Page History

Scanned PDF Version of this Document

                                                                                                                                                                                    In What Sense(s) Am I a "Universalist"?unmigrated-wiki-markup

I am a "universalist" in _two_ senses: (1) in the sense that, as Hartshorne puts it, "in the depths of consciousness we feel and accept the divine ordering without which there could be nothing significant or definite," and that "the worst sinner \ [_sic_\] still does this in his imperfect way" ("_A New Look at the Problem of Evil_": 211); and (2) in the sense that every human being, however she or he may feel and accept "the divine ordering," authentically or inauthentically, is everlastingly embraced within the love and life of God.

But my "universalism" is evidently qualified in both senses. For, with respect to (1), the human response to God's universal ordering of all things is not itself universally the same because of the difference between "imperfect" and "perfect" (= "inauthentic" and "authentic") modes of feeling and accepting it; and with respect to (2), there ever remains even -- indeed, especially! -- in God's love whatever real difference there is between those who are authentic and those who are not. Although God's love is given freely and impartially to both, and both feel and accept it, however "imperfectly," it is given to the one as to the other as what they are, not as what they are not.

...