Are we saved by baptism alone?

[DavidFilmer]

Much obliged.

CIC (Latin canon law)[more canons]

Yes, I know the teachings. I know the parables. I’m having a hard time imagining how they apply to the lives of ordinary modern Westerners. That’s why I’m asking for examples.

What would be an example of promoting social justice that, if I didn’t do it, it would be sinful? What would be an example of assisting the poor that, if I didn’t do it, would be sinful? I mean examples that one might reasonably expect to encounter in modern Western society.

Or, put it another way: If I go to Confession and tell the priest that I didn’t promote social justice, he is gonna ask me in what way - I guarantee it (if you don’t believe it, try confessing that and see what happens). If I saw a black guy getting beat up by the Klan and did nothing (not even calling the cops), I could confess that as a sin of omission. That’s an example, but not an example of something that we would reasonably expect to happen. So what answer might I give if I never saw a beating or any other very unlikely event?

C’mon. I can think of a thousand examples of sins of commission. I can’t come up with a single EXAMPLE of a sin of omission, and nobody else seems to do any better than me.

 

[Vico]

Yes, I know the teachings. I know the parables. I’m having a hard time imagining how they apply to the lives of ordinary modern Westerners. That’s why I’m asking for examples.

What would be an example of promoting social justice that, if I didn’t do it, it would be sinful? What would be an example of assisting the poor that, if I didn’t do it, would be sinful? I mean examples that one might reasonably expect to encounter in modern Western society.

Or, put it another way: If I go to Confession and tell the priest that I didn’t promote social justice, he is gonna ask me in what way - I guarantee it (if you don’t believe it, try confessing that and see what happens). If I saw a black guy getting beat up by the Klan and did nothing (not even calling the cops), I could confess that as a sin of omission. That’s an example, but not an example of something that we would reasonably expect to happen. So what answer might I give if I never saw a beating or any other very unlikely event?

C’mon. I can think of a thousand examples of sins of commission. I can’t come up with a single EXAMPLE of a sin of omission, and nobody else seems to do any better than me.

There are many and often occurring instances of objectively grave sins of omission, which is what you are looking for. (We are not able to identify the culpability.) Here a few:

Having enough income and not contributing money to the Church.
Being able to attend liturgy on holy days of obligation, but choosing not to.
Being given an opportunity to vote against abortion and choosing not to.
Intentionally not taking care of one’s parents in their old age.
Intentionally or by indifference, not giving assent to some teaching of the Church on faith or morals, to be held by a Catholic.

 

[DavidFilmer]

There are many and often occurring instances of objectively grave sins of omission, which is what you are looking for. (We are not able to identify the culpability.) Here a few:

Having enough income and not contributing money to the Church.

Yes, I have already stipulated that failure to obey the rules (precepts) of the Church could constitute sin of omission. I was asking about freewill acts of charity, not obedience to Church rules.

Being able to attend liturgy on holy days of obligation, but choosing not to.

Rule.

Intentionally or by indifference, not giving assent to some teaching of the Church on faith or morals, to be held by a Catholic.

Rule.

Being given an opportunity to vote against abortion and choosing not to.

Has any American ever been given the opportunity to vote against abortion? (besides nine guys in black robes) I haven’t, nor have I ever heard of such an election. I’m asking about likely things, not things that have never actually happened, not even once.

Intentionally not taking care of one’s parents in their old age.

OK, this is a possible example. But, in modern Western society, elder care is more and more being handled by professionals, either through in-home care, or by nursing homes or hospice. In America, such care is often paid though insurance or government programs (Medicaid, VA benefits, etc). This is becoming the ordinary way to care for elder parents, and someday this may become the exclusive way, but I think that there are enough exceptions today that I would consider this a valid example. But I doubt it will be applicable in 100 years. Modern Western society adds to the list of possible sins of commission, while diminishing the list of possible sins of omission.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Can you give me an example of something that would show love for my neighbor, where the failure to act would be sinful?

Right below which you admit is possible. You asked a question and supplied you own example below Dave. Anyway, when you fail to see Christ in your neighbor and intentionally act against Christ its a mortal sin.

In Jesus’ day, one might reasonably expect to encounter a beaten person (which was the context of the “love your neighbor” teaching). That sort of thing doesn’t happen today. It’s possible, but very unlikely.

But its possible Dave which then requires no further elaboration.

So Jesus gave an example that his Apostles could relate to, but modern Americans can’t relate to. If Jesus were telling such a parable today, what example might he give?

Dave your arguing a point which you see already. Perhaps skeptical about it and kicking it around in your mind. But still you see the point.

34
Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35
h For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me,
36
naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’
37

To intentionally neglect Love Your Neighbor is a mortal sin. All the above situations can and do apply today. Nothing has changed here.

Matthew 12- ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these."

 

[Vico]

, I was asking about freewill acts of charity, not obedience to Church rules. ,.

I though you were looking for examples of avoiding voluntary sins of positive precept. The idea is not to loose the sanctifying grace of baptism.

Charity is the basis of Church rules so there will be no such examples.

To be charitable, we set a good example of behavior to the weak, even in doing an act which is not sinful, in itself, for us.

I have voted many times for the candidates that are against abortion over those that are pro abortion.

*Catechism *1812 The human virtues are rooted in the theological virtues, which adapt man’s faculties for participation in the divine nature:76 for the theological virtues relate directly to God. They dispose Christians to live in a relationship with the Holy Trinity. They have the One and Triune God for their origin, motive, and object.

1813 The theological virtues are the foundation of Christian moral activity; they animate it and give it its special character. They inform and give life to all the moral virtues. They are infused by God into the souls of the faithful to make them capable of acting as his children and of meriting eternal life. They are the pledge of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the faculties of the human being. There are three theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity.77

 

[Ignatius]

I refer the reader to the Council of Trent, Session VI, Canons 24, 26, 31, & 32. These canons mainly treat “faith alone,” but I think are applicable also to “baptism alone.”

Jesus said “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” Mark 16:16. So, no not Baptism alone.

Actually, there is nothing “alone”, Jesus said that we must do all that He commanded.

 

[steve_b]

I haven’t seen anyone yet, quote the following

837 “Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but ‘in body’ not ‘in heart.’”

This person possesses and has accepted all the means of salvation given to the Church… that means baptism and the whole deal. BUT if they don’t persevere in Charity, they aren’t saved.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Jesus said “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” Mark 16:16. So, no not Baptism alone.

You interpret Scripture like a protestant - you own personal interpretation.

I don’t cite Scripture - I cite Church teaching, which is informed by Scripture, but is interpreted by the Holy Spirit.

So, are you saying that (according to your interpretation), if we receive valid Christian Baptism (even as infants), but do not commit mortal sin (even if we live to old age), we cannot be saved, even if we never know about (or believe in) Jesus? (my question assumes that the Faith required of Baptism came from our parents, Godparents, and the Christian community at large, but not from us.)

This is not some fanciful scenario - most Catholics are Baptized as infants. This is the ordinary means by which Catholics receive Baptismal (Saving) Grace. It is not obtained through any faith or belief of our own. And it cannot be lost, except through mortal sin.

I’m just asking, because if you answer “yes” then you make yourself a heretic. If you answer “no,” then I wonder what point you are trying to make, and I would ask you to explain it better.

Actually, there is nothing “alone”, Jesus said that we must do all that He commanded.

Well, if we are required to do all that Jesus commanded, perhaps you would be so kind as to produce a list of those commandments, so that we might obey them?

The Catholic Church has never produced such a list. She has produced a list of just five commands (the Precepts of the Catholic Church) which are required of all Catholics, and I don’t believe that ANY of those Precepts can be found in the plain teaching of Our Lord.

 

[DavidFilmer]

I though you were looking for examples of avoiding voluntary sins of positive precept. The idea is not to loose the sanctifying grace of baptism.

That is the idea, but I was looking for (as I have explained many times) for sins of positive precept which concern matters of charitable acts (which benefit others), not subscription to Church rules (which benefit ourselves).

Charity is the basis of Church rules so there will be no such examples.

The only “Church rules” which are required of Catholics are the five Precepts of the Catholic Church. Would you please tell us how charity is the basis of our requirement to attend Mass or days of obligation? Or how charity is the basis of our requirement to receive Eucharist or attend Confession once a year? Or any other Precept?

I have voted many times for the candidates that are against abortion over those that are pro abortion.

But that’s not the same thing as an opportunity to vote against abortion (which is what you said). You and I are on the same page here - I have never voted for a pro-abortion candidate in an election in which the candidate’s position might influence policy. But I cannot conceive of an idea that any American Catholic is obligated, under penalty of sin, to vote for a candidate on a one-policy anti-abortion basis, while ignoring all other pro-life positions (including, perhaps, euthanasia and capital punishment).
And, I can say for sure, that the Catholic Church has never endorsed such a rule, that an American Catholic cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate without respect to any other position. So, if the Church does not condemn such a vote, I see no reason why you should do so, or regard those who fail to do so guilty of mortal sin.

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “or regard those who fail to do so guilty of mortal sin.”
A. I do not make that judgment of culpability. One can observe that a person does objective grave sin without determining culpability.

You wrote: “The only “Church rules” which are required of Catholics are the five Precepts of the Catholic Church. Would you please tell us how charity is the basis of our requirement to attend Mass or days of obligation? Or how charity is the basis of our requirement to receive Eucharist or attend Confession once a year? Or any other Precept?”
A. Actually those are not the only obligations. I compiled a list of over 20 obligations from the canon law.

You wrote: “That is the idea, but I was looking for (as I have explained many times) for sins of positive precept which concern matters of charitable acts (which benefit others), not subscription to Church rules (which benefit ourselves).”
A. Charitable acts benefit others but also benefit ourselves spiritually. We must follow those rules which are obligatory for more than one reason, one of which is not to give scandal, which is uncharitable. Our compliance also benefit others: we give witness to our faith. We are members of the Church of Christ, a universal Christian community.

I posted before on scandal. This is from Baltimore Catechism:Q. 1277. What is forbidden by the fifth Commandment?
A. The fifth Commandment forbids all willful murder, fighting, anger, hatred, revenge, and bad example.

Q. 1278. Can the fifth commandment be broken by giving scandal or bad example and by inducing others to sin?
A. The fifth commandment can be broken by giving scandal or bad example and inducing others to sin, because such acts may destroy the life of the soul by leading it into mortal sin.

Q. 1279. What is scandal?
A. Scandal is any sinful word, deed or omission that disposes others to sin, or lessens their respect for God and holy religion.
This is from the later Catechism of the Catholic Church:Respect for the souls of others: scandal

**2284 **Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. the person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.

2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."85 Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.86

**2286 **Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion.

Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, or to "social conditions that, intentionally or not, make Christian conduct and obedience to the Commandments difficult and practically impossible."87 This is also true of business leaders who make rules encouraging fraud, teachers who provoke their children to anger,88 or manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values.

**2287 **Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. "Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!"89

 

[guanophore]

Works are generally required as a matter of salvation in maintaining the state of grace.

Yeah, well, you’re gonna have to cite that. To my mind, that’s awfully close to heresy.

’ For this very reason make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. 8 For if these things are yours and abound, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins. 10 Therefore, brethren, be the more zealous to confirm your call and election, for if you do this you will never fall; 11 so there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." 2 Peter 1:5–12

It seems that the vicar of Christ back Phil up on his statement. Good works make us effective and fruitful in God’s service, as well as remind us of our baptismal grace. They serve to confirm our call and election.

 

[DavidFilmer]

You wrote: “or regard those who fail to do so guilty of mortal sin.”
A. I do not make that judgment of culpability. One can observe that a person does objective grave sin without determining culpability.

But you have not established, in Church Doctrine or any other means, that voting for a pro-abortion candidate who opposes euthanasia and capital punishment is objectively sinful. I did not suggest culpability, only grave matter. It is not grave matter to vote for a pro-abortion candidate if this is not the only consideration.

You wrote: "The only “Church rules” which are required of Catholics are the five Precepts of the Catholic Church. Would you please tell us how charity is the basis of our requirement to attend Mass or days of obligation?

Charity is NOT the basis of these rules. Pay attention! I’m asking about acts of charity, not obedience to rules. How many times and ways do I need to make this clear?

A. Actually those are not the only obligations. I compiled a list of over 20 obligations from the canon law.

Are you really not aware that Canon Law consists of rules, and not doctrine? Our modern system of Canon Law is barely a century old. It is a new innovation in Catholic jurisprudence. I am NOT asking about rules. Rules are man-made. They can change, and be completely abolished. I am NOT asking about rules.

I posted before on scandal. This is from Baltimore Catechism:

Q. 1277. What is forbidden by the fifth Commandment?
A. The fifth Commandment forbids all willful murder, fighting, anger, hatred, revenge, and bad example. [etc]
​

Those are all sins commission. I’m asking about sins of omission. Do you know the difference?​

 

[guanophore]

Can you give me an example of something that would show love for my neighbor, where the failure to act would be sinful?

In Jesus’ day, one might reasonably expect to encounter a beaten person (which was the context of the “love your neighbor” teaching). That sort of thing doesn’t happen today. It’s possible, but very unlikely.

So Jesus gave an example that his Apostles could relate to, but modern Americans can’t relate to. If Jesus were telling such a parable today, what example might he give?

David, I don’t know where the ivory tower is where you live, but there are plenty of poor, homeless, hungry and imprisoned people in the US. And if you think you are not morally obligated to reach out to them in the name of Jesus, all I can say is that I will pray that the Holy Spirit will help His nature to be formed in you.

 

[guanophore]

an example of something that we would *reasonably expect to happen*.  So what answer might I give if I never saw a beating or any other very unlikely event?

C’mon. I can think of a thousand examples of sins of commission. I can’t come up with a single EXAMPLE of a sin of omission, and nobody else seems to do any better than me.

Have you ever considered that living in your ivory tower by itself is a sin of omission?

Anyone who does not believe that the words of Jesus apply to a “modern Westerner” has a very sheltered life.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Departed from topic and closed.