Can someone who rejects the Gospel be saved?

[MagdalenaRita]

That requires a well-formed conscience, and even so, it doesn’t guarantee that we can accurately assess the state of our own soul. It’s still possible to deceive oneself.

While it is possible to deceive ourselves, the Church gives us clear guidance on examining our conscience, knowing when we are in mortal sin and instructs us that we are responsible to form our consciences according to Church teaching.

St Paul writes:…

I think you might be interpreting Scripture on your own. It’s best to follow Church teaching.

 

[Gorgias]

While it is true Paul did not accept the gospel and convert right away, he still did before he died, which kept him from being condemned.

Agreed. Yet, what’s being asserted is that anyone who rejects preaching will be condemned. St Paul is the counter-example to prove that assertion false.

I think you might be interpreting Scripture on your own.

I’m quoting, not interpreting, just like @Ammi claims he’s doing.

 

[Nikolaite]

So… what is it that we must confess, according to the CCC, because it causes us to fall out of a state of grace? “Grave sin.” So, you’ve got a choice: either you claim that the CCC is in error and in conflict with Trent, or you recognize that they are two ways of describing the same concept. So… are we able to be conscious of an objective reality (i.e., having committed a grave sin)? Yep. Does that mean that we can be conscious of judging our own self subjectively? St Paul says “no.”

I’d say this is an example of a wrong rule of faith. The catechism is a reference text like an encyclopedia. It teaches you where to go find the authoritative teachings…like say…the Council of Trent.

We’re not allowed to conflate terms that are used in an authoritative fashion with those which are not, like some wrest the scriptures to their own destruction. The definitive position of the Church comes from the Sacred and Oecumenical Council of Trent…not from the second edition of the CCC.

Regardless, this is off topic, so the above is my final answer on the subject.

 

[Gorgias]

The definitive position of the Church comes from the Sacred and Oecumenical Council of Trent…not from the second edition of the CCC.

So… you don’t deny the teaching of the Church. Except where you deny the teaching of the Church. Got it.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

, what’s being asserted is that anyone who rejects preaching will be condemned. St Paul is the counter-example to prove that assertion false.

So, it is dying, (at death) and knowing and rejecting Christ that puts one’s soul in grave danger. Being condemned happens at one’s own particular judgment, not while they are still alive, which is why Paul doesnt fit that example.

We are not condemned while we are still here on Earth.

 

[Ammi]

Yes, of course.

John 12

If any one hears my sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own authority; the Father who sent me has himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak.

 

[Genesis315]

Faith in Christ is absolutely necessary for salvation.

Catechism:

The necessity of faith

161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation.42 "Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life ‘But he who endures to the end.’"43

Faith is “a free assent to the whole truth that God has revealed.” (CCC 150). In particular, as the quoted paragraph above states, this means faith in Christ, since Christ “is the Father’s one, perfect and unsurpassable Word. In him he has said everything; there will be no other word than this one” (CCC 65); “what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son” (CCC 65, quoting St. John of the Cross).

Even if in good conscience, people in non-Christian religions cannot have faith–they simply do not believe what God has revealed. Their belief is merely “religious experience still in search of the absolute truth and still lacking assent to God who reveals himself” and therefore “the distinction between theological faith and belief in the other religions, must be firmly held.” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dominus Iesus 7).

Since they lack faith, persons who remain in such a situation until death could not be saved. However, we do acknowledge that, for those in good conscience seeking to follow the truth, “in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him.” (CCC 848). This may even happen only at the “eleventh hour” (cf. Matt. 20:6).

 

[MagdalenaRita]

St Paul writes: “It does not concern me in the least that I be judged by you or any human tribunal…

So what I see in this Scripture is Paul knows that God will be his final judge, not himself, nor another human being. While it is true we can not know for absolute certainty the state of our soul, after having heard and known the gospel message we can examine ourselves and discern if we have rejected Christ and committed mortal sin, which puts our soul in grave danger of eternal death.
According to Haydock commentary, Paul is refusing to call himself “just”, knowing that there may be sins he has overlooked.

When reading Scripture, you have to take the whole of it and Hebrews 10 states:
“if we sin willfully after having the knowledge of the truth, there is now left no sacrifice for sins”

St. Thomas Aquinas states:

Mortal sins destroy the grace of God in the heart of the sinner. By their very grave nature, a mortal sin cuts our relationship off from God and turns man away from his creator.

 

[Ammi]

I agree that Invincible Ignorance has a place in a person’s culpability and blame worthiness regarding whether a grave sin is mortal or not.

“On the other hand, it is culpable to remain willfully ignorant of matters that one is obligated to know. In this case the individual is morally responsible for their ignorance, and for the acts resulting from it.”

Are we not obligated to seek God? Are we not given a natural conscience which establishes knowledge of a Creator?

And if someone has the intentions of “seeking God” which the Church recognizes as necessary for salvation, and then learns of the Gospel message (whether by preaching or reading), they are confronted in their heart the revelation of who God is. The Word, then, having been made known to them, in their heart, presents a choice. To accept and believe, or to reject and not believe. This does not have to do with conduct after the fact. It has to do with believing or not believing what is being made known to them of God. If believed, then the grace of the Word is being accepted and can be cooperated with. If not believed, then grace is being rejected. This isnt to say that initial belief is sufficient to final justification, because the Lord says trials will come and perseverance is necessary. Neither is it to say that disbelief in the Gospel is restricted to a one time choice, but as long as we are living, we are able to turn to Him and be reconciled to God.

 

[Gorgias]

We are not condemned while we are still here on Earth.

Again, I’m addressing Ammi’s rather stilted interpretation of the Scriptural text. Namely, that “lack of belief in the preaching one heard” → “condemnation”. That’s all I’m refuting – his interpretation runs counter not only to Church teaching, but also, to the witness of St Paul’s experience in Scripture.

 

[Ammi]

John 3

Those who believe in him are not condemned ; but those who do not believe are condemned already , because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Again, I’m addressing Ammi’s rather stilted interpretation of the Scriptural text. Namely, that “lack of belief in the preaching one heard” → “condemnation”. That’s all I’m refuting – his interpretation runs counter not only to Church teaching, but also, to the witness of St Paul’s experience in Scripture

So, not having read all the comments, I am not sure what all has been said but according to Cornelius e Lapide’s great Catholic commentary on that bible passage he says this:

He that believeth … is not judged, shall not be condemned, but saved. But he that believeth not is judged, i.e., is condemned already. For such an one manifestly condemns himself by his unbelief; for by it he cuts himself off from the very pathway and beginning of salvation, i.e., faith; because he hath not believed in the name…

This is the judgment, &c. (Vulg.) Judgment, i.e., cause of judgment, or condemnation. This is the cause why those are already condemned who believe not on Me, because they have preferred darkness, and ignorance of God, and of what they ought to do, and their own pleasures and lusts and sins upon the earth, rather than light, that is, Christ, who hath brought the knowledge of God and salvation into the world

And the Catholic Haydock commentary says:

Ver. 18. Is not judged. He that believeth, viz. by a faith working through charity, is not judged; that is, is not condemned; but the obstinate unbeliever is judged; that is, condemned already, by retrenching (removing) himself from the society of Christ and his Church.

So, IMHO, one condemns himself when he chooses unbelief.

 

[Ammi]

Right. This is true Catholic Teaching. Scripture plainly revealing this several times over.

Debates about invincible ignorance and what constitutes mortal sin can be never ending.

What constitutes “hearing”, “knowing”, or “learning” a valid Gospel message and whether the person has the capacity to use reason, is not something I’m concerned with for others, because I’m not their judge anyway.

But if someone says, “I dont believe in God, or Jesus”… I would try to help them in as much as I am given an ability. So I knew in my own conscience, that they were not ignorant of the Gospel. Because the Gospel is about the forgiveness of God and His love for us.

 

[Gorgias]

but those who do not believe are condemned already

Ahh, but those who are “condemned already” are those who did not believe the preaching they heard. Saul heard St Stephen’s preaching, and did not believe. Was he “condemned already”?

 

[Ammi]

Yes, of course. Then, on the road to Damascus, he was given a special grace… a revelation, and believed. He was initially saved when he believed, and no longer rejected Jesus.

 

[adamhovey1988]

What do you mean by reject? If someone was taught the Islamic view of Jesus, that he was never crucified, so therefore could not have died for your sins, and rejects that, is that rejecting the gospel? If you read the Quran, some of it is quite accurate, but it’s what’s different that isn’t. Or what if you were raised a Jehovah’s Witness, and taught that the Watchtower Society is the only group that can correctly interpret scripture? And you decide, that you don’t want to be part of that, and that’s what you think all religion is? I think that rejecting the gospel is wrong, but what if you’re rejecting a false gospel? And if you’re a JW or Muslim, I’m just using those as examples, because I know we have a few of both here, and I don’t want anyone to get the impression that I’m going out of my way to be offensive.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Ahh, but those who are “condemned already” are those who did not believe the preaching they heard. Saul heard St Stephen’s preaching, and did not believe. Was he “condemned already”?

He was condemning himself until he chose to believe and obey. We also are condemned until we choose to believe and obey. As long as we are rejecting Christ, we are not on the path of salvation. We have cut ourselves off of that path of salvation.

 

[Ammi]

Why create a bunch of examples of false Gospels? Those are non-Christian religions. Of course they dont qualify as the Gospel.

If through no fault of their own, a person does not know the Gopel, they can not be held accountable for rejecting it.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

And you decide, that you don’t want to be part of that, and that’s what you think all religion is? I think that rejecting the gospel is wrong, but what if you’re rejecting a false gospel?

Ammi:

Those are non-Christian religions. … they dont qualify as the Gospel.

I think to answer your question is, that they are false gospels is the key. The deception in them doesn’t lead a person to salvation but only to confusion.

 

[nfinke]

Well Id say yes, but you have to be more specific about what you’re saying, as the title says “reject” while your comment says “believe in”

The church says that people who are not christian through any fault of their own are not closed off to the possibility of salvation. ie if you were raised in a secular family, and the reason you don’t “believe in” the gospel is because you never read it seriously, and noone ever made a convincing argument that you should take it seriously, then God won’t hold that against you in the same way you won’t lose salvation if you commit a sin you aren’t aware is a grave matter.

But if you hear the gospel, believe it’s true, and for some reason “reject” it (that term seems to imply you had it to begin with), then at that point you’ve turned away from God wilfully and with full knowledge of the consequences. You’re out of luck then.