Catholic vs. Protestant Soteriology. HELP!

[whit]

Continued from above…

	 	 	 	  As Catholics we also have to put up with a silly little thing called retribution, and then there is penance and depending on the type of sin, "making the injured whole again", as in the case of theft or injury to reputation.  All these little things throw a crimp into the Protestants idea of obtaining forgiveness of sin.  I could be wrong because I have never been a Protestant but I have never heard of any Protestant ever saying anything other than what you mentioned in your post about "daily repent of their sins" where I assume that you just tell God you are sorry and go about your business relying on His mercy and goodness.  A Catholic should be more cognizant of their actions because we are responsible for telling our failings to a person "in persona Christi."  We are actually telling our sins to Christ but the priest is who we see and hear and listen to his teachings and advice and requirements and penance.  It is embarrasing to have to tell others of our failings.  It is also difficult to have to remember them long enough to get to confession and rid ourselves of them.  We are constantly reminded that we are sinners and know that we are carrying around our failings.  But what it does for us is to help us to not want to sin if not because it is so hurtful to God but because of the situtaion mentioned above.

You speak of the situation of sin in relation to the Church as an impediment to salvation when in fact is it just the opposite. You as a Protestant in your living room “repenting of your sin” by saying “I’m sorry God” can’t be sure that you are actually forgiven or not. However, we Catholics by reason of the Sacrament of Reconciliation (confession) we know in fact that if we have made a good confession and not knowingly held back any mortal sins, that we are absolved of our sins by Christ Himself. Again, by the power of forgiveness given the Apostles and their descendents by Christ when we hear the priest say “…I absolve you of all your sins…” Beautiful, wonderful words to hear.

Now I am not saying that some of all of your sins are or are not forgiven. That is not up to me. But I would be concerned knowing that the Sacrament of confession goes back to the beginning of the Church, to the Apostles and the first Christians. That it was dropped as a Sacrament by the “reformers” (Protestants) just some 500 years ago. The Catholic Church by the way does not say that no one can get salvation but Catholics. It just says it is much easier to do so if one is Catholic and lives by it’s teachings. And as a Catholic, I am glad that there are these rules to live by because it makes me (paraphrasing) look for the “narrow door to salvation” as oppposed to the wide one that most people are heading for that Jesus spoke about.

Continued…

 

[whit]

Continued from aboe…

	 	 	 	  Now, Mel, as someone in earlier posts mentioned, part of your problem is that you probably suffer from what is called scrupulosity.  Well, I do too to some degree  It can be difficult but I would not give up the Sacrament of Reconciliation(confession) for anything.  There is a site for you to look at that tries to help those of us who have this problem.  It is Liguori Publications.  Here is the link to the [10 Commandments for the Scrupulous](http://mission.liguori.org/newsletters/scrupulosity.htm) by Fr. Thomas Santa C.SS.R.  Ther is more information there too and they put out a newsletter and there are copies of past newsletters there for you to peruse.  Just look around.

Hope I haven’t bored you or sound too presumptious.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation is there for a reason. Christ instituted it; His Church does His bidding.

God bless. Whit

 

[theMutant]

martino:

Mel, you sound as if you have found a way to sin during the day and still sleep like a baby at night.

Possibly I am misinterpreting your post, but I don’t think that quick, flippant answers are going to answer Mel’s underlying questions about soteriology (our understanding of how the grace of Christ is applied to us and the guilt of our sin is removed so that we become just and can enter heaven). Believe me, I know of MANY Catholics who feel that Catholicism has provided a way to sin all week long and still be able to go to sleep and receive Communion with a “clear” conscious. This is based on their misunderstanding of the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Mel,

I am wondering if you have read the full documents, all of the canons and decrees, of sessions five and six of the Council of Trent or even the current Catechism of the Catholic Church’s explanation of the Catholic belief on grace and justification (paragraphs 1987 through 2029). The combination of these two resources should help to answer your question and, hopefully, help you see that the Catholic teaching of soteriology is neither a legallistic or an unattainable standard. It is the teaching of the Father’s love for us and of the fact that His desire that we be with Him was so great that He gave His only Son so that we could be come adopted heirs with that Son.

 

[Melchior]

martino:

"Salvation in Catholicism is extremely fleeting "- Not unless you are perpetually commiting mortal sin!

If one is saved they will always be unless they reject Christ. Unbelief is the only sin that will damn some one ultimately.

“as Lutheran I know faith without works is dead. But I also know that I am forgiven provided I daily repent of my sins. I know that if I die today (so long as I trust in Christ) He is faithful and merciful and I am forgiven.” - What if you die in a state of serious sin? What are the consequences? You said you dont believe in “once saved always saved” .

Every one is a sinner. If one is in Christ they will be saved. Every sin is serious and we will all die without knowing all our sins.

" I know that I can walk away from the faith and in doing so put my soul in mortal peril" - is this the only way to lose your salvation? If yes, then there are no consequence for sin!

Don’t you know that Christ died for your sins? He paid the price you could not. The consequence was very high and Christ suffered the consequence for us. That is the Gospel my friend. Are you trusting in Christ or yourself?

" I understood myself to be in a state of mortal peril daily since I had committed mortal sins in my heart all the time. Even though I would repent several times a day I would fear death in one of those innumerable and unavoidable times of sin. What if I fall asleep and have an impure thought and die in my sleep before I wake up and repent? -what are you referring to as “unavoidable times of sin”?, if it is really unavoidable then it wouldnt be even considered sin in the first place, certainly not mortal sin. The example you give of an impure dream is no good because for a sin to be mortal it must have been committed with full consent of the will, I dont think your subconscious counts.

My point was that we are sinners and all sin is serious. The wages of sin is death - all sin. And we all sin. Can you not sin? Have you been glorified?

“That’s what being Catholic was to me, a legalistic religion that held sinners to an impossible standard the standard of the law and not the gospel.”- its not impossible to avoid serious sin, its called “self discipline” and “spiritual maturity.” Show me where to gospel teaches us that there is no consequence for our sins or that following Jesus is supposed to be easy. I can show you exactly where it teaches that there will be severe punishment sin and that following Jesus will be extremely difficult, most wont be willing.

I never said that it is not possible to avoid sin. You are putting words in my mouth. But it is not possible 100% of the time. Jesus also said “My yoke is easy and my burden is light”. There is severe punishment for sin if you have not been forgiven. Those who are in Christ are forgiven.

Mel

 

[Melchior]

Continued replyy to Martino:

“Since we are all sinners and indeed most of us sin daily how can we ever hope to be saved?”- i dont think you understand the difference between venial and mortal sin. Not all sin causes the loss of sanctifying grace; only serious sin, committed with full knowledge and with full consent of the will cuts us off from God’s grace.

Jesus said if we commit a sin in our hearts we have really committed that sin. He said (unrighteous) anger towards your brother is committing murder. So mortal sins seem alot easier to commit than some are saying.

Plus, “He who believes is not condemned. He who does not believe is condemned already”. Rejecting Christ is the only thing that damns some one according to Him.

“I am just so wary of raising my children in a church that makes hope seem impossible.”- are you going to teach them that they have no hope of avoiding serious sin? You are the one taking hope away! will you teach them its impossible for them not to have premarital sex, because after all, they have no hope of controlling themselves! Oh yea, and they are going to do it anyway right?

I am not taking away hope if I raise my kids to love and follow their savior.

I know of not one single Catholic in my life, not one who has lived a moral life even close to most evangelicals I know. It was because I was an Evangelical that I stayed away from sexual sin as a teenager while all my Catholic friends were engaged in it. And I live in Boston where almost everyone I know, including 7 siblings are all Catholic.It is the Protestants in my life who have lived much more Christ like lives that the Catholics. I am not saying this to say that Catholicism is not true. But I think you should be more careful with how you presume we Protestants raise our children and what we teach them. As if I need to instill terror to spur them to righteousness. I would rather have them serve God in gratitude for His grace than out of fear. Not healthy fear, but constant fear be out of His grace.

So my concern is that my kids will fall into sin that they would be better equipped to avoid as Protestants. Since they will not have the support of their Catholic peers and church community like they would as Evangelicals. I am amazed that you think Evangelical Protestants are somehow more prone to fall into sin than Catholics. Not in my experience.

Mel

 

[Sherlock]

Mel,

I don’t think you are addressing the answers that people gave you with any kind of willingness to listen. To be honest, after reading these last posts of yours I had to wonder how sincere you were in your initial post, in which it was clear that you had some misunderstandings about Catholicism and possibly some problems with scrupulosity. Most folks responded charitably and sincerely, and your response is to point out how bad the Catholics are that you know (nowhere near the righteousness of Evangelicals). Gosh, inspired by you, maybe we can all chip in with our own accounts of just how publicly Christ-like all of the Evangelicals, Lutherans, or Mormons we know are, and compare those numbers to Catholics. (In my case, I am surrounded by lukewarm Evangelicals who don’t attend any services and honor the Lord’s Day by working like dogs.) Maybe that exercise would prove…what? Wow, wouldn’t that be a valuable addition to discussion?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Mel,

If one is saved they will always be unless they reject Christ. Unbelief is the only sin that will damn some one ultimately.

To quote a well-known Protestant bible scholar, C.H. Spurgeon, “To disbelieve is to disobey.” To assert otherwise lead to antinomianism.

For example, we disobey, and therefore, disbelieve when we commit adultery or murder. This is in contrast to Martin Luther’s assertion: “Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly… as long as we are here [in this world] we have to sin… No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.”(emphasis added). (Letter to Melanchthon, Aug 1, 1521)

 

[Melchior]

Sherlock:

Mel,

I don’t think you are addressing the answers that people gave you with any kind of willingness to listen. To be honest, after reading these last posts of yours I had to wonder how sincere you were in your initial post, in which it was clear that you had some misunderstandings about Catholicism and possibly some problems with scrupulosity. Most folks responded charitably and sincerely, and your response is to point out how bad the Catholics are that you know (nowhere near the righteousness of Evangelicals). Gosh, inspired by you, maybe we can all chip in with our own accounts of just how publicly Christ-like all of the Evangelicals, Lutherans, or Mormons we know are, and compare those numbers to Catholics. (In my case, I am surrounded by lukewarm Evangelicals who don’t attend any services and honor the Lord’s Day by working like dogs.) Maybe that exercise would prove…what? Wow, wouldn’t that be a valuable addition to discussion?

Sherlock,

I was only responding to Martino’s post. Did you see some of the things he wrote? I was just respondig to him. I am certainly grateful for everyones response and I am still reading them.

There are some very helpful things that have been written and I intend to respond. I just happen to have read Martino’s first this morning and since he had a series of questions for me I thought I would answer them while drinking my coffee. I was not ignoring anyone else. But if you are going to be honest read the tone of some of his responses to me and you will see where I was coming from. I was just telling the truth. I was not saying that anything I said makes Catholicism false and Protestantism true.

When lived in the midwest during college I saw the very nominal Evangelical culture there. And the few Catholics I knew seemed to be much more serious than the Protestants. But that is not where I live and not where I grew up. Obviously, people on this forum cna put many a Protestant to shame. But I was responding to a cheap shot.

I am seriously considering Catholicism but I am also trying to work things out and short, snappy answers to every sentence I wrote are not what I was looking for. Since I was baring my soul and not just having a general theological discussion or looking to debate I would expect someone to be more considerate and thoughtful, like most of the posts have been. If someone is just interested in challenging me for the sake of debate then they should do so in another thread. This one was quite personal.

BTW, Mormons do not belong in the same category as Christians groups. But that to can be in another thread.

Mel

 

[Sherlock]

Melchoir,

Fair enough.

You wrote: “BTW, Mormons do not belong in the same category as Christians groups.”

I know, but I included them because if we are to judge a theology not on its doctrines but on the perceived righteousness of its adherents, then the Mormons I know are heads and tails above the Evangelicals of my acquaintance. My point was to show how unsatisfactory and subjective this approach is.

 

[Melchior]

Ryan, Chris, Josh, Dave, Tantum, Salmon, Matt 16_18, Catholic Guy, Germys9, The Mutant, Vincent, b32865 and Whit,

Thank you all for your responses.

I may be reading between the lines but I think some of you believe I suffer from Scruples. And I just thought it was a board game all this time. If it is anything like the shingles I understand it is very painful.

There were some really helpful answers here. If I had time I would respond to every post. But you have given me lots to read and pray and think about.

Thanks to you I am seeing these issues with new eyes. Or I am at least starting too.

Blessings,

Mel

 

[Melchior]

Sherlock:

Melchoir,

Fair enough.

You wrote: “BTW, Mormons do not belong in the same category as Christians groups.”

I know, but I included them because if we are to judge a theology not on its doctrines but on the perceived righteousness of its adherents, then the Mormons I know are heads and tails above the Evangelicals of my acquaintance. My point was to show how unsatisfactory and subjective this approach is.

Ahhh. I understand now. I agree. Thanks, Sherlock.

Mel

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Mel,

One more thing to ponder …

You said:

Rejecting Christ is the only thing that damns some one according to Him.

True. But you can reject Christ by your actions, such as adultery and murder, and other such grave sins.

“For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.” (Rom 2:13)

This is not works-based salvation, but the “obedience of faith,” which St. Paul emphasized to us in the same epistle (Rom 1:5; 16:26).

Again from Protestant scholar C.H. Spurgeon:

If we transgress against him, we shall soon be in trouble; but a holy walk—the walk described by my text as faith working obedience—is heaven beneath the stars. God comes down to walk with men who obey. If they walk with him, he walks with them. The Lord can only have fellowship with his servants as they obey. Obedience is heaven in us, and it is the preface of our being in heaven. Obedient faith is the way to eternal life—nay, it is eternal life revealing itself.

In Sacred Scripture, the opposite of “believe” is “disobey”:

The word believe in biblical times carried with it the concept of obedience and reliance. Kittel says “pisteuo means ‘to trust’ (also ‘to obey’) . . .” Vines says, “. . . reliance upon, not mere credence . . .” This is confirmed further by John the Baptist’s statement in John 3:36 "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not (apeitheo) the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (KJV) The word apeitheo is understood by all good translators and commentators to mean obedience. The opposite (antonym) of believe is *disobey. *The verse in the RSV says "He who believes (“is believing”, present tense) in the Son. . . he who disobeys (“is disobeying” present tense) the Son . . . " The NASB translates the verse like this: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him”. Kittel, a Protestant reference work, clearly defines *apeitheo *to mean “to be disobedient.” The word *belief *has the element of obedience wrapped in its arms and the opposite of biblical belief is disobedience. One cannot consider themselves to be biblical if they teach salvation by mental assent (which amounts to cheap grace) *without *the subsequent and corollary present and ongoing obedience. (Steve Ray, “Does John 3:16 Teach Eternal Security Through Faith Alone?”)

 

[Mijoy2]

threej_lc:

Thanks for posting.

It would seem to me that the basis of your complaint is a misunderstanding of what a mortal sin is.

Josh

I relate to Mel, this is a huge problem of mine too. It appears to me there is a double standard. The double standard that comes from the interpretation of Mortal sin.

We use the term “grievious act” yet we put masturbation and missing Mass in this catagory. These may in fact be mortal sins, in fact I believe the argument for them to be mortal is quite clear in the CCC. Yet (and I apologize to those who have read my posts in the past, I just can’t seem to get beyond this) we rarely if ever bring up the FACT that the vast majority of Catholics commit one or the other, or both, of these sins continuously. Maybe not the majority of Catholics that frequent these forums but certainly the majority of Catholics as a whole. There is a disconnect here. It is not confronted directly by either the popular apologists (here and elsewhere) or the Priests at our parishes. How can anyone have peace knowing thier friends and family members are in a state of mortal sin?

Follow the logic:

Missing Mass is a mortal sin
Mortal sin puts us in serious jeopardy of eternal damnation.
Most everyone misses Mass frequently (people in these forums excluded)
This is not seen as a serious matter!!!

I used missing Mass as the mortal sin of choice in the above example because I believe it can’t be denied that most people do. Let alone the fact that one must be Catholic in order to miss Mass in the first place. (of course I understand that implicable ignorance may apply here. However that would make them better off then most Catholics)

The definition of mortal sin also troubles me greatly. It is either largely subjective or the vast majority of sins are mortal.

Allow me to sight and example:
One does not give his employer his full 8 hours that is expected. He slacks off a bit throughout the day. Lets say he gives 7.5 hours.

1. Grevious matter: He has violated one of the ten commandments: Thou shall not steal.
2. Full knowledge: Of course he knew what he was doing and knew it was wrong.
3. He did it of his own will.

Other sins that can easily be argued as Mortal this way (all of these brake at least one of the ten commandments).

talked about a co-worker in a negative light.
stole a pen.

This issue is not confronted head on by the Church, it appears to me. The people who visit these forums have varying ideas. To further complicate this, I do not think that the people visiting these forums represent a cross-section of Catholics. What of the others? What of the majority? I can’t seem to come to resolution with this.

 

[Sherlock]

Mel,

You have my sincere prayers.

By the way, I see that I wrote “heads and tails” instead of “heads and shoulders”—heh heh. Reminds me of when I once said of someone, “He smokes like a fish”.

 

[martino]

I re-read my last post and wish to go in a different direction.

Peace is not gained by “not struggling” but by “not sinning”!
The only real peace we can have is in pleasing God.

The struggle and the suffering we go through in this life is not only quite necessary but its quite good for us. If we cease to fight then we risk losing everything.

Whether you go to to a Lutheran or Catholic Church, it doesn’t matter much because “you” go with yourself everywhere. And “you” are your own worst enemy, that is true for all of us. The spirit and the flesh battle it out within us every day. The flesh can only win if we stop fighting, if we give up. This is the combat that Paul talks about. We are not supposed to be comfortable in this world, this is not our home. The kind of peace that some seek doesnt even exist for us. St. Paul says that he dies daily, beats his body (the flesh) into submission (to the spirit), so that he won’t lose his own salvation after preaching the Gospel to others. He certainly did not presume on God’s mercy.

Our sins against God should cause “terror”. Terror is a great place to start. The worst place to be is where the pain we cause God no longer dismays us. Is our conscious now asleep or do we just ignore it?

It is quite true that it is impossible not to sin; the question is this: have we advanced in purity and virtue or have we remained the same? The farther we advance and the holier we become the more sensitive we become to our sins, even the littlest ones. If we become comfortable in our sins then we forfeit the battle and give ourselves over to sin. The devil cant take anything from us, we have to give it to him.

My point is this; if our sins cause us to suffer, then we must seek to stop sinning, not to stop suffering. Suffering is the pathway to heaven, sinning is the pathway to hell.

Better to be scrupulous than indifferent to sin!

 

[Melchior]

Mijoy2:

I relate to Mel, this is a huge problem of mine too. It appears to me there is a double standard. The double standard that comes from the interpretation of Mortal sin.

We use the term “grievious act” yet we put masturbation and missing Mass in this catagory. These may in fact be mortal sins, in fact I believe the argument for them to be mortal is quite clear in the CCC. Yet (and I apologize to those who have read my posts in the past, I just can’t seem to get beyond this) we rarely if ever bring up the FACT that the vast majority of Catholics commit one or the other, or both, of these sins continuously. Maybe not the majority of Catholics that frequent these forums but certainly the majority of Catholics as a whole. There is a disconnect here. It is not confronted directly by either the popular apologists (here and elsewhere) or the Priests at our parishes. How can anyone have peace knowing thier friends and family members are in a state of mortal sin?

Follow the logic:

Missing Mass is a mortal sin
Mortal sin puts us in serious jeopardy of eternal damnation.
Most everyone misses Mass frequently (people in these forums excluded)
This is not seen as a serious matter!!!

I used missing Mass as the mortal sin of choice in the above example because I believe it can’t be denied that most people do. Let alone the fact that one must be Catholic in order to miss Mass in the first place. (of course I understand that implicable ignorance may apply here. However that would make them better off then most Catholics)

The definition of mortal sin also troubles me greatly. It is either largely subjective or the vast majority of sins are mortal.

Allow me to sight and example:
One does not give his employer his full 8 hours that is expected. He slacks off a bit throughout the day. Lets say he gives 7.5 hours.

1. Grevious matter: He has violated one of the ten commandments: Thou shall not steal.
2. Full knowledge: Of course he knew what he was doing and knew it was wrong.
3. He did it of his own will.

Other sins that can easily be argued as Mortal this way (all of these brake at least one of the ten commandments).

talked about a co-worker in a negative light.
stole a pen.

This issue is not confronted head on by the Church, it appears to me. The people who visit these forums have varying ideas. To further complicate this, I do not think that the people visiting these forums represent a cross-section of Catholics. What of the others? What of the majority? I can’t seem to come to resolution with this.

You have articulated my concerns ten tmes better than I could. I would appreciate any response to Mijoy. In fact yuo can ignore what I wrote since I like how she put it better!

Mel

 

[Melchior]

Sherlock:

Mel,

You have my sincere prayers.

By the way, I see that I wrote “heads and tails” instead of “heads and shoulders”—heh heh. Reminds me of when I once said of someone, “He smokes like a fish”.

Thank you!

Lol! After all it’s six of one a dozen of the other.

Mel

 

[martino]

Mijoy2:

Follow the logic:

Missing Mass is a mortal sin
Mortal sin puts us in serious jeopardy of eternal damnation.
Most everyone misses Mass frequently (people in these forums excluded)
This is not seen as a serious matter!!!

.

Miljoy, the above is quite startling, but you are exactly correct. The door to heaven is narrow and few will pass through it. Its important not to follow the crowd because the crowd will surely lead you in the wrong direction. The door to hell is wide and many will pass through it. If what you wrote is true and I believe that it is, that means that a great many of us will not make it to heaven. the devil has convinced us that he doesnt exist. Most people are not concerned with their salvation, they take it for granted. We are at a point in time where most Christians dont really believe that there are serious consequences for sin. The Church has no doubt failed in getting this message out, at least over the last 30 years or so. The fact the my priest doesnt have the balls to stand up in front of his congregation and remind them that they are at great peril and if they do not turn away from sin they could wind up in hell (actually my priest does say that!) is no excuse for me to live a sinful life. His failure to preach the Gospel could certainly land him in hell but I am not going to hell for anyone elses failures. If I am to burn in hell for all eternity it will be for my own transgressions.

We all must decide for ourselves whether or not we really reject sin, our salvation is our own responsibility. We will not be able to point the finger at someone else when we stand before Jesus. “Everybody else was doing it”, is the defense of a fool.

 

[Mijoy2]

martino:

The door to heaven is narrow and few will pass through it. Its important not to follow the crowd because the crowd will surely lead you in the wrong direction. The door to hell is wide and many will pass through it…

Martino, thanks for your reply. However it carries with it a few problems:

Couldn’t it be argued that the plan/design is flawed?

How can anyone live in peace knowing this? Especially those who have children?

How does one reconcile this with a “loving God” a “merciful God”?

Who could be happy in Heaven knowing others, loved ones, are in Hell? This is a paradox. it is impossible.

I think I need to make an appointment with a priest, this simply does not add up. However I worry my quandry will go on.

All this does is emphasize my point.

 

[steve_b]

Melchior:

It seems to me that Salvation in Catholicism is extremely fleeting and ultimately all up to us in the end.

as Lutheran I know that I am forgiven provided I daily repent of my sins.

I know that if I die today (so long as I trust in Christ) He is faithful and merciful and I am forgiven. I know that I can walk away from the faith and in doing so put my soul in mortal peril.

Point #1 if one dies in mortal sin, they will not go to heaven. That is not legalism, that’s scriptural. See scripture references included

Point #2 (forgiveness of sin)
Scripture says, some sins are deadly, and some are not. John says, one shouldn’t pray about the deadly kind for forgiveness. Ask yourself why not? And what is one to do with THAT sin? scripture provided

Point #3 (walking away from the faith)
How old were you when you left the Catholic Church?

Melchior:

being Catholic was to me, a legalistic religion that held sinners to an impossible standard the standard of the law and not the gospel.

But since*** feelings and impressions are just as real as facts***

Who told you this? Facts are Facts. Feelings and impressions
may not even be close to fact or reality.

Melchior:

I thought I would see how you deal with the idea that*** it takes very little to lose your salvation.***

Read Gal 5:19-21 and tell me which sins WILL land you in hell if you die in them. Then ask yourself, Is it easy or hard to commit these sins?

1 Jn 5:16… John says, venial (not deadly)sin you pray about and God forgives you. Mortal(deadly) sin he says you shouldn’tt pray about. You confess THOSE sacramentally. “whose sins you forgive they are forgiven”. Jesus said this only to His 1st bishops, not to every Tom Dick or Harry in Judea. Therefore, It’s assured mortal sin will be forgiven in saramental confession! The other way as John says, isn’t guranteed.

Do you see how the Catholic Church follows scripture? Do you see that there is comfort and reassurance here? This isn’t legalism my friend it’s the faith. Come back to it, and leave the traditions of men.

Melchior:

Right now I am confident that God both saved me and sustains me in the faith. I realize that apostasy is possible but I am confident of better things. I don’t know that I could sleep at night as a catholic. My focus would be on judgment not mercy.

Does anyone know where I am coming from?
Mel

Roll up your sleeves Mel, and learn the faith properly. Put aside all your mischaracterizations and distortions you’ve learned, along with all the “feelings and impressions” you think are fact, but really aren’t. Really learn the faith. Come back to the Church, and leave the traditions of men