CathInfo.com

The eminent Fr. Royo Marin O.P has this to say in Theology of Salvation, it's a short read but I think well worth reading, the full chapter is longer, it explains his reasons to be optimist at length and also lists the arguments for the more rigorous position. It's also I think a masterclass in true theology and epistemic humility

CHAPTER V

Are Few Saved?

Here is one of the most distressing and difficult problems that can be presented to the theologian. The question is one of those most frequently and passionately asked by the majority of people. And yet, perhaps there is no other question in all of Catholic theology that can be answered with less certainty and assurance. Divine revelation is very obscure; Christian tradition is very divided, and the Church has defined nothing on this matter. Consequently, we can move only within the realm of mere conjecture and probability.

Hence the great diversity of opinions, especially among preachers and theologians. From the extreme rigorism of a Massillon—whose thunderous sermon on "the small number of the saved" has tormented so many souls—to the exaggerated and imprudent optimism of so many others who save almost everyone, there is a wide variety of intermediate opinions. 1

POSING THE QUESTION

104. We are going to attempt a solution favorable to a moderate optimism, which seems to us more in conformity with the spirit of the Gospel and the very essence of Christianity, which is, above all, the religion of love and mercy. But we must not hide the fact that in no other chapter of our book have we experienced such profound anguish as in the drafting of these pages. Because if it is true—as Pascal says—that "the heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing," it is no less true that, however hard it may prove in practice, the theologian cannot let himself be guided by anything other than the lights of reason illuminated by faith.

Abiding by this last criterion, we have frequently stifled the cries of the heart in order to give free passage only to what the intellect, enlightened by faith, fully consented to and approved. To many it will perhaps seem that we speak with too much caution and that on some points one could go further than we do; but in so difficult and dangerous a matter we prefer to maintain ourselves in a moderate and prudent zone, frankly far from the borders of error.

The path we are going to follow is the following: First, we will examine the Gospel passage in which the very question heading this chapter is asked. Next, we will set forth the reasons that seem to justify the moderate optimism of which we spoke above. And finally, we will examine the principal arguments of the rigorist thesis, which we will present in the form of objections, and which we will endeavor to resolve properly.

I. THE RESPONSE OF JESUS CHRIST

105. In the Gospel of Saint Luke there is a most interesting passage that expressly alludes to the problem we have posed. Let us first look at the Gospel text and then give its exegetical interpretation, to see its true scope and significance.

He was passing through towns and villages, teaching and making his way toward Jerusalem. Someone said to him, "Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?" He said to them, "Strive to enter through the narrow door, for I tell you that many will try to enter and will not be able. Once the master of the house gets up and locks the door, you will stand outside and knock on the door, saying, 'Lord, open to us.' He will answer you, 'I do not know where you come from.' Then you will begin to say, 'We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.' He will say to you, 'I do not know where you come from. Depart from me, all you evildoers!' There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, while you yourselves are thrown out. People will come from east and west, from north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. Indeed, those who are last will be first, and those who are first will be last" (Lk. 13:22–30).

This is the famous Gospel passage so often invoked by the partisans of the rigorist thesis. Let us now see its true meaning and scope according to the most eminent modern exegetes, who perfectly know the thought of the Holy Fathers and the sentiment of all Christian tradition:

FR. LAGRANGE: "Jesus was on his way when a question was put to him that still causes anxiety in many souls, precisely because the Master did not wish to reveal the Father's secret. He has told us what it was useful for us to know. Someone who seems quite sympathetic and had gladly listened to the Master's words asked him: "Lord, are only a few going to be saved?" This preoccupation is frequent among the rabbis. Eternal salvation was thought of, above all, that of the Israelites, because the others had deserved their perdition and people almost rejoiced at it. In principle, it was admitted without difficulty that all Israelites faithful to reciting their profession of faith would be saved; but despite this, there were some very guilty ones and also infidels. Jesus' answer has three points: salvation demands effort; salvation is not possible without obedience to God; the Gentiles will be admitted, while the Jews will be rejected." 2

FILLION: "The question, purely theoretical in its presentation, was idle and a matter of mere curiosity. Jesus would certainly have wished it to be formulated in these terms: "Lord, what must one do to be saved?...
Without answering directly, the Savior nevertheless does so in an entirely practical way, indicating to his interlocutor and to the whole audience the path to follow to attain salvation...
Thus, regarding an abstract, useless question, the divine Master brings his hearers into themselves, to excite in them a lively interest in their own salvation. What does it matter, from a practical point of view, whether few or many are saved? The essential thing for each person is to form part of the number of the elect, and this result will not be reached except at the price of efforts." 3

MARCHAL: "Whoever thus interrogated Jesus... thought, in posing this question, of his compatriots, because he could not suppose that the pagans could have a part in blessed eternal life. Not wishing to reveal the mystery of the large or small number of the elect, Our Lord, without answering directly, will announce to the face of his entire audience two conditions of salvation: effort and obedience to God, and will affirm the possibility of salvation for the Gentiles and of condemnation for the Jews. This was the true means of inviting his audience to reflect. The theoretical question of the small or large number of the elect has no interest for practical life; what matters is knowing what must be done to be part of the number of the elect." 4

RICCIOTTI: "The question put to Jesus reflected the opinion then widespread in Judaism that the elect were far fewer in number than the reprobate. Jesus neither rejects nor approves this opinion, but merely invites people to strive to enter the banquet hall, access to which is not easy. It is true that the questioner is a Jew, a member of the chosen people and compatriot of Jesus; but such a quality is of no use regarding obtaining preferential treatment." 5

NÁCAR-COLUNGA: "Jesus shuns answering the question of his disciples; but he teaches what we must do when dealing with a business as serious as that of our salvation. The latter demands effort, and to secure it one must do violence to oneself, because once excluded from the kingdom of heaven, there is no remedy." 6

BOVER-CANTERA: "The Master, without answering the rabbi's curiosity, warns him that neither all Jews nor they alone will be the ones who are saved. He teaches him, moreover, the way to be saved: personal effort and diligence, for the door is narrow and a time will come when it will be closed. Finally, the entry of the Gentiles and a certain primacy over the mass of Jews is prophetically announced." 7

Enough. The citations of the exegetes could be multiplied greatly, but it is unnecessary. It is quite clear that Our Lord did not wish to answer the question put to him. Leaving completely aside the question of the number of the saved, he prudently limited himself to giving practical norms to effectively secure eternal salvation. It is undoubtedly true that salvation demands effort and that the most prudent and safest course is to enter through the narrow door of the full fulfillment of God's law, which is the only one that leads to life. Whoever mistakes the way and remains outside when the master of the palace closes the door invokes in vain having known the Lord: he will remain outside forever. Will many or few remain outside in this manner? Absolutely nothing is told us in the sacred text.

Precisely because nothing can be concluded from that Gospel passage, Our Lord's silence has been interpreted in such diverse ways. Fr. Monsabré summarizes the two extreme opinions in the following paragraph, delivered in one of his masterly conferences at Notre-Dame de Paris:

"The rigorists may tell me that Jesus Christ hides the mystery of his justice here so as not to trouble timid souls; I believe rather that he hides the mystery of his mercy to make us avoid presumption." 8

Be that as it may, the truth is that from the aforementioned Gospel passage nothing can be concluded regarding the problem before us. If we want to find a little light to resolve it to the extent possible, it is necessary to draw upon other clearer and more probative arguments. 9

This is what, with all humility and modesty, we propose to attempt in the following pages. We sincerely believe that theology will never find an entirely clear and categorical answer to the passionate evangelical question, but it seems to us that it is perfectly licit for the theologian to try to shed a little light on so distressing a problem that robs so many sincerely Christian souls of their tranquility and sleep. If we believed that this question is mere and pure curiosity and leads to nothing practical, we would be very careful not to raise it, and with even greater reason still if we believed that it could prove harmful or dangerous to anyone.

Does the silence of the One who could have resolved it definitively and forever invite us to silence as well? It seems to us that the argument does not hold, precisely because it proves too much. A categorical response from Our Lord would have inevitably led to one of the two results pointed out by Fr. Monsabré in the quote we just gathered: either terrible discouragement, had it been rigorist, or intolerable presumption, if salvation affected the vast majority of men. There is no danger, on the other hand, of reasonably arriving at either of these results if we are the ones who venture to answer the Gospel question; because, however strong and decisive the reasons we allege in one direction or the other may seem, it will always be true that they are perfectly fallible and subject to error, and therefore cannot reasonably lead the soul to despair or presumption, since the reality of things could be absolutely against the particular theory that has impressed our soul. "Christ would have made a dogma; I do no more than state an opinion" (Fr. Lacordaire).

Accordingly, we are going to set forth the reasons that seem to us to justify a moderate optimism in the solution of this distressing problem. We completely renounce establishing mathematical calculations or pointing out concrete numbers, which would be devoid of all foundation and would argue reckless audacity and presumption. We aspire solely to set forth the main reasons that seem to us to tip the balance in favor of a moderate optimism, the true numerical scope of which absolutely no one could precisely define.

II. THE OPTIMISTIC SOLUTION

The main reasons to arrive at an optimistic solution are the following, which we will set forth in the order in which we state them:

1. The infinite mercy of God.
2. The very justice of God.
3. The universal salvific will.
4. The mystery of divine predestination.
5. The superabundant redemption of Jesus Christ.
6. The intercession of Mary, advocate and refuge of sinners.
7. The subjective responsibility of sin.
8. The pains of purgatory.

After explaining these ideas, we will examine in the form of objections the principal arguments of the rigorist thesis, to which we will give the appropriate answer.