So, is Gandhi saved?

First a caveat – I don’t think that the Fathers were all that concerned with being ‘saved’ in the sense in which post-Reformation Christians understand the term, and I believe that the Eastern Orthodox church tends to downplay any conversations of this sort, on the grounds that judgement belongs to God alone. I have a lot of sympathy with that perspective. An excessive concern with ‘salvation’ is a spiritual neurosis IMHO.

Second, a quick philosophical preamble. On the question of other faiths, and how far it is possible to be ‘saved’ outside of the church, there are three broad views (I’m deliberately avoiding some of the technicalities): exclusivist, inclusivist and pluralist. Exclusivist says only those who call on the name of Christ are saved; inclusivist says other faiths can save but only in so far as they take on the nature of Christ (Karl Rahner calls these ‘anonymous Christians’); pluralists say that salvation is possible in all religions.

I’m an inclusivist, that is, I see Jesus as ‘the way, the truth and the life’; I think nobody comes to the Father except by Him (in other words, Jesus is the criterion for what being ‘saved’ is, and salvation lies precisely in being conformed to Him, by grace – this is what the Eastern Orthodox call ‘theosis’, being ‘divinised’); but I think that He has sheep in other pens, and that if those other sheep recognise His voice, they will come by Him even if they don’t call Him Jesus. I give great weight to Matthew 7.21-23 in saying that.

Which should make clear why I think Gandhi is saved. I think he pursued the will of the Father, even if it was explicitly not pursuing the will of Christ. What hovers behind that, of course, is that Gandhi was not pursuing the will of Christ as he took it to be ie as he had been taught it by the Christians with whom he had come into contact. In other words, I think a large part of the ‘blame’ for Gandhi not accepting Christ rests with a distorted presentation of the gospel (not all the blame).

Why do I think Gandhi pursued the will of the Father? He was by no means perfect, he was very human, but his redemption comes, I would say, through his courageous embrace of non-violence, putting the Sermon on the Mount into practice, leading people in the way of peace, and being irrevocably committed to the truth (satyagrahi). I think grace was active in his life. I don’t think he ‘earnt’ salvation; I think he was open to God’s life working through him. When he comes into the truth I think he will turn towards it (Him), not away from it, and I think Jesus will recognise him as one of his own.

That’s my two pennies anyhow.

UPDATE: “Then Peter began to speak: ‘I now realise how true it is that God does not show favouritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right’.” (Acts 10.34)