The Population of Hell

Avery Cardinal Dulles

Sometimes the complaint is heard that no one preaches about hell any longer. The subject of hell, if not attractive, is at least fascinating, as any reader of Dantes Inferno or Miltons Paradise Lost can testify. Equally fascinating, and decidedly more pressing, is the question of ho many of us may be e!pected to go there hen e die.

"s e #no from the $ospels, %esus spo#e many times about hell. Throughout his preaching, he holds forth t o and only t o final possibilities for human e!istence& the one being everlasting happiness in the presence of $od, the other everlasting torment in the absence of $od. 'e describes the fate of the damned under a great variety of metaphors& everlasting fire, outer dar#ness, tormenting thirst, a gna ing orm, and eeping and gnashing of teeth.

(n the parable of the sheep and the goats, %esus indicates that some ill be condemned. The Son of man says to the goats& )Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels* +Matthe ,-&./0. (n the $ospel of %ohn, hich says comparatively little about hell, %esus is quoted as saying& )The hour is coming hen all ho are in the tombs ill hear 1the 2athers3 voice and come forth, those ho have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those ho have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment* +%ohn -&,45,60.

The apostles, understandably concerned, as#ed& )7ord, ill those ho are saved be fe 8* 9ithout directly ans ering their question %esus replied& )Strive to enter by the narro door: for many, ( tell you, ill see# to enter and not be able* +7u#e /;&,;5,.0. (n the parallel passage from Matthe , %esus says& )Enter by the narro gate, for the gate is ide and the ay is easy that leads to destruction, and those ho enter by it are many. 2or the gate is narro and the ay is hard that leads to life, and those ho find it are fe * +Matthe <&/;5/.0. (n a parable immediately follo ing this e!change, %esus spea#s of those ho try to come to the marriage feast, but are told& )Depart from me, all you or#ers of iniquity. There you ill eep and gnash your teeth* +7u#e /;&,<5,40. (n another parable, that of the edding guest ho is cast out for not earing the proper attire, %esus declares& )Many are called, but fe are chosen* +Matthe ,,&/.0. Ta#en in their obvious meaning, passages such as these give the impression that there is a hell, and that many go there: more, in fact, than are saved.

The =e Testament does not tell us in so many ords that any particular person is in hell. >ut several statements about %udas can hardly be interpreted other ise. %esus says that he has #ept all those hom the 2ather has given him e!cept the son of perdition +%ohn /<&/,0. "t another point %esus calls %udas a devil +%ohn ?&<@0, and yet again says of him& )(t ould be better for that man if he had never been born* +Matthe ,?&,.: Mar# /.&,/0. (f %udas ere among the saved, these statements could hardly be true. Many saints and doctors of the Ahurch, including St. "ugustine and St. Thomas "quinas, have ta#en it as a revealed truth that %udas as reprobated. Some of the 2athers place the name of =ero in the same select company, but they do not give long lists of names, as Dante ould do.

Beferences to punishment after death in the remainder of the =e Testament simply confirm the teaching of the $ospels. (n the >oo# of "cts Caul says that those ordained to eternal life have believed his preaching, hereas those ho disbelieved it have judged themselves un orthy of eternal life +"cts /;&.?5.40. Ceters 2irst 7etter puts the question& )(f the righteous man is scarcely to be saved, here ill the impious and sinner appear8* +/ Ceter .&/40. The >oo# of Bevelation teaches that there is a fiery pit here Satan and those ho follo him ill be tormented forever. (t states at one point& )"s for the co ardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be the la#e that burns ith fire and brimstone, hich is the second death* +Bevelation ,/&40.

The testimony of Caul is comple!. (n his 2irst 7etter to the Thessalonians he spea#s of the coming divine judgment, in hich %esus ill inflict vengeance )upon those ho do not #no $od and upon those ho do not obey the gospel of our 7ord %esus. They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction and e!clusion from the presence of the 7ord* +/ Thessalonians /&65/@0. (n his epistle to the Bomans Caul says that the impenitent %e s are storing up rath for themselves on the day of judgment +Bomans ,&-0. (n riting to the Aorinthians he distinguishes bet een those ho are being saved by the gospel and those ho are perishing because of their failure to accept it +/ Aorinthians /&/40. (n a variety of te!ts he gives lists of sins that ill e!clude people from the #ingdom of $od +/ Aorinthians ?&65/@: $alatians -&/65,/: Ephesians -&;5?0. "nd he tells the Chilippians& )9or# out your salvation in fear and trembling* +Chilippians ,&/,0.

Some passages in the letters of Caul lend themselves to a more optimistic interpretation, but they can hardly be used to prove that salvation is universal. (n Bomans 4&/65,/ Caul predicts that )creation itself ill be set free from its bondage of decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of $od,* but the te!t seems to refer to the orld of nature: it does not say that all human beings ill achieve the glorious liberty in question. (n / Aorinthians /-&,4 Caul spea#s of all things being ultimately subjected to Ahrist, but he does not imply that subjection means salvation. 'e presumably means that the demonic po ers ill ultimately be defeated. (n Chilippians ,&65/@ he predicts that eventually every #nee ill bo to Ahrist and every tongue confess him. >ut this need not mean a confession that proceeds from love. (n the $ospels the devils proclaim that %esus is the 'oly Dne of $od, but they are not saved by recogniEing the fact.

Equally unavailing, in my opinion, are appeals to passages that say that $ods plan is to reconcile all things in Ahrist +Ephesians /&/@: Aolossians /&/65,@0. "lthough this is surely $ods intent, 'e does not override the freedom that enables men and omen to resist 'is holy ill. The same may be said of the statement that $od )desires all men to be saved and come to the #no ledge of the truth* +/ Timothy ,&.0. Caul is apparently see#ing to stimulate the apostolic Eeal of missionaries ho ill bring the saving truth of Ahrist to all ho do not yet believe. The absolute necessity of faith for salvation is a constant theme in the ritings of Caul. ( see no reason, then, for ran#ing Caul among the universalists.

The constant teaching of the Aatholic Ahurch supports the idea that there are t o classes& the saved and the damned. Three general councils of the Ahurch +7yons (, /,.-: 7yons ((, /,<.: and 2lorence, /.;60 and Cope >enedict F((s bullBenedictus Deus +/;;?0 have taught that everyone ho dies in a state of mortal sin goes immediately to suffer the eternal punishments of hell. This belief has perdured ithout question in the Aatholic Ahurch to this day, and is repeated almost verbatim in the Aatechism of the Aatholic Ahurch + CCC G/@,,, /@;-0. Several local councils in the Middle "ges, ithout apparently intending to define the point, state in passing that some have actually died in a state of sin and been punished by eternal damnation.

The relative numbers of the elect and the damned are not treated in any Ahurch documents, but have been a subject of discussion among theologians. "mong the $ree# 2athers, (renaeus, >asil, and Ayril of %erusalem are typical in interpreting passages such as Matthe ,,&/. as meaning that the majority ill be consigned to hell. St. %ohn Ahrysostom, an outstanding doctor of the Eastern tradition, as particularly pessimistic& )"mong thousands of people there are not a hundred ho ill arrive at their salvation, and ( am not even certain of that number, so much perversity is there among the young and so much negligence among the old.*

"ugustine may be ta#en as representative of the 9estern 2athers. (n his controversy ith the Donatist Aresconius, "ugustine dra s upon Matthe and the >oo# of Bevelation to prove that the number of the elect is large, but he grants that their number is e!ceeded by that of the lost. (n >oo# ,/ of his City of God he rebuts first the idea that all

human beings are saved, then that all the baptiEed are saved, then that all baptiEed Aatholics are saved, and finally that all baptiEed Aatholics ho persevere in the faith are saved. 'e seems to limit salvation to baptiEed believers ho refrain from serious sin or ho, after sinning, repent and are reconciled ith $od.

The great Scholastics of the Middle "ges are not more sanguine. Thomas "quinas, ho may stand as the leading representative, teaches clearly in theSumma Theologiae that $od reprobates some persons. " little later he declares that only $od #no s the number of the elect. >ut Thomas gives reasons for thin#ing that their number is relatively small. Since our human nature is fallen, and since eternal blessedness is a gift far beyond the po ers and merits of every created nature, it is to be e!pected that most human beings fall short of achieving that goal.

The leading theologians of the baroque period follo suit. 2rancisco SuareE, in his treatise on predestination, puts the question squarely& 'o many are saved8 Belying on the $ospel of Matthe , St. %ohn Ahrysostom, St. "ugustine, and Cope St. $regory, he proposes the follo ing estimation. (f the question is as#ed about all men living bet een the creation and the end of the orld, the number of the reprobate certainly e!ceeds that of the elect. This is to be e!pected because $od as not rightly #no n before the coming of Ahrist, and even since that time many remain in dar#ness. (f the term )Ahristian* is ta#en to include heretics, schismatics, and baptiEed apostates, it ould still appear that most are damned. >ut if the question is put about those ho die in the Aatholic Ahurch, SuareE submits his opinion that the majority are saved, since many die before they can sin mortally, and many others are fortified by the sacraments.

SuareE is relatively optimistic in comparison ith other Aatholic theologians of his day. Ceter Aanisius and Bobert >ellarmine, for e!ample, ere convinced that most of the human race is lost.

Several studies published by Aatholics early in the t entieth century concluded that there as a virtual consensus among the 2athers of the Ahurch and the Aatholic theologians of later ages to the effect that the majority of human#ind go to eternal punishment in hell. Even if this consensus be granted, ho ever, it is not binding, because the theologians did not claim that their opinion as revealed, or that to ta#e the opposite vie as heretical. =or is the opinion that most people attain salvation contradicted by authoritative Ahurch teaching.

Mention should here be made of a minority opinion among some of the $ree# 2athers. Alement of "le!andria, Drigen, $regory =aEianEen, and $regory of =yssa sometimes spea# as though in the end all ill be saved. Drigen, the most prominent representative of this vie , is generally reported as teaching that at the end of time, the damned, no repentant and purified, ill ta#e part in the universal restoration of all things + apokatastasis0. Three centuries after Drigens death his vie s on this and several other topics ere condemned by a local council of Aonstantinople convened by the Emperor %ustinian in a.d. -?;. Even in his lifetime, ho ever, Drigen claimed that his adversaries had misunderstood or misrepresented him. " number of distinguished scholars do n through the centuries have defended his orthodo!y on the fate of the damned. The doctrine of the eternity of hell has been firmly in place at least since the seventh century, and is not subject to debate in the Aatholic Ahurch.

"bout the middle of the t entieth century, there seems to be a brea# in the tradition. Since then a number of influential theologians have favored the vie that all human beings may or do eventually attain salvation. Some e!amples may be illustrative.

(n a )reverie* circulated among friends but not published until after his death, the philosopher %acques Maritain included hat he called a )conjectural essay* on eschatology, in hich he contemplates the possibility that the damned, although eternally in hell, may be able at some point to escape from pain. (n response to the prayers of the saints, he imagines, $od may miraculously convert their ills, so that from hating 'im they come to love 'im. "fter being pardoned, they ill then be delivered from the pain of sense and placed in a #ind of limbo. They ill still be technically in hell, since they ill lac# the beatific vision, but they ill enjoy a #ind of natural felicity, li#e that of infants ho die ithout baptism. "t the end, he speculates, even Satan ill be converted, and the fiery inferno, hile it continues to e!ist, ill have no spirits to afflict. This, as Maritain ac#no ledged, is a bold conjecture, since it has no support in Scripture or tradition, and contradicts the usual understanding of te!ts such as the parable of the 7ast %udgment scene of Matthe . >ut the theory has the advantage of sho ing ho the >lood of Ahrist might obtain mercy for all spiritual creatures, even those eternally in hell.

Harl Bahner, another representative of the more liberal trend, holds for the possibility that no one ever goes to hell. 9e have no clear revelation, he says, to the effect that some are actually lost. The discourses of %esus on the subject appear to be admonitory rather than predictive. Their aim is to persuade his hearers to pursue the better and safer path by alerting them to the danger of eternal perdition. 9hile allo ing for the real possibility of eternal damnation, says Bahner, e must simultaneously maintain )the truth of the omnipotence of the universal salvific ill of $od, the redemption of all by Ahrist, the duty of men to hope for salvation.* Bahner therefore believes that universal salvation is a possibility.

The most sophisticated theological argument against the conviction that some human beings in fact go to hell has been proposed by 'ans Irs von >althasar in his boo# Dare e !ope "That All #en Be Saved$% 'e rejects the ideas that hell ill be emptied at the end of time and that the damned souls and demons ill be reconciled ith $od. 'e also avoids asserting as a fact that everyone ill be saved. >ut he does say that e have a right and even a duty to hope for the salvation of all, because it is not impossible that even the orst sinners may be moved by $ods grace to repent before they die. 'e concedes, ho ever, that the opposite is also possible. Since e are able to resist the grace of $od, none of us is safe. 9e must therefore leave the question speculatively open, thin#ing primarily of the danger in hich e ourselves stand.

"t one point in his boo# >althasar incorporates a long quotation from Edith Stein, no Saint Teresa >enedicta of the Aross, ho defends a position very li#e >althasars. Since $ods all5merciful love, she says, descends upon everyone, it is probable that this love produces transforming effects in their lives. To the e!tent that people open themselves to that love, they enter into the realm of redemption. Dn this ground Stein finds it possible to hope that $ods omnipotent love finds ays of, so to spea#, out itting human resistance. >althasar says that he agrees ith Stein.

This position of >althasar seems to me to be orthodo!. (t does not contradict any ecumenical councils or definitions of the faith. (t can be reconciled ith everything in Scripture, at least if the statements of %esus on hell are ta#en as minatory rather than predictive. >althasars position, moreover, does not undermine a healthy fear of being lost. >ut the position is at least adventurous. (t runs against the obvious interpretation of the ords of %esus in the =e Testament and against the dominant theological opinion do n through the centuries, hich maintains that some, and in fact very many, are lost.

The conviction of earlier theologians that relatively fe are saved rests, ( suspect, partly on the assumption that faith in Ahrist, baptism, and adherence to the Ahurch are necessary conditions for salvation. The first t o of these conditions are clearly set forth in the =e Testament, and the third has been taught by many saints, councils, popes, and theologians. >ut these conditions can be interpreted more broadly than one might suspect. (n recent centuries it has become common to spea# of implicit faith, baptism )by desire,* and membership in the )soul* of the Ahurch, or membership in voto +)by desire*0. Jatican (( declares that all people, even those ho have never heard of Ahrist, receive enough grace to ma#e their salvation possible.

The Ahurch continues to insist that e!plicit faith, reception of the sacraments, and obedience to the Ahurch are the ordinary means to salvation. Cius (F in the Sylla&us of 'rrors +/4?.0 accordingly condemned the proposition& )9e should at least have good hopes for the eternal salvation of those ho are in no ay in the true Ahurch of Ahrist.* Cius F(( in his encyclical on the Mystical >ody of Ahrist + #ystici Corporis, /6.;0 taught that even those ho are united to the Ahurch by bonds of implicit desire5a state that can by no means be ta#en for granted5still lac# many precious means that are available in the Ahurch and therefore )cannot be sure of their salvation.* Jatican (( said that anyone ho #no s that the Aatholic Ahurch as made necessary by Ahrist and refuses to enter her cannot be saved. (f e accept these teachings, e ill find it unli#ely that everyone fulfills the conditions for salvation.

Cope %ohn Caul (( in his Crossing the Threshold of !ope mentions the theory of >althasar. "fter putting the question hether a loving $od can allo any human being to be condemned to eternal torment, he replies& )"nd yet the ords of Ahrist are unequivocal. (n Matthe s $ospel he spea#s clearly of those ho ill go to eternal punishment +cf. Matthe ,-&.?0.* "s justification for this assessment the Cope puts the rhetorical question& Aan $od, ho is ultimate justice, tolerate terrible crimes and let them go unpunished8 2inal punishment ould seem to be necessary to reestablish the moral equilibrium in the comple! history of humanity.

(n a $eneral "udience tal# of %uly ,4, /666, the Cope seems to have shifted his position, adopting in effect that of >althasar. "ccording to the English version of the te!t he said&

Ahristian faith teaches that in ta#ing the ris# of saying )yes* or )no,* hich mar#s the +human0 creatures freedom, some have already said no. They are the spiritual creatures that rebelled against $ods love and are called demons +cf. 2ourth 7ateran Aouncil0. 9hat happened to them is a arning to us& it is a continuous call to avoid the tragedy hich leads to sin and to conform our life to that of %esus ho lived his life ith a )yes* to $od.

Eternal damnation remains a possibility, but e are not granted, ithout special divine revelation, the #no ledge of (hether or (hichhuman beings are effectively involved in it. The thought of hell5and even less the improper use of biblical images5must not create an!iety or despair, but is a necessary and healthy reminder of freedom ithin the proclamation that the risen %esus has conquered Satan, giving us the Spirit of $od ho ma#es us cry )"bba, 2atherK* +Bomans 4&/-: $alatians .&?0

The last sentence refers to the hope of Ahristians for their o n salvation and cannot be used to support any theory of universal salvation. >ut the preceding sentence indicates at least an openness to the opinion that e may hope for the salvation of all.

"lthough the Cope may have abandoned his criticism of >althasar, a number of theologians remain opposed. (n a supplement to his boo#, >althasar himself reports that one revie er accused him of supporting )the salvation optimism that is rampant today and is both thoughtless and a temptation to thoughtlessness.* "t an international videoconference organiEed by the 'oly Sees Aongregation for the Alergy last =ovember, %ean $alot, ith an apparent reference to >althasar, said that the hypothesis of hell as a mere possibility )removes all effectiveness from the arnings issued by %esus, repeatedly e!pressed in the $ospels.* "t the same conference 2ather Michael 2. 'ull of =e Lor# contended that >althasars theory is )tantamount to a rejection of the doctrine of hell and a denial of mans free ill.* (n this country 2r. Begis Scanlon, D.2.M. Aap., accused >althasar of being a 'egelian relativist ho )smuggles into the heart of the Aatholic a serious doubt about the truth of the Aatholic faith.* Scanlon himself

ta#es it to be Aatholic teaching that some persons, at least %udas, are in fact eternally lost. This article set off an epic controversy bet een t o Aatholic editors, Bichard %ohn =euhaus and Dale Jree, both of hom came to Aatholic Ahristianity as adults.

=euhaus fired the opening salvo in the %uneM%uly ,@@@ issue of 2irst Things. Defending >althasar against Scanlon, he cited the passages from the CopesCrossing the Threshold of !ope mentioned above and referred also to his o n boo#, Death on a )riday Afternoon, in hich he had argued from several =e Testament te!ts that although e cannot be certain, e may indeed hope and pray for the salvation of all.

Dale Jree came bac# in the *e( +,ford -evie( ith an article titled )(f Everyone (s Saved . . . ,* defending Begis Scanlon and rejecting =euhaus e!egesis of the biblical te!ts he had quoted. 'e also claimed to have found a statement in =euhaus boo# that could be interpreted as implying that everyone ill be saved.

=euhaus responded in 2irst Things that Jrees attac# as based on a misrepresentation. 'e had never taught the doctrine #no n as universalism, namely that all ill be saved. 'e asserted only that e may hope that all ill ultimately come to salvation. This probably should have been the end of the matter, but Jree in the May ,@@/ issue of *+- insisted that he had not misread =euhaus boo# and repeated his charges. Then, in its %ulyM"ugust ,@@/ issue,*+- published a defense of =euhaus by %anet 'oll Madigan hich made serious charges against Jree and against *+- itself. Jree responded in the same issue.

The "ugustMSeptember ,@@/ issue of 2irst Things contained =euhaus o n clarification of hat he intended to say in his boo#. 'e presented an e!cellent case for holding that e may hope and pray for the salvation for all. (n an Dctober ,@@/ editorial in *+-, Jree e!pressed moderate satisfaction ith =euhaus clarification, but still had objections to various statements that =euhaus had not retracted.

7i#e Jree, ( accept the substance of this final intervention of =euhaus, but ( find some obscurity in his argument. 'e says that certain Cauline te!ts +most of hich ( have cited above0 )support* universal redemption. (f e give priority to these passages, =euhaus argues, e have to interpret the $ospel passages about damnation as )admonitory and cautionary, solemn arnings of a terrible possibility.*

=euhaus does not say +and, ( am sure, does not mean0 that Caul in the passages he quotes actually teaches universal salvation. (f so, Caul ould be turning the $ospel arnings into empty threats, and ould be ta#ing a position contrary to the constant tradition of the Ahurch. ( can agree that these )optimistic* passages, ta#en in isolation, could be interpreted as e!pressing a confidence that all ill be saved. >ut that interpretation is unacceptable even as an interpretation of Cauls mind, because it runs counter to other te!ts, several of hich ( have quoted above, in hich Caul evidently supposes that some are in fact lost. My conclusion ould be that even if e give full value to the Cauline passages quoted by =euhaus, the $ospel arnings could still be understood as predictions that some ill be condemned.

"lso contestable is =euhaus speculation that )perhaps the fate of %udas is that of total annihilation.* The constant teaching of the Magisterium has been that unrepentant sinners are sent to eternal punishment. %udas must be in hell unless he repented.

(t is unfair and incorrect to accuse either >althasar or =euhaus of teaching that no one goes to hell. They grant that it is probable that some or even many do go there, but they assert, on the ground that $od is capable of bringing any sinner to repentance, that e have a right to hope and pray that all ill be saved. The fact that something is highly improbable need not prevent us from hoping and praying that it ill happen. "ccording to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, )(n hope, the Ahurch prays for Nall men to be saved +/ Timothy ,&.0* + CCCG/4,/0. "t another point the Aatechism declares& )The Ahurch prays that no one should be lost* + CCC G/@-40.

Dne might as# at this point hether there has been any shift in Aatholic theology on the matter. The ans er appears to be Les, although the shift is not as dramatic as some imagine. The earlier pessimism as based on the un arranted assumption that e!plicit Ahristian faith is absolutely necessary for salvation. This assumption has been corrected, particularly at Jatican ((. There has also been a healthy reaction against the type of preaching that revels in depicting the sufferings of the damned in the most lurid possible light. "n e!ample ould be the fictional sermon on hell that %ames %oyce recounts in his Portrait of the Artist as a .oung #an. This #ind of preaching fosters an image of $od as an unloving and cruel tyrant, and in some cases leads to a complete denial of hell or even to atheism.

Today a #ind of thoughtless optimism is the more prevalent error. Ouite apart from hat theologians teach, popular piety has become saccharine. Inable to grasp the rationale for eternal punishment, many Ahristians ta#e it almost for granted that everyone, or practically everyone, must be saved. The Mass for the Dead has turned into a Mass of the Besurrection, hich sometimes seems to celebrate not so much the resurrection of the 7ord as the salvation of the deceased, ithout any reference to sin and punishment. More education is needed to convince people that they ought to fear $od ho, as %esus taught, can punish soul and body together in hell +cf. Matthe /@&,40.

The search for numbers in the demography of hell is futile. $od in 'is isdom has seen fit not to disclose any statistics. Several sayings of %esus in the $ospels give the impression that the majority are lost. Caul, ithout denying the li#elihood that some sinners ill die ithout sufficient repentance, teaches that the grace of Ahrist is more po erful than sin& )9here sin increased, grace abounded all the more* +Bomans -&,@0. Cassages such as these permit us to hope that very many, if not all, ill be saved.

"ll told, it is good that $od has left us ithout e!act information. (f e #ne that virtually everybody ould be damned, e ould be tempted to despair. (f e #ne that all, or nearly all, are saved, e might become presumptuous. (f e #ne that some fi!ed percent, say fifty, ould be saved, e ould be caught in an unholy rivalry. 9e ould rejoice in every sign that others ere among the lost, since our o n chances of election ould thereby be increased. Such a competitive spirit ould hardly be compatible ith the gospel.

9e are forbidden to see# our o n salvation in a selfish and egotistical ay. 9e are #eepers of our brothers and sisters. The more e or# for their salvation, the more of $ods favor e can e!pect for ourselves. Those of us ho believe and ma#e use of the means that $od has provided for the forgiveness of sins and the reform of life have no reason to fear. 9e can be sure that Ahrist, ho died on the Aross for us, ill not fail to give us the grace e need. 9e #no that in all things $od or#s for the good of those ho love 'im, and that if e persevere in that love, nothing hatever can separate us from Ahrist +cf. Bomans 4&,45;60. That is all the assurance e can have, and it should be enough.

A/'-. CA-DI*AL D0LL'S1 S232 , holds the Laurence 32 #cGinley Chair in -eligion and Society at )ordham 0niversity2 This essay is adapted from his Laurence 32 #cGinley Lecture delivered at )ordham 0niversity on *ovem&er 451 4554.