supporters of the Divine Mercy program.

I haven’t got a clue how modern RCs reconcile this to previous papal statements on the topic while still holding to papal infallibility (in the sense of inerrantly teaching doctrines of faith and morals). They seem due for a big adjustment in what infallibility means – probably they’d be safer with something like “the councils and Magesterium and Pope shall by miracle never fail to bring about the purposes of God, even if they themselves fall and rebel”.

i was pretty sure Papal infallibility was dropped as a doctrine already.

Alex, that is a fantastic find. i don’t have twitter, though, but what encouraging thoughts.
i knew i liked him for his humility, but didn’t expect him to be at least hinting at doctrines of UR…that’s amazing.
so inclusive, too.

Too cool! And I especially appreciated “Dare We Hope that All Men Be Saved” by Balthasar!

Maybe people got their hopes up too soon … :frowning:.

Yeah, I’ve noticed a few people trying to “balance” what the Pope said, but that’s to be expected. As far as I know, the Pope hasn’t made an apology or come out “balancing” his comments…

And anyway - the balancing statements are also open to interpretation. Are they just stressing that atheists are saved by Christ and not by their own efforts? The whole tenor of these statements is 'Jesuitical :confused:

I think so but I don’t think the Pope was implying that anyone was saved apart from Christ in the first place - that was just the media’s spin to make it sound more controversial :unamused:

Another take…
Titled “Is Pope Francis Endorsing Universalism?”

Definition of Universalism is a bit odd I thought:

(Universalism says nothing about the equality of faiths! – “only” the Total adequacy of Jesus as a Savior!)

So is Francis a Universalist?

I do like that it’s on the radar though!!


Heh. Whereas Paul said that whoever has been reconciled to God by the blood of the cross, which is all things in heaven and in earth that need reconciling, how much moreso shall they be saved into His life!

I can’t help but wish that Paul had been inspired to write those both together so people wouldn’t have to work to figure it out. Anyway, thanks for digging up another article TV. The author is surely correct that Pope Francis wasn’t advocating pluralism. And it behooves us to recall that (largely thanks to those pestilent so-called Unitarian Universalists) that concept of “universalism” isn’t odd to most people, it’s what most people expect the term to involve. What’s odd to them is that we don’t at all mean that!

Unless the RCs decide to just drop or radically punt Papal Infallibility, I don’t think we can ever expect a Pope to retract what prior popes have declared in favor of some kind of eternal conscious torment, no matter how sympathetic he seems to Christiaun universalism. If they’re of the right spiritual temperament they’ll dance right up to it, but won’t cross the line.

Jason, I’m no expert on RC practices, but I was under the impression Papal Infallibility was only recognised in very special circumstances (probably seven according to Wikipedia). Popes have turned back positions declared (fallibly) by previous popes. So I’m sure they could still go all universalist on us if they wanted.


WAAB, the same article notes that the declaration of anathema by a Pope basically counts as an implied piece of infallible teaching, as by doing so it satisfies the conditions of defining a doctrine of faith and/or morals that must be held (contra to the anathema) by the whole church, thus also satisfying the condition that the Pope is speaking in his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority.

We know of notorious cases where a Pope declared something anathema and then had to reverse later, of course (such as declaring acceptance of any Latin translation other than a particular one just made to be anathema–and then discovering that the translation was in significant error somewhere, requiring an updated reprint for the new translation!)

But if that’s true, then papal anathemas don’t necessarily hold; but if papal anathemas don’t necessarily count as infallible teaching, then anything similarly meeting the conditions doesn’t necessarily count either.

Alex, nifty though that is (a Pope on Twitter feed!!–who would have thought I’d live to see the day…), it isn’t any different than the standard Arm doctrine in itself. The “redeem” language sounded more interesting earlier, because the RCC has previously held assurances much like Calvinists about the assurance of salvation for those whom God has redeemed (which is where the Calvs historically traced their emphasis through). But I can’t find anything in the Catechism indicating those whom God redeems He will surely save into the life of Christ.

(I can find that in St. Paul, but not in the Catechism. :wink: )

I think we can safely says he’s an Arminian, so now if we can just find somewhere where he says God gets what He wants, like Irresistible Grace:slight_smile:

Ah, I see… Thanks Jason!

There are some of the same and other quotes from this pope on Dave Tomlinson’s site as well.


Is it too early to be able to add the current pope to the big list - perhaps as hopeful, or wide hoper?

Too early to add to the big list, except maybe so far as any pope in a while has been at least a wide hoper (i.e. that Christ can and does save people into the Catholic Church invisible before they die, even if they don’t realize yet they’re among the sheep), much like Lewis.

If we had a category for sympathy to universalism, though, he and Benedict and JP2 would certainly fit in there. :slight_smile: :sunglasses:

“go to him with a sincere and contrite heart” & “obey their conscience” sound like repentance & faith to me… (the conscience being part of the way the Spirit regenerates/works in us - to keep Calvinists happy)

I don’t want to change the thread of the post - but is there a list of saints/popes (maybe online) that did endorse EU? I’m curious because I have some close friends who became Catholic and asked me about this…