8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

1/14

Journal of EcumenicalStudies,462,Spring 2011

ALVIN PLANTINGA ONRELIGIOUS PLURALISM: A

CATHOLICAPPRAISAL

GlennB.Siniscalchi

PRECIS

The Protestant philosopher Alvin Plantinga has maintained that exclusivism

might help Christians to become more confident of the truth of Christianity in re-

sponse to religious pluraliste such as John Hick. Although Plantinga has not spelled

out the details of "belief producing processes," which must function properly in or-

der for Christians to become more confident of Christian beliefs, Lumen gentium14

sheds significant light on the dilemma by declaring that salvation becomes moredemanding for those who have been exposed to the gospel, not easier to attain. The

author's explication and defense ofLumengentium 14withinthe context of contem-

porary debates in the theology of religions resolves Plantinga's proposal by stressing

and defending the importance of analogical thinking for the purposes of interrelig

iousapologetics. Thus, a certain understanding of religious exclusivism does seem to

increaseone's confidence in the truth of Christianity.

Theproblem ofreligiouspluralism dejure isone of themost daunting prob-lems that Christiansare nowfacing.1 Ifthe fundamental beliefs ofChristianity

are true,then anybeliefs inopposition tothem must befalse. There can be no

'SeeAlvinPlantinga, "Christian Philosophy atthe Endofthe20th Century," m SanderGriffioen and BertM Balk, eds,Christian Philosophy attheCloseof theTwentiethCentury Assment andPerspective (Kampen, Netherlands Uitgevenj Kok,1995), 39,where hewrote "Fi-nally, pluralist objections tootrouble many Christians,especially Christian academics and others

who are acutelyawareofsomeoftheother major religionsoftheworld Thisissomethingofa new

orrevitalizedworry forthe Christian community,as aresultwehavejustbegun toworkat it andthinkaboutit ButI venture to predict that these pluralist objections willloomlargein the nextseg-mentofouradventure as Christians"

Glenn Siniscalchi (Catholic)is aPhD student insystematic theology atDuquesne University,Pittsburgh, PA HereceivedanMA in theology from Saint Mary Seminary andGraduateSchoolofTheology, WicklifTe,OH,in2007, and holdsa A from WestVirginia University, Morgantown,WV Healsocompleted Certification inSpecial Education, Learning Disabilities, from the Univer-sityofNorthCarolina at Charlotte During Spring, 2011, heisan adjunct faculty member atSt Jo-seph's University, Philadelphia, PA Hetaught religion atNorthCatholic High SchoolinPittsburgh,200708 Hetaught previously as aparaprofessional orspecial education teacher at schools in

Woosterand Cleveland, OH, Monroe, NC,and Deptford and Camden, NJ Hehasmade presenta-tionsat adozen conferences and professional societies since 2008, including the originalversionofthe present essay for the National Conference of the Evangelical Philosophical Society in Atlanta

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

2/14

230 JournalofEcumenical Studies

denying this obvious fact. If persons can be saved outside of Christ, then the

church has obviously erred for centuries about its central belief in the one me-

diator between God and humanity, casting God's sovereignty into serious doubt.

Another belief that is called into question by the problem of religious pluralismhasto do with the traditional attributes of God. If God is benevolent and om-

nipotent, then why would God prevent so many individuals and even groups of

people from hearing the Good News within their earthly lifetime? How could

God fault these persons for not acceptingJesusChrist and send them to hell?

Alvin Plantinga is one of the most reputable Christian apologists writing

today. Many Christians credit him with significant arguments that have helped

toretrieve the discipline ofapologetics.Although he has not spent much time in

the field of interreligious apologetics, he has published awellknpwnarticle in

response to religious pluralism. He seeks to resolve the dilemmas of pluralistssuch as John Hick by addressing both moral and epistemological challenges to

religious exclusivism. At the end of his celebrated essay, Plantinga boldly con-

tended:

A fresh or heightened awareness of the facts of religious pluralism couldbringabout a reappraisal ofone'sreligious life, a reawakening, a new or re-newed and deepened grasp and apprehension of(1)[beliefinatheisticGod]and (2) [namely, God has revealed Godself inChrist].From Calvin's per-

spective, it could serve as an occasion for a renewed and more powerfulworking of the beliefproducing processes by which we come to apprehend(1)and (2) In that way knowledge ofthefacts of pluralism could initiallyserveas adefeater, but in the long run have precisely the opposite effect

3

Thus, Plantinga holds that a reflection on the facts of pluralism might even-

tually make Christians more confident in their exclusivistic understandings of

faith. Though he did not spell out the details of "belief producing processes"in

regard to the debate between pluralists and exclusivists, the Catholic Church

sheds light on the same idea. The Second Vatican Council put it this way: "Allchildren of the Church should . . . remember that their exalted condition results,

not from their own merits, but from the grace ofChrist.If they fail to respond in

thought,wordand deed to that grace, not only shall they not be saved, but they

shall be the more severelyjudged."4For those who have been exposed to the

truth, salvation becomes more demanding, not easier to attain. Religious exclu-

sivism remains compatible with a certain type of exclusivism. Catholic doctrine

2Alvin Plantinga, "Pluralism A Defense of Religious Exclusivism," in Thomas D Senor, ed ,The Rationality of Belief and the Plurality ofFaith Essays in Honor of William Alston (Ithaca,

NY and London Cornell University Press 1995) pp 191 215 The same essay has been repro

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

3/14

AlvinPlantinga on Religious Pluralism: A Catholic Appraisal 231

insists that hearing the gospel is merely a sign that God is calling one to deeper

relationship with Godself, not that persons outside the Church cannot be saved.

Conciliar teaching is not in opposition to exclusivism as Plantinga has defended

it,and it seems to relieve his worry that pluralism might serve as an undercutting

defeater of religious exclusivism.5 More importantly, it seems to vindicate his

belief that exclusivism, if understood in a certain way, might increase one's con-

fidence in the truth of Christianity. This essay also seeks to honor one of the

greatest contemporary apologists by shedding some light on his philosophical

insights within the context of an ecumenical dialogue with a Catholic theolo-

gian.6

Salvation Outside and inside the Church

From the outset, I would like to posit a divineaccountability principle. This

principle refers to the particular moral standard that God lays down within the

depths of each person's conscience. The principle is not indiscriminatingly bind-

ing on every person but is relative from one person to the next. So, it is not as

black and white as some may think, for only God knows each individual's cir-

cumstances and works in each person's life accordingly. Various factors con-

tribute to the principle: life experience,upbringing, personality, culture, friend-ships, genetics, political environment, educational experiences, etc. Vatican II

endorsed this theological principle inAd gentes:

This task which must be carried out by the order of bishops, under the

leadership of Peter's successor and with the prayers and cooperation of the

whole Church, is one and the same everywhere and in all situations, although,

because of circumstances, it may not always be exercised in the same way.

The differences which must be recognized in this activity of the Church, do

not flow from the inner nature of the mission itself, but from the circum-

stancesin which it is exercised.These circumstances depend either on the Church itselfor on the peoples,

classes or men to whom its mission is directed. Although the Church pos-

sesses in itself the totality and fullness of the means of salvation, it does not

always, in fact cannot, use every one ofthemimmediately, but it has to make

beginnings andworkby slow stages to give effect to God's plan. Sometimes

after a successful start it has cause to mourn a setback, or it may linger in a

state of semifulfillment and insufficiency. With regard to peoples,classes

and men it is only by degrees that it touches and penetrates them and so raises

them to a catholic perfection. In each situation and circumstance a proper line

of actionand effective means should be adopted 7

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

4/14

232 Journal of Ecumenical Studies

Notice that the Council Fathers still draw a distinction between objective

truth and error, but the major point underscored by them has to do with the

means by which the grace of God is appropriated to each person's life. It cannot

be denied that God works in different ways in each person's life. According toVatican II, the reason why God works in different ways is due to the individual,

unique circumstances that each person faces.No one is exactly like anyone else.

Given these radical contingencies and acute challenges, the only thing Christians

can do in terms of the problem of religious diversity is to follow Christ's teach-

ing to the best of their abilities. Part of following Christ's teaching consists in

persuading others unto the gospel. As Francis Sullivan has pointed out:

The second momentous change was the droppingof the statement that

only Roman Catholics are really (reapse)members of Christ's church. Now,instead of saying that only Catholics arereallymembers of the church, the

text of LG 14 says that only those Catholics arefully incorporated in the

church who arelivingin thestateofgrace.This change signifies a break with

the idea that belonging to the church is an "eitheror," "allornothing"

proposition. It introduces the idea of different degrees of fullness of incorpo-

ration in the church, applying this in the first instance to Catholics them-

selves. But if some Catholics are more fully incorporated than others, it

would seem logical to acknowledge degrees of incorporation in the church on

the part of other Christians as well, since baptism has always been seen as the

sacrament by which one becomes a member of the church.8

So, not everyone who professes membership in another religion truly be-

longs to that religion but is somehow oriented toward Christ and is en route to

salvation.Within this frame of reference, Catholics should recognize that many

whowill receive eternal salvationwillconsist of persons that many did not think

would receive it. It is not unrealistic to think that therewill be more individuals

who will be saved who lived their entire earthly lives outside of the visible, ca-

nonical boundaries of the Church than those who spent their entire lives inside

it.As Eugene Hillman has suggested:

if there are degrees of holiness among Christians, then we would assume that

these same degrees may be actual also among those who, because of their

historical situation and through no fault of their own, cannot have explicit

faith and historical belief in Jesus Christ. God truly wills the salvation of

every member of the human race, not just those who happen to be born in the

right time and place.9

Conscientiously informed Catholics are held to a much higher standard tolive out their calling in Christ; they will bejudged much more strictly. As long

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

5/14

AlvinPlantinga on Religious Pluralism* A Catholic Appraisal 233

this way, St. Augustine's evaluation of salvation extraEcclesiamrings true to

this day: "many who appear to be without are within, while many who appear to

be within are without."10

It is not to be overlooked that, if someone suspects that

Catholicism is the one true religion, then the honest thing for one to do is pursue

one's questions. Mental reservations or moral hesitationswill not fool an all

knowing God. Vincible ignorance can certainly be overcome.

Let us now draw some conclusions in this section. Salvation is more de-

manding for those who have been exposed to Christianity. Those who have not

been exposed to the gospel can still be saved, but they are not as accountable to

live up to the standard that God has given them through nature and conscience.

Corresponding with the demands of the divineaccountability principle within

this lifetime are the different degrees of final rewards and punishments. On theone hand, some heavenly rewards are greater than others(Mt. 16:27;Rom. 2:6;

1Cor. 3:8; Heb.6:10;2 Jn. 1:8; Rev.2:23, 20:1213,22:12).Conversely, there

are differing degrees of loss in hell (Mt. 11:2024; Lk. 12:4248;Heb. 10:28

29;Jas.3:12;2Pet.2:2022).n Forthose who overcome manyobstacles,much

morewillbe given to them (compare1 Cor.10:13).For those who fail to live up

tothe standards that God has placed in frontofthem, much morewill be lost. In

thefinal analysis, God is not as concerned with whatsufferings we go through

asmuch as withhow wellwe go through them.

Exclusivism, Inclusivism, Pluralism,andBeyond

Probably the biggest difficulty for theologians who are working in the wider

ecumenism is to balance four wellestablished tenets in a convincing manner to

outsiders. These four tenetsinclude the following: (1)divinerevelation has been

given in Christ on behalf of all persons; (2) everyone whowill be saved in the

end is saved through Christ; (3) everyone has a fair chance to be saved; and (4)

Catholicsmustbringthe Good News to every person insofar as this is humanlypossible.

12Depart from any oftheselongstanding beliefs in the Catholic Church,

and one is no longer in communion with the Church.Addedto this challenge is

the Church's longstanding belief that it is the one true religion.13

But,why do some Christians set aside or depreciate at least one of the four

tenets for the sake of the others? For example, many theologians settle for a

"complementary" relationship between Catholicism and other religions, but they

l0

St Augustine,DeBaptismo,27 381'Noone has argued more convincingly for the complexities of heaven and hell than S Mark

Heim,in hisThe Depth of the Riches A Trinitarian Theology of Religious Ends(Grand Rapids,MI

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

6/14

234 Journal of Ecumenical Studies

forget that "complementarity" merely applies to those who are invincibly igno

rant ofthegospel.14

In other words, one can maintain a complementary relation

ship between Christianity and other religions, but the term "complementary"

needs to be clarified without ruining the impetus for mission work. In the hardsense of complementarity, God is working in the Church in one way. But, in the

other religions God is working in another way. In the soft sense of the term,

however, "complementarity" refers to Christianity and those who are being

saved who are not accountable to accept Christ and the Church.

One common reason for the depreciation ofatleast one ofthefour tenets is

that it is unfair for so many persons to be born in a time and place where the

gospel will never be available to them.15

The implication is that at least one of

the four tenets must be compromised. Sometimes these theologians (or philoso

phers) emphasize the salvific role that other religions have in and of themselves(which is simply not a Catholic option).

Undoubtedly, the Church affirms that God can use whatever good means

that God wants in order to save the lost. Other religions are not seen as unmiti

gated systems of evil but retain elements of goodness in them. However, accord

ing to Catholic teaching, the distinctive beliefs and practices of the other relig

ions are not seen as divinely inspired truths (for example, the Qur'n is not a di

vinely inspired book according to the Catholic Church). As Hillman wrote: "Re

ligions in themselves, interpreted and administered as they must be by sinners,are instruments of grace, but at the very same time they are also manifestations

of our need for grace. So each religion always requires purification of itself

through the repentance of its most faithful followers."16

Other religions may re

tain spiritual values that God can use to save those who are invincibly ignorant

of the gospel. God can save Muslims not through their beliefthatthe Qur'n is

divinely inspired but as a book that contains truths that are accessible to all per

sons,not as specially revealed religious truth.17

One might argue that the elements from non-Christian religions that God

uses to save persons incidentally coincide with the precepts ofthenatural morallaw.

18Salvation can be found in other religions but is definitely not of these re

ligions. James Fredericks has observed, "Nowhere in its documents does the

council unambiguously recognize the other religions as actual mediations of the

,4For theologianswho allow themselves to be interpreted in thehard senseofcomplementary

relationships between Christianity and otherreligions, see EwertCousins, "The Trinityand World

Religions," . / S 7 (Summer, 1970) 476-498, HowardR Burkle, "Jesus ChristandReligiousPlu

ralism," JES 16 (Summer, 1979) 457-471, Donald G Dawe, "Religious Pluralism and the

Church,"J ES 18 (Fall, 1981) 604-615 (see especiallypp 617 and 620, of theresponses by Vir

ginia Kaib Ratigan), and Roger Haight, "Trinity and Religious Pluralism," JES 44 (Fall, 2009)

525-540 (especiallypp 538-540)l5

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

7/14

AlvinPlantinga on Religious Pluralism: A CatholicAppraisal 235

saving grace of JesusChrist."19

Other religions are seen as participated forms of

mediation in the revelation that has been given to humanity in Christ.20

More-

over, the grace that comes through moral obedience to the natural law is chris

tological (for, every act of obedience to the natural law is synonymous with

obedience to Christ himself). All grace is christological, whether it comes

through obedience to the natural law or through faith in Christ. Doctrines in the

world's other religions that contradict Catholic distinctives are considered false

and ought to be rejected as such.

We see these unbalanced theologies of religion in many writings. Religious

pluralists such as John Hick serve as the best example of those who flaunt the

unfairness of God in the face of so many different and contradictory religious

claims, denying the first tenet and depreciating the fourth.

21

In defense of hispluralist hypothesis, Hick wrote in theJournal of Ecumenical Studies:

The main data that need to be understood are: (1) In the vast majority of

casesthe religion to which anyone adheres depends on where they wereborn

. (2) Each ofthe historical religionsseems,as far as we can tell, to produce

equally good and equally bad human beings, an equal proportion of saints

and sinners. (3) Each ofthe historical traditions has developed an explicit or

implicit claim to be uniquely superior to all the rest. In thecaseof Christian-

ity, for example, the claim (developed after Jesus'own time) is that he was

Godthat is, God the Son, second person of adivine Trinityincarnate.This implies that Christianity alone was founded by God in person and so

must be superior to all other religions.22

Hick prematurely concluded that all religions are unequivocal, equal paths

to salvation.23

He and Paul Knitter have made "a move away from insistence on

the superiority or finality of Christ and Christianity toward a recognition of the

independent validity of other ways."24

These pluralistsworkwith the assumption

that advocates of Christian uniqueness must always affirm that God loves only

those who accept God's love explicitly. Basing its teaching on scripture andLumen gentium, the divineaccountability principle bringsthis complaint to rest,

which is now long overdue. Who affirmed that salvation was more likely to oc-

cur for those who have been exposed to Christ?When the accountability princi

l9James Fredericks, "The Catholic Church and the Other Religious Paths Rejecting Nothing

thatIsTrueand Holy,"TheologicalStudies64(June,2003)2332

Flannery, VaticanI1, Lumen gentium, no 62 pp4184192lPerhaps the most representative example of religiouspluralismto date(e,pluralismdejure)

isfound inJohn Hick,AnInterpretation of Religion Human ResponsestotheTranscendent,2nd ed(NewHaven, CT YaleUniversity Press,2005)

22

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

8/14

236 Journal of Ecumenical Studies

pie is explained, the strictly pluralist position is shown to rest on a false assump

tion. The phenomenon of holiness in other religions simply does not constitute a

challenge to the Catholic who is cognizant of the implications ofLumen gen

tium,no. 14.The second group is traditionally described as the exclusivists. This group

stresses the first tenet over the others (they tend to stress the fourth tenet as

well): Revelation has been given on behalf of all persons. Exclusivists affirm

that, unless one accepts revelation explicitly in faith, one will be lost forever.

This group seems to forget the third tenet: Salvation is equally accessible for all.

More important for our purposes is that exclusivists seem to forget that salvation

is more demanding for those who have been exposed to the Good News, not that

salvation comes more easily for believers. While exclusivists are quick to fault

the formally unevangelized for not being born in a time and place to hear andrespond favorably to the gospel, they equally fail to recognize that God is calling

themto accept Christ in a more personal and thus saving way.

This leaves us with the last camp, which is known as the inclusivists. Now,

if we frame the debate from within the typology of exclusivism, pluralism, and

inclusivism, we must admit that inclusivism has been the Catholic Church's of

ficial viewpoint.25

Vatican II approved oftheworld's religions in the sense that

they contain elements of truth that can dispose individuals to receive Christ if

they explicitly hear the gospel. Thus, the Church's "revolutionary stance" at

Vatican II did not lie in its affirmation that non-Christians could be saved but in

its refusal to call non-Catholics "pagans," "heathens," "idolaters," and the like.

Instead of openly criticizing views that are contrary or contradictory to Catholic

doctrine, Vatican II sought to find what is good and holy in other religions in

stead.26

There is a distinction between the substance of what is believed and the

way in which it is expressed. Vatican II did not override the content of tradi

tional Catholic belief but more or less changed its language about non-Catholic

religions. So, for the first time in conciliar history, a positive statement was as

cribed to other religions (albeit positive ascriptions were made by Christian

thinkers well before Vatican II).

The problem with inclusivism is that it can be abused as a theological

model, leading people astray from discipleship. For example, one can use the

inclusive model as an excuse to destroy the underlying rationale for missions by

positing what is known as "accessibilism" alongside of it, a highly speculative

notion that insists that most people in the world will be saved in the end. But, it

must be emphasized that the scriptures and the history of Christian thought sim

ply do not allow Christians to know how many people will be saved.27

For this

reason, the debate should focus more on the tri-polar classification in light of thefour established tenets.

28Thus, the debates surrounding the problem of who will

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

9/14

Alvin Plantinga on Religious Pluralism: A Catholic Appraisal 237

be saved in the end (that is, the debate on restrictivism, accessibilism, and uni-

versalism, which is formally distinct from the tri-polar classification of exclusiv

ism, inclusivism, and pluralism) are not helpful in discussing the credibility ofCatholic beliefs in light ofthefour established tenets. Inclusivism does not have

to be rejected because it is mistaken but because it can easily drive the conversa

tion in a direction that is harmful on the practical level unless it is conjoined

with the accountability thesis along with a proper understanding of faith, hope,

and love. As Stephen Duffy has keenly pointed out:

To maintain that Jesus is the decisive, constitutive bearer of salvation foroneself is to engage in sotenological, confessional language, a language

comparable tolove language That one experiences transforming power andultimacy in Jesus is not to disallow that one could experience it in othersources (though one may not, in fact) nor that, in fact, others experience it infigures and sources other than Jesus Thelanguage, again, issotenologi-

cal andconfessional, and the normativenessisfunctional,not metaphysical2

Response to Objectors

Let us now turn to the objections to the accountability thesis ofLumengen-tium,no. 14.

(1) The first objection is related to the rationale for mission work. These ob

jectors claim that, if persons can be saved outside of cognitive belief inthe Sav

ior, this will undercut the motivation for missions.30

It is understandable that some Catholics have wondered about the Church'sunderlying rationale for missions since Vatican II. However, one oftheprimary

goals of missions in Catholic thinking since the Council is qualitativeto trans

form the quality of living in all societies. There is a quantitative aspect as well

to save persons. There are at least four reasons to engage in mission work according to the papacy. In the first place, we are commanded by Christ to engage

in the Great Commission (Mt. 28:16-20). Second, it is only natural to becomeevangelical when one is truly born oftheSpirit. As Pope John Paul II once said,

faith increases (in oneself) when it is given to others. Third, the Magisterium

affirms that the fullness of revealed truth is to be found within the Catholic

Church alone. Although the fullness of the truth is found within the Church, this

would not mean that revealed truth from God is ever fully known. Correlatively,

the human person is made for the entire truth,notjust some ofit.Fourth, God is

glorified when Christians take up the missionary mandate. Persons remain rest

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

10/14

238 Journal of Ecumenical Studies

less in their hearts until they are given the opportunity to know and live out the

truth.

Positive communication of religious truth outside of Christianity is not seen

as complementary (this is said in the hard sense of the term "complementary")or parallel to the revelation that has been given in Christ. Finally, the objection

about undercutting the motivation for missionary work in face ofthepossibility

that outsiders can still be saved seems to forget that the issue of missions is

about what the Christian God is doing in the world, not what formal churches

and ecclesiastical communities alone are doing. Yves Congar once wrote that

the apostles were pressed, impelled, not so much bytheir love for Christ asbyChrist's love which, imparted to them, dwelt in their hearts and reinforced

their devoted lives, seeking through them to be spread over the world "It isfire that I have come to spread over the earth" (Luke xu 49) There is noneed to look for reasonstojustify love it ism itself able to impart good

32

Added to all this is the divine-accountability principle: If we are being saved,

then we would want others to know the Good News.

(2) This brings us to the next objection: Why would God allow some per

sons to know God more explicitly than the formally unevangelized? This objec

tion certainly carries some unnecessary theological baggage. As mentioned ear

lier, not everyone is called to the same tasks within one's lifetime. Nor can everyperson perform the same tasks as every other, given the debilitating circum

stances that each of us must face. "Such an objection" Gerald O'Collins rightlynoted, "does not reckon with the way in which the love of Jesus resembles hu

man love by not being exercised in an identical way towards all cultures, religions,and individuals. The risen Jesus lovingly interacts with the whole world,

and that means he interacts in ways that are different"33

There is, for instance, a

difference of kind (not of degree) that God has for the church through the Risen

Christ and the love God has as founder ofeachworld religion. Hence, there is an

analogy between God's love for the church and God's love for those who liveoutside its formal boundaries.34

Awareness of divine revelation reorders one's awareness of God's presence

in one's life and clarifies what is already implicitly known. Moreover, the objection that holds that the formally unevangelized are at a disadvantage to experi

ence God in Christ seems to smack ofafundamentalist understanding of exclu-

12

Yves Congar, TheWideWorld, My Parish Salvationand ItsProblems,tr Donald Attwater(London Darton, Longman&Todd, Baltimore,MD Helicon Press, 1961 [ong Vaste Monde ma

paroisse (Pans Tmoignage Chrtien)]), 131

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

11/14

AlvinPlantinga on Religious Pluralism: A Catholic Appraisal 239

sivism. But, there is more than one way to understand Christian uniqueness (and

its accompanying viewpoint, exclusivism).35

Hence, asking why Godwouldal-

low some persons to know God more explicitly than others seems similar to ask-

ing why God calls some to be professional theologians and other Christians to

stay at home and work as homemakers in service to one's children. In other

words, iftheseobjectors are to remain consistent with their position, theywould

have toaffirm that it is better to be a professional theologian than to be a home

maker. But, surely it is presumptuous to hold that theologians live with more

approval in the eyes of God (simply because they might be more cognitively

aware of church doctrine and practice) than Christian homemakers (I use these

illustrations without wanting toaffirm or defend universalism, the idea that all

willbe saved in the end). The point is that each person has a different functiontofulfill within the plan ofGod,who works all things out for the greater good. It

isnot to be overlooked that the accountability thesis does not mean that holiness

willalways be greater within the canonical boundaries of the Catholic Church.

Sometimes,holiness can be found outside its visible confines to a much greater

degree.

Natural evil and the challenge of religious diversity pertain to those persons

who have not heard the gospel because of natural forces that are beyond human

control,but these natural evils do not outweigh an overwhelmingly great good:

Somewillbe saved and eventually enjoy friendship with God in the greatest ofall possible worlds in heaven. God has providentially ensured through grace that

eachperson has the opportunity to be saved. Certainly, all people are held ac-

countable at different levels for different tasksduringtheir limited, earthly lives.

Vatican II affirmed that men and women are the only creatures in the universe

that God has willed for their own sake.36

His love for humanityhasindeedover-

comeall evils.Thus, hearing the gospel is merely an outward sign that God is

calling its hearers to greater relationship with Godself, not that God loves those

who hear the message more than those who are cognitively unaware ofit.Given

thenature of God's revelation, Catholics have the opportunity to point to some-thing tangible within the sphere of history to substantiate God's love for human-

ity. AsDei verbumannounces, Christ confirmsdivinerevelation and gives it a

historical, concrete expression.37

Moreover,a propositional awareness oftheSavior seems trivial in light of

this objection, given that all persons can receive eternal salvation. The formally

unevangelized are just as close to the crucified Christ (see Mt.27:46, for in-

stance: "My God, my God why have you forsaken me?") and have an equally

fair chance of receiving eternal life as any Christian who dares to claim the

name of Christ. Not only does a personal relationship with God go beyond cog-nitive categories, but from the perspective of eternity the problem of cognitive

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

12/14

240 JournalofEcumenical Studies

endorse universalism, the idea that allwill besaved in the end).

Conclusion

Framing the challenge of natural evil and religious diversity from a perspec-

tive that insists that Christians are more fortunate to have heard the gospel (and,

by implication, that theywill have a greater chance to be saved than those who

have not heard the gospel explicitly) is the wrong way to approach the dialogue

in the theology of religions. If one is constrained by a "wordhearingfaith"

paradigm, which is propounded by fundamentalistic advocates of exclusivism, it

willobviously be difficult for them toacceptthe argumentof thisessay.A better

paradigm was offered byKarlRahner.38

He held that theLogosis understood in

relation to all of reality, not just in relation to hearing the gospel, verbally spo-

ken.Logosdoes not loseverbalsignificance but is part ofthetotality of reality.

God is reaching everyone (pluralism) in Christ (exclusivism).39

As Maurice

Boutinstated in an earliernumberofthisjournal,"God's grace is notboundto

Christianity, but Christianity is bound to God's grace, which is for Christian

faith Christ's grace as well. As such, explicit Christianity is thefull realization

of God'sgrace."40

This theological framework makes it possible to move beyond fundamental-ist understandings of exclusivism into a paradigm of universal christological

grace. Though Plantinga has not said whether his version of exclusivism is a

strictexclusivism, meaning that no one can be saved outside of cognitive belief

in Christ, his arguments seem to allow for softer interpretations of exclusivism

thatare compatible with the argument ofthisessay (which, in turn, help to for-

tify his concern about "belief producing mechanisms").41

As the late Clark Pin

For more on Rahner's theology of the anonymous Christian, seeKarl Rahner, "Christianityand NonChristian Religions," inKarlRahner,Theological Investigations, vol 5 LaterWritings, tr

Karl Kruger(Baltimore,MD HeliconPress, 1966[ong Neuere Schriften (Einsiedein Benziger,

I960)]),pp 115134,idem, "Jesus Christ in NonChristian Religions," inKarlRahner,Foundations

ofChristianFaith AnIntroductionto theIdeaofChristianity,tr William V Dych (NewYork Se

aburyPress [A Crossroad Book], 1978 [ong Grundkursdes Glaubens Einfuhrung in den Begriff

desChristentums(Freiburg im Breisgau Verlag Herder,1976)]),pp 31132119

For a secondary source on Rahner's theology of the "anonymous Christian," see Maurice

Boutin, "Anonymous Christianity A Paradigm for Interreligious Encounter9"J E S 20(Fall,1983)

60262940Ibid,p 612

""Referring to Plantinga's essay in defense of exclusivism, Keith Mascord wrote "Plantinga'sdefence of exclusivism leaves open the question of which version of exclusivism is being de-

fended" (KeithMascord,AlvinPlantingaand Christian Apologetics,PaternosterTheologicalMono-

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

13/14

Alvin Plantinga on Religious Pluralism: A Catholic Appraisal 241

nock rightly observed:

[0]ne could say that my proposal is exclusivist in affirming a decisive redemption in Jesus Christ, although it does not deny the possible salvation of

non-Christian people. Similarly, it could be called inclusivist in refusing to

limit the grace of God to the confines of the church, although it hesitates to

regard other religions as salvific vehicles in their own right. It might even be

called pluralist insofar as it acknowledges God's gracious work in the lives of

human beings everywhere and accepts real differences in what they believe,

though not pluralist in the sense of eliminating the finality ofChristor falling

into relativism.42

I hope the present essay has resolved this issue for Plantinga by elaboratingupon the importance of analogical thinking for the purposes of interreligious

apologetics. A certain understanding of religious exclusivism does seem to in

crease one's confidence in the truth of Christian faith.

Christians should begin to wonder what they are doing to live a life of obe

dience in response to the gospel. Being a member of the church does not guaran

tee a person's salvation, nor does it make it easier for them to be saved. Cogni

tive ignorance does not constitute a deprivation of salvific grace, nor does cogni

tive ignorance entail a lack of divine fairness. We should not be so worried

about the millions of people who have not heard the gospel message as much as

we should be concerned about what God will do with us if we do not respond to

God's grace and attempt to reach the formally unevangelized with the gospel to

the best of our abilities.

8/12/2019 Alvin Plantinga Pluralism

14/14

^ s

Copyright and Use:

Asan ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission

from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific

work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,

or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association

(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American

Theological Library Association.