What of the Man on the Island?

One of the most controversial topics in the Christian world is regarding the fate of non-Christians.

Is God really going to condemn every single person who did not come to a conscious belief in the Christian faith?  

The question presents a conundrum for Christians who love God and take their faith seriously.   On the one hand you want to affirm the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation.  On the other hand, you want to affirm the unlimited mercy and love of God.  Considering the fate on non-Christians seems to drive a wedge between the two beliefs.

This is especially the case when we’re considering the fates of decent people for whom hearing the Gospel was completely impossible or for whom believing it is an unreasonable expectation.

That is what I wanted to look at today.  What principles can the Bible give us when considering this problem?  And how is this reflected in the teaching of the Catholic Church?



“The Man on the Island”

The dilemma is typically incarnated as the “Man on the Island”. The Man on the Island has been on an island all his life.  He is a moral, honest, and decent person.  He has never heard about Jesus and is not a Christian.  What becomes of this man?

I’ve sat across from a man who assured me, with 100% certainty, that the Man on the Island is going to hell.  He sent me to the Gospel of John, which contains these two passages:

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” - John 3:18

“I am the way, the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.” – John 14:6

And to the Gospel of Mark, which says:

"And He said to them, 'Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned." - Mark 16:15-16

On face value, those passages seem to resolve the fate of the Man on the Island.  It seems he drew a losing number in the salvation lottery.  He never had a chance.  He was doomed from the moment of his birth for reasons completely beyond his control.

That idea would seem to comport with a strict adherence to the Calvinist doctrine of Double Predestination.  Namely, the idea that God creates some people for the sole purpose of damning them - never giving them a chance.

(People actually believe this)

Created for Hell?

But is that the whole truth?

Many Christians find that doctrine difficult to reconcile with a benevolent God.  It seems arbitrary and cruel.  It also seems to run counter to something Paul said in his letter to Timothy:

“First of all, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people. … This is good and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” – Timothy 2:3

And what Saint Peter said:

“The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” - 2 Peter 3:9

The plainest reading of those two passages (and tons of others) would indicate that on some level God does not desire for anyone to be damned.  It likewise seems illogical for God to desire something and then set up a situation in which it cannot possibly occur.

So perhaps there is more that can shed light on the issue.



What are People Expected to Know?

Let’s start with another question:  What does God expect us to know without anyone telling us?  To answer that question, we’ll turn to the beginning of Paul’s letter to the Romans.  In that section of his letter he speaks of what God reveals to us about Himself through nature:

“For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.  Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.  So they are without excuse.” – Romans 1:19-20

So if we use right reason and observe the world around us, we should be able to conclude that some kind of eternal deity exists.  This is reflected in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which reads:

"Created in God's image and called to know and love him, the person who seeks God discovers certain ways of coming to know him. These are also called proofs for the existence of God, not in the sense of proofs in the natural sciences, but rather in the sense of converging and convincing arguments, which allow us to attain certainty about the truth. These 'ways' of approaching God from creation have a twofold point of departure: the physical world, and the human person."  - CCC 31

However, we might not be aware that this is the God of Abraham who was incarnate in Jesus Christ.  Paul later says somebody needs to tell us that:

“How then will they call on Him in Whom they have not believed?  And how are they to believe in Him of Whom they have never heard?  And how are they to hear without someone preaching?  And how are they to preach unless they are sent?” – Romans 10:14-15 

So while it is reasonable to expect a person to arrive at Deism or Theism, it is nevertheless unreasonable  to expect a person to believe in the Christian revelation without first being told about it.

This introduces an important factor into figuring out the fate of the Man on the Island.  While he may not believe in God’s complete revelation, we can recognize that he might not be culpable – or responsible – for not believing.

But… does God care about our culpability?



Inculpable Ignorance in Scripture:

The first place I’d look is an analogy Jesus made about two servants who had different levels of knowledge regarding their master’s will.  They received treatments proportional to what they knew:

“And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating.  But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating.” – Luke 12:47-48

There is also what Jesus said regarding the guilt of people who were rejecting Him:

“If I had not come and spoken to them they would not have been guilty of sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin.” – John 15:22

We see something similar in the teaching of Saint Paul.  When Paul preached in the Areopagus, he famously used the temple to the “unknown god” as a way to introduce people to the true God.  When he did this, he made a statement about God “overlooking” the people’s lack of knowledge about Him:

“Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.” - Acts 17:29-30

Lastly, we have this explanation from Paul regarding the judgment of those who don’t know what God expects of them.  He suggests that their ignorance and their consciences may excuse them:

“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.  They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.” – Romans 2:14-16 

Looking Back:

With these statements in mind, let’s return to the verse from John’s Gospel which seemed to doom the Man on the Island:

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” - John 3:18

"And He said to them, 'Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned." - Mark 16:15-16

How are we to understand these in light of these subsequent statements?  The key is the distinction between disbelief and ignorance.  The former is an act of the will by which a person chooses not to love God.  The latter is not.  Therefore, there is a difference between the person who has heard the Gospel and rejected it, and a person who simply has not heard it.

So where does leave us?  It shows us that a person may be ignorant of the Gospel, but God can still be working in that person’s life.  We can’t judge any particular case or dare to guess at numbers, but the possibility exists that a person in this situation can be acceptable to God.

In fact, we even have an example of this in the book of Acts.  Starting in Chapter 10 we learn of a Roman centurion named Cornelius who hasn’t heard the Gospel.  However, we learn that his prayers are heard by God (Acts 10:4) and that he is considered “righteous and God-fearing” (Acts 10:22).

The Catholic Church's Stand:

So how does the Catholic Church put this together?

A good summary can be found in one of the documents produced by the Second Vatican Council.  It reads:

"Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. 

Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found among them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.  She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.  

But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator. Or some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. 

Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, 'Preach the Gospel to every creature', the Church fosters the missions with care and attention." – Lumen Gentium, 16

For more, one could also read paragraphs 845-848 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Note, however, (and this is important), the Church is by no means saying people who are invincibly ignorant of the Gospel are automatically saved.   It is only presenting a possibility of their salvation.  And if they are saved, it is only because they have responded to grace according to what they knew.



Open Questions:

None of this is to say every relevant question has been answered by the Church.  There are still important questions which have no definitive answer.  These are areas where observant Catholics are free to disagree.


Can an Atheist be in good conscience?

Back in Romans 1, Paul mentioned that God has made Himself evident in the things which He has made.  Therefore, he concluded, "they are without excuse".

On the face of it, this would seem to indicate that those who deny the existence of God are... well... without excuse.  So is it possible to be an Atheist who is inculpably ignorant?


At what point does one become culpable?

Imagine two people.  The first has only heard of the Gospel as some absurd thing which people believe in a faraway land.  And most of what he knows about it is inaccurate.  He has never heard it in detail from an actual believer and has never heard any evidence for it.

Compare him to a person who has had the Gospel explained in great detail and supported by a reasonable amount of evidence - and yet does not believe it.

Clearly there is a difference in culpability between the two.  The first may be excused for never really hearing the Gospel.  The second... likely not.  So where does one transition into the other?


What proportions are we talking about?

Even if it is possible for a person to be saved while inculpably ignorant of the Gospel, the next question is... how many?  Keep in mind how Jesus says in Matthew's Gospel:

“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road is easy that leads to destruction, and there are many who take it. For the gate is narrow and the road is hard that leads to life, and there are few who find it." - Matthew 7:13-14

So how optimistic are we allowed to be?



The Sovereign AND Loving Judge:

Let's conclude.

We know that the only way to the Father is through the Son.  But Jesus is both sovereign and merciful.  If He wants to excuse someone’s ignorance and save him out of a free act of mercy, who am I to argue?  

I believe the Man on the Island is not necessarily screwed.  His situation is perilous, but not hopeless.  The only appropriate Christian response to the question of his salvation is silence.

And to build a boat.

Thank you for joining me.