Too Much of a Good Thing: Universal Salvation

"They were loved out of the Church."

Following the Second Vatican Council, there was a renewed emphasis on the love of God for humanity and His desire that all be saved. This, of course, is true and should be a focus by the Church at all times. The problem arises when any truth is taken to an extreme that reduces or denies another truth. It became popular to preach universal salvation, a heresy that denies the existence of Hell and states that all humanity will be saved. Universal salvation states that regardless of how we’ve lived our lives and how well we followed (or how strongly we’ve avoided) the teachings of Christ, we’ll be saved.

On top of the popularity of universal salvation, there was a renewed overemphasis on the meal aspect of the Mass. To be clear the Mass has always been held as a meal: the sacrificial meal through which we participate in both the Sacrifice of Calvary and the Heavenly Banquet. The focus became more on making the Mass into an earthly meal, with symbolism more common to a picnic or potluck. This led to innovations like gathering around the altar, using a coffee table for the altar and having everyone sit on the floor (including the priest!), and an overemphasis on socialization and community involvement. The focus of the Mass was no longer the Sacrifice of Christ, but rather the community that gathers to break the bread and share the cup.

This strong focus on the community led to such ideas as having the cantor begin Mass by inviting everyone to stand and “greet their neighbor”, allowing 5 minutes of socialization before the opening hymn; the priest having those visiting introduce themselves and say where they’re visiting from (which I always found embarrassing as a visitor, by the way); and the Sign of Peace going from a ritual in which ” the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament” with “those who are nearest and in a sober manner” (GIRM 82) to a 15 minute (yes, I’ve seen that) time of visiting and gladhanding throughout the Church.

A very good article by Fr. Cory Sticha.  Be sure to read all of it.

Let it be said, I am no radical Traditionalist.  Not that there is anything wrong with it - if the Latin Mass is what makes you feel comfortable to worship God at Mass, then I heartily approve of your choice, as if you even needed my approval.  On the other hand, I am comfortable with the Novus Ordo Mass in English.  It can be as solemn and as reverent as a TLM Mass.

But I will say, having come from the Diocese of Orange, I was getting tired of what I considered reducing the Mass to pablum - easily digested and no one goes away uncomfortable.  I am not saying that the Mass at my former parish was bad, but there were - and still are - things that I could do without.  I remember priests using the Sign of Peace to do a sort of "victory lap" up the center aisle on one side and down the other, which I was told was to allow the Eucharistic Ministers to prepare the altar (and I was one; that much time was not needed).  One priest, whom I loved dearly and, in fact, was my Confessor during his tenure, insisted on asking, "Do we have any visitors here?  Where are you from?" at the beginning of the Mass, which I found tedious (although he usually made up for it by giving a good Homily).  And the Eucharistic prayer - say it, properly chant it, but please do not sing it in a lilting sort of way, as it makes you and it sound effete.

But those are petty complaints.  The real issue is that this sort of thinking can make a priest become Mr. Nice Guy, such that his people will gush and say, "Oh, Father is so nice," without really giving thought to whether he is helping his people become holy.  Father never makes us feel uncomfortable.  Father never challenges us.  We are not really concerned with the dogma - a word that carries more of a negative feeling than actual definition for many Catholics - of the Church, well . . . because Father really isn't himself.  And so we get feel good platitudes in Father's homily and did we say he just so sweet?!

Does this mean a priest should be a rip-roaring bastard?  No, of course not.  It does mean that Father needs to work at making sure the Truth is taught and adapting that teaching accordingly for his audience.  So if Mrs. Rodriguez comes and tells Father how upset she is that her son is sleeping in on Sunday rather than coming to Mass on Sunday, and Senora has been lax herself with attendance, it is time to emphasize that she is failing in her obligation, both to attend Mass and raise her child in the faith, firmly, and then work out with her a plan of action.  Maybe she wonlt like that answer - but it's the right answer and has to be taught.

We all can get to Heaven.  But we not all will.

And Hell is hot.

Disclaimer: my descriptions are not based on any one priest that I have met at St. Joseph so don't anyone go running back to the Rectory to say, "Oh, Father, Stephani's saying bad things about you!"  I was a parishioner there for some 15 years, so my descriptions are based on a conglomeration of experiences and stories.  I love all my priests, even if I don't agree with their styles of pastoral care 100%.  And really, as if any priest gives a rat's ass what I think.  Though they should, mwa ha ha ha ha!