The Spirit Beyond Boundaries

“…It no longer consists in asking how much ‘supernatural’ truth can be said to be objectively contained in non-Christian scriptures. The only relevant question is: in the present order of salvation how do these scriptures subjectively convey to a non-Christian the universal influence of the Spirit?”¹

— James Dupuis, “The Cosmic Influence of the Holy Spirit and the Gospel Message,” pp. 117–138, in Gispert-Sauch, S.J. (ed.), God’s Word Among Men: Papers in Honour of Fr. Joseph Putz, S.J., Delhi: Vidyajoti, 1973, p. 136.

The Ambiguity of “the Present Order of Salvation”

Dupuis’s phrase “the present order of salvation” (p. 136) sounds clear until we ask which order he means. Within Christian theology itself, there is no consensus regarding the destiny of those who have never heard the gospel. A snapshot of the field shows competing models:

• Restrictivism (often called “exclusivism” by some): Salvation is only in Jesus Christ, and one must know the gospel and exercise faith before death to be saved. (Ronald H. Nash)²
• Inclusivism: Christ alone saves, but explicit knowledge of Christ is not necessary; God may grant salvation where people respond in faith to the light available through creation and conscience. (John Sanders)²
• Divine Perseverance / Postmortem Evangelization: Those who die unevangelized receive an opportunity to respond to Christ after death. (Gabriel Fackre)²

Even these three internal models disclose differing answers to the same question, while still affirming two central Christian convictions: God’s desire to save, and Jesus as the only Savior (the universal and the particular). Beyond them lie further proposals (summarized at pp. 13–14):²

• Complete Agnosticism: We do not have sufficient biblical data to reach a conclusion.
• “More Light” View: God sends the gospel to those who respond positively to general revelation—“more light to those who respond to the light they have.” (From Thomas Aquinas to Norman Geisler)
• Middle Knowledge (Counterfactual Mercy): God may save those whom He knows would have believed in Christ if they had heard the gospel.
• Final Option Theory: At the moment of dying (not after death), Christ encounters every person, offering a final opportunity for conversion. (Some Roman Catholic theologians)
• Optimistic Reserve: Confidence that God will save the vast majority, without specifying the mechanism. (John R. W. Stott)
• Negative Agnosticism: God may provide a way for some of the unevangelized, but we have no reason to think He will. (J. I. Packer)
• Classical Universalism: Ultimately all will be saved through Jesus. (e.g., Origen)
• Unitive Pluralism: Goes beyond universalism by rejecting Jesus as the unique Savior; major religions are valid paths to ultimate reality in their own right. (John Hick, Paul Knitter)

Given such divergence, “the present order of salvation” cannot be a stable or universal frame. Which “order” does Dupuis have in mind—the Evangelical restrictivist frame, post–Vatican II Catholic inclusivism, a hopeful Barthian horizon, or a pluralist reconstruction? The internal debate itself complicates any claim to a single “universal influence of the Spirit” mediated in one normative way.

Rethinking the Universal Spirit

If the Spirit is truly universal, its presence should manifest according to the needs and histories of diverse peoples. The Jewish scriptures bear one pattern of experience; Christian tradition bears another. To equate one community’s experience with universality itself risks shrinking the universal to the particular and implies—often unintentionally—that Christians alone are the Spirit’s guardians.

This narrowing persists when Christian theology remains captive to denominational frames or, in the Catholic case, to post–Vatican II documents that, while generous, still center a Christian lens³.

A Wider Horizon

A more credible universality appears not in boundary-claims but in aspirations that embrace all. The Upaniṣads offer such a vision, one that reaches beyond sectarian lines:

UNIVERSAL PRAYER

ॐ सर्वेषां स्वस्तिर्भवतु ।
सर्वेषां शान्तिर्भवतु ।
सर्वेषां पूर्णं भवतु ।
सर्वेषां मङ्गलं भवतु ॥
सर्वे भवन्तु सुखिनः ।
सर्वे सन्तु निरामयाः ।
सर्वे भद्राणि पश्यन्तु ।
मा कश्चिद्दुःखभाग्भवेत् ॥

Om, sarveṣāṁ svastir bhavatu.
Sarveṣāṁ śāntir bhavatu.
Sarveṣāṁ pūrṇam bhavatu.
Sarveṣāṁ maṅgalaṁ bhavatu.
Sarve bhavantu sukhinaḥ.
Sarve santu nirāmayāḥ.
Sarve bhadrāṇi paśyantu.
Mā kaścid duḥkhabhāg bhavet.

Translation
May all be blessed.
May all have peace.
May all be fulfilled.
May all experience goodness.
May all be happy.
May all be healthy.
May all perceive what is auspicious.
May none suffer unhappiness.

Conclusion

This prayer exemplifies a truly universal spirit—seeking the well-being of all, without exception. Any claim to exclusivity—Christian, Hindu, or otherwise—risks confining the Spirit within self-made boundaries. To recognize the Spirit beyond boundaries is to keep universality genuinely universal: inclusive, open, and expansive toward the whole human family.

Notes

1. James Dupuis, “The Cosmic Influence of the Holy Spirit and the Gospel Message,” in Gispert-Sauch, S.J. (ed.), God’s Word Among Men: Papers in Honour of Fr. Joseph Putz, S.J., Delhi: Vidyajoti, 1973, pp. 117–138, esp. p. 136.
2. Gabriel Fackre, Ronald H. Nash & John Sanders; ed. John Sanders, What About Those Who Have Never Heard? Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, InterVarsity Press, Illinois, esp. pp. 13–14.
3. Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, in W. M. Abbot & J. Gallagher (eds.), The Documents of Vatican II, New York: America Press, 1966.