26
it to be true. Finally, one wonders how this approach can be harmonized with Pauls
contentions in Romans 1, where he argues that all persons have an awareness through conscience
and nature of the existence and nature of the one true God--one assumes this would include the
atheist--and that to reject that God in favor of the creation results in condemnation.
4) A weak view of sin: A final critique is that this theology presents a view of sin which is
ultimately quite weak. With all of the grace and salvation granted not only to sinners who have
never heard of Christ, but even to atheists and members of other religions who know of Christ
and consciously reject him, one wonders, perhaps crassly but honestly, does anyone go to hell in
current Roman Catholic theology? The catechism is clear that those who die in mortal sin are
lost and condemned to hell. But the bar for mortal sin is high indeed. Mortal sin is rejection of
the mercy of God and refusal to repent and be converted. Moreover, it must be done with full
knowledge and deliberate intent of the will. Bottom line, the only person who is condemned is
the person who knows, both by intellectual awareness and conscience, that Jesus Christ is the
only way to God and rejects him anyway. Thus, sin and its consequences are effectively
nullified by ignorance and by a conscience too culturally conditioned to believe in Christ.
At the end of the day, even though these documents are not aimed at Evangelicals, should
we consider them a step toward further communion with our Catholic brothers and sisters? Yes,
definitely, if not without some reservations. Despite continued support of Catholic ecclesial
exclusivity on the one hand and even further leanings towards universalism on the other, the
reaffirmation of the centrality of Christ along with an expanding openness to the presence of the
grace of Christ in other religious traditions increases our hope for unity, even in the midst of
serious disagreement.