Explain salvation to me, please

[DavidFilmer]

Wow… I had never seen that. We are NOT supposed to pray for someone if their sin leads to death, but how are we supposed to know the condition of their heart and whether or not their sin is mortal???

Yeah, John doesn’t give us nearly enough guidance on that one. That’s where the authority of the Church has to make up for what John leaves out.

The Church doesn’t embrace the “pray for them for forgiveness” approach. Instead, She encourages frequent Confession, which does not require any subjective discernment (and is a 100% guarantee).

 

[Horton]

Wow… I had never seen that. We are NOT supposed to pray for someone if their sin leads to death, but how are we supposed to know the condition of their heart and whether or not their sin is mortal???

If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death, you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that you should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death. [1John 5:16,17]

In love, we pray (1 Jn 5:16–17) for those who are in sin, but not in deadly sin (literally, “sin unto death”), probably referring to apostasy or activities brought on under the antichrist; cf. Mk 3:29; Heb 6:4–6; 10:26–31. Even in the latter case, however, prayer, while not enjoined, is not forbidden.

Rather than tell us NOT to pray for any certain person, I believe John is saying while prayer may help, a person in mortal sin (deadly sin) needs to take a couple more steps such as reconciliation.

 

[Gorgias]

I realize this was asked about Catholics and salvation but when Protestants were brought in I felt the need to explain from my perspective.

Rita,

That’s kind of why it’s an odd question to consider. On one hand, Catholics distinguish between sins that lead to death and sins that do not lead to death (as in 1 John 5:16); on the other hand, part of that distinction (in Catholic theology) is whether the person knows the gravity of the sin and yet commits it anyway. Still, the question is a difficult one: if a Protestant does not make this distinction, does that mean that no sins – or all sins – they commit lead to death?

It’s the intersection of Catholic doctrine as it applies to non-Catholic Christians. It’s certainly a difficult topic to broach.

 

[Gorgias]

Here, John clearly distinguishes between venial and mortal sin. He tells us not to pray for someone in mortal sin.

No, he doesn’t.

This is one of the more common logical errors one may make from reading a text. When I person says, “I do not say X”, that does not mean “I say don’t do X”; it just means “I’m not saying ‘X’”. Subtle – yet important! – difference!

In this context, it doesn’t mean “don’t pray for those committing mortal sin;” rather, it means that praying for a person committing a mortal sin will not lead to the result that “God will give him life.” Important distinction, there…

 

[DavidFilmer]

In this context, it doesn’t mean “don’t pray for those committing mortal sin;” rather, it means that praying for a person committing a mortal sin will not lead to the result that “God will give him life.” Important distinction, there…

Yes, quite correct. I think “pray by default” is the best approach (though I admit to rarely achieving it).

 

[Gorgias]

I think “pray by default” is the best approach (although we as Christians] rarely achieve it).

Boy, ain’t that the truth!

(As an example, I wonder how many who embrace the name ‘Christian’ are truly praying for Dylann Roof right now. The guy – however broken – really needs God’s grace right now…)

 

[slh3016]

Not too good.

There’s a centuries-old theological debate about whether it is “easy” or “hard” for a person of good will to commit mortal sin. For the sake of protestants, I hope it’s “hard.”

Because, if it’s “easy,” then they ordinarily have no recourse to Sacramental Confession.

Honestly, this “issue” gives me a lot of frustration, particularly because I’m technically still a Protestant, but just started RCIA after researching the Church for over 2 years and being fully convinced already of its legitimacy.

If Protestants or anyone outside the Catholic Church do not have access to the Sacraments, especially the Sacrament of Reconciliation UNTIL they have come into the Church at Easter, why would the church put a huge obstacle (RCIA) in the way to Reconciliation? That seems rather absurd, don’t you think?

I’m not knocking RCIA AT ALL but I’ve been ready to confess my sins for a LONG time now but have to wait until next March to hear those words of absolution. If the Catholic Church position is that I can’t be forgiven until I go to Confession and I can’t go to Confession until I’ve completed RCIA and about to enter the Church NEXT Easter, what happens should I die in the meantime?

I doubt that is how Christ REALLY wanted this to work

As for now, I have to trust Jesus that my heartfelt confession TO HIM alone (without a priest) and my remorse over my sins are sufficient. I think Confession is the “normative” means but definitely not the ONLY means to forgiveness

 

[alchemon]

Here is a question I struggle with regarding the logic of mortal sin. If salvation is the result of baptism and not dying in a state of mortal sin, then wouldn’t the ideal solution be to baptize an infant and then never teach him about the faith, since mortal sin requires knowledge of God’s law and intentionally disobeying it?

 

[Gorgias]

Honestly, this “issue” gives me a lot of frustration

If Protestants or anyone outside the Catholic Church do not have access to the Sacraments, especially the Sacrament of Reconciliation UNTIL they have come into the Church at Easter, why would the church put a huge obstacle (RCIA) in the way to Reconciliation?

RCIA isn’t an obstacle to the sacraments… it’s preparation for them!

I’m not knocking RCIA AT ALL but I’ve been ready to confess my sins for a LONG time now but have to wait until next March to hear those words of absolution.

I’ll grant you that you have been longing to confess your sins… but I’d assert that you won’t be ready to confess them until you’ve had a chance to fully understand what the Church teaches, and have prepared for Confirmation!

Yes, perhaps you’re one of the few who’s researched the teachings of the Church, and fully understand them – but it would be imprudent for a parish to make that assumption in an unwarranted way. Far better, it seems, that the Church be certain that you’ve been exposed to all her teachings – before you enter into the practice of the sacraments!

Yes, you feel the desire to be forgiven – that’s salutory! – but sometimes, we must temper that desire with the virtue of obedience to Christ’s Church…

If the Catholic Church position is that I can’t be forgiven until I go to Confession and I can’t go to Confession until I’ve completed RCIA and about to enter the Church NEXT Easter, what happens should I die in the meantime?

Do you really think that God would say to you, “I’m sorry … I know you wanted to enter fully into the Church, but since you died before you could, I’m sending you to hell”…? :nope:

I doubt that is how Christ REALLY wanted this to work

That’s why He said, in Mt 16, “what you bind will be bound in heaven, and what you loose will be loosed in heaven… except entry into my Church, which should work this way:…”.

OK… that was snarky – but you get my point, right? The way “Christ REALLY wanted this to work” was to place it in the hands of the Church, to whom He sent the Holy Spirit.

As for now, I have to trust Jesus that my heartfelt confession TO HIM alone (without a priest) and my remorse over my sins are sufficient. I think Confession is the “normative” means but definitely not the ONLY means to forgiveness

Precisely. For those who haven’t been admitted to the sacraments, that is proper.

 

[Gorgias]

Here is a question I struggle with regarding the logic of mortal sin. If salvation is the result of baptism and not dying in a state of mortal sin, then wouldn’t the ideal solution be to baptize an infant and then never teach him about the faith, since mortal sin requires knowledge of God’s law and intentionally disobeying it?

No. Baptism of an infant occurs only with the promise (by his parents) to raise him in the faith.

Baptism isn’t ‘magic’. Baptism without catechesis creates an obligation without a means to fulfill the obligation.

The normative path to salvation is baptism followed by living a life of grace. The ideal means of achieving that is baptism followed by teaching a child how to live a life of grace. Other means of achieving salvation exist; however, this is the way that Jesus taught us as certain.

 

[ichabode]

But it still requires “full knowledge and deliberate consent” [1859] to be mortally sinful. There’s no such thing as a sin that is always mortally sinful, since the act itself is only 1/3 of the equation.

David, I respectfully disagree. The CCC paragraph following 1859 is 1860 which states, “But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man.”

A sin that violates the moral law would not be diminished because of “full knowledge”. Though deliberate consent is always necessary in the idea that you cannot be forced or tortured into a sin because it would not be free will.

A quick comment on full knowledge (this has nothing to do with David’s post). Many people including myself who had read Fr. Richard McBrien’s catechism or “Christ Among Us” were led to believe mortal sin is not possible because of the condition “full knowledge”. Full knowledge does not mean infused knowledge it is simply a term that states do you know what the Church teaches on a subject, and this includes public revelation.

A simple example, Do you know what the Church’s position is in regard to contraception? You have full knowledge and seeking out a sympathetic priest to make life easier does not diminish full knowledge on the subject no matter what he might have told you.

 

[alchemon]

Then, according to your logic, there must be something outside of baptism and the lack of mortal sin that is integral for salvation. The true answer to the original question is the salvation is only due to the grace of God since all have sinned and fallen short of His glory.

However, baptism, faith, good works, and the lack of mortal sin (which may be semantically argued to be good works) are all required for salvation. To use the legalistic approach of mortal sin + baptism are the only two requirements is to belittle the process.

 

[fhansen]

Right I know.

Faith and Baptism

1253 Baptism is the sacrament of faith. But faith needs the community of believers. It is only within the faith of the Church that each of the faithful can believe. The faith required for Baptism is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop. The catechumen or the godparent is asked: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” The response is: “Faith!”

1254 For all the baptized, children or adults, faith must grow after Baptism. For this reason the Church celebrates each year at the Easter Vigil the renewal of baptismal promises. Preparation for Baptism leads only to the threshold of new life. Baptism is the source of that new life in Christ from which the entire Christian life springs forth.

1255 For the grace of Baptism to unfold, the parents’ help is important. So too is the role of the godfather and godmother, who must be firm believers, able and ready to help the newly baptized - child or adult on the road of Christian life. Their task is a truly ecclesial function (officium). The whole ecclesial community bears some responsibility for the development and safeguarding of the grace given at Baptis

This is a very important distinction-in case we begin to think that salvation is merely the result of mechanical actions: Baptism and refraining from mortal sin. Here is the beginning of our justification/salvation:

**183 Faith is necessary for salvation. The Lord himself affirms: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” **(Mk 16:16).

But even from there we don’t rest on our laurels. The Christain faith is a walk, where we’re justified by God and expected to grow in more justice yet. Sin is struggled with throughout life, and we overcome it by the grace to change, as we cooperate with God in a living communion with Him. Sin is overcome as we’re transformed into God’s image, into beings who love, which excludes sin by its nature as ‘love fulfills the law’ Rom 13:8, and obviously fulfills the greatest laws, the two Greatest Commandments, which define the epitome of justice/holiness for man.

 

[slh3016]

RCIA isn’t an obstacle to the sacraments… it’s preparation for them!

No, I get that, but since a long drawn-out RCIA process is relatively new, it gives me pause to wonder why, if Confession is necessary for conversion and forgiveness of sins, that it is withheld.

I’ll grant you that you have been longing to confess your sins… but I’d assert that you won’t be ready to confess them until you’ve had a chance to fully understand what the Church teaches, and have prepared for Confirmation!

I don’t know, I’m not sure that’s what Jesus would’ve said if someone fell at His feet in true repentance and remorse.

Yes, perhaps you’re one of the few who’s researched the teachings of the Church, and fully understand them – but it would be imprudent for a parish to make that assumption in an unwarranted way. Far better, it seems, that the Church be certain that you’ve been exposed to all her teachings – before you enter into the practice of the sacraments!

Yes, I get that and I agree. It’s been an intense two years already of studying and I’m just so ready

Yes, you feel the desire to be forgiven – that’s salutory! – but sometimes, we must temper that desire with the virtue of obedience to Christ’s Church…

No, I’m ready for that, too

Do you really think that God would say to you, “I’m sorry … I know you wanted to enter fully into the Church, but since you died before you could, I’m sending you to hell”…? :nope:

Well, I certainly hope not, but there are some on these threads that might have that attitude and present it as the Church’s attitude

I’ve also heard some say, “Well, you might be forgive if you have perfect contrition, but that’s a tricky thing because conditions x,y, and z must be present…….” which seems like it makes the “burden of proof” much greater for a non-Catholic to be forgiven than for a Catholic to be forgiven, yet some also say it’s harder for non-Catholics to commit mortal sins because they don’t realize they are mortal sins……see how confusing and tricky this all seems (when you disconnect yourself from Jesus)

That’s why He said, in Mt 16, “what you bind will be bound in heaven, and what you loose will be loosed in heaven… except entry into my Church, which should work this way:…”.

OK… that was snarky – but you get my point, right? The way “Christ REALLY wanted this to work” was to place it in the hands of the Church, to whom He sent the Holy Spirit.

Again, though, was the process for entering His Church in the Apostolic era easier/harder than it is today?

Should there be a shorter process to get people into the Church and access to the Sacraments followed then by an intense period of Catechesis? These are the questions I ponder.

 

[Gorgias]

David, I respectfully disagree. The CCC paragraph following 1859 is 1860 which states, “But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man.”

Correct. The distinction that the CCC is making, there, is between ‘full knowledge’ and the ‘principles of the moral law.’ No one can claim to be ignorant of the latter, but that does not imply the presence of the former. (Else, it wouldn’t be necessary to include ‘full knowledge’ in the definition of mortal sin.)

A sin that violates the moral law would not be diminished because of “full knowledge”.

Again, correct: the objective gravity of a sin is the same, whether or not the person committing the sin does so “with full knowledge and deliberate consent” or not. However, the subjective imputability of that sin to the person is what is diminished: a grave sin committed without deliberate consent is imputed to the person as a venial sin.

A quick comment on full knowledge (this has nothing to do with David’s post). Many people including myself who had read Fr. Richard McBrien’s catechism or “Christ Among Us” were led to believe mortal sin is not possible because of the condition “full knowledge”.

That’s the other extreme; ‘full knowledge’ is neither automatic and ubiquitous nor impossible.

 

[Vico]

What does a person have to do to be saved, according to Catholicism?

Baltimore Catechism #4.

1. Q. What do you mean by grace?A. By grace I mean a supernatural gift of God bestowed on us, through the merits of Jesus Christ, for our salvation.
   “Supernatural,” that is, above nature. “A gift”; something, therefore, that God does not owe us. He owes us nothing, strictly speaking. Health, talents, and such things are natural gifts, and belong to our nature as men; but grace is something above our nature, given to our soul. God gives it to us on account of the love He has for His Son, Our Lord, who merited it for us by dying for us. “Merits.” A merit is some excellence or goodness which entitles one to honor or reward. Grace is a help we get to do something that will be pleasing to God. When there is anything in our daily works that we cannot do alone, we naturally look for help; for example, to lift some heavy weight is only a natural act, not a supernatural act, and the help we need for it is only natural help. But if we are going to do something above and beyond our nature, and cannot do it alone, we must not look for natural, but for supernatural help; that is, the help must always be like the work to be done. Therefore all spiritual works need spiritual help, and spiritual help is grace.
2. Q. Is grace necessary for salvation?A. Grace is necessary for salvation, because without grace we can do nothing to merit Heaven.
3. Q. Can we resist the grace of God?A. We can and unfortunately often do resist the grace of God.
   Grace is a gift, and no one is obliged to take a gift; but if God offers a gift and we refuse to take it, we offend and insult Him. To insult God is to sin. Therefore to refuse to accept, or to make bad use of the grace God gives us, is to sin.
4. Q. What is the grace of perseverance?A. The grace of perseverance is a particular gift of God which enables us to continue in the state of grace till death.
   “Perseverance” here does not mean perseverance in our undertakings, but perseverance in grace – never in mortal sin, always a friend of God. Now, if God keeps us from all sin till the day of our death and takes us while we are His friends, then He gives us what we call the gift of final perseverance. We cannot, strictly speaking, merit this great grace, but only pray for it; so anyone who commits mortal sin may be taken just in that state and be lost for all eternity.
5. Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation? A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
   Those who through no fault of theirs die without Baptism, though they have never committed sin, cannot enter Heaven neither will they go to Hell. After the Last Judgment there will be no Purgatory. Where, then, will they go? God in His goodness will provide a place of rest for them, where they will not suffer and will be in a state of natural peace; but they will never see God or Heaven. God might have created us for a purely natural and material end, so that we would live forever upon the earth and be naturally happy with the good things God would give us. But then we would never have known of Heaven or God as we do now. Such happiness on earth would be nothing compared to the delights of Heaven and the presence of God; so that, now, since God has given us, through His holy revelations, a knowledge of Himself and Heaven, we would be miserable if left always upon the earth. Those, then, who die without Baptism do not know what they have lost, and are naturally happy; but we who know all they have lost for want of Baptism know how very unfortunate they are.
   Think, then, what a terrible crime it is to willfully allow anyone to die without Baptism, or to deprive a little child of life before it can be baptized! Suppose all the members of a family but one little infant have been baptized; when the Day of Judgment comes, while all the other members of a family-father, mother, and children-may go into Heaven, that little one will have to remain out; that little brother or sister will be separated from its family forever, and never, never see God or Heaven. How heartless and cruel, then, must a person be who would deprive that little infant of happiness for all eternity-just that its mother or someone else might have a little less trouble or suffering here upon earth.
6. Q. Is Baptism of desire or blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water? A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.
7. Q. What do we promise in Baptism? A. In Baptism we promise to renounce the devil with all his works and pomps.

 

[Vico]

What does a person have to do to be saved, according to Catholicism?

Baltimore Catechism #2

1. Q. Are sins against faith, hope and charity also sins against the first Commandment? A. Sins against faith, hope, and charity are also sins against the first Commandment.
2. Q. How does a person sin against faith? A. A person sins against faith: 1st, by not trying to know what God has taught; 2d, by refusing to believe all that God has taught; 3d, by neglecting to profess his belief in what God has taught.
3. Q. How do we fail to try to know what God has taught? A. We fail to try to know what God has taught by neglecting to learn the Christian doctrine.
4. Q. Who are they who do not believe all that God has taught? A. They who do not believe all that God has taught are the heretics and infidels.
5. Q. Who are they who neglect to profess their belief in what God has taught? A. They who neglect to profess their belief in what God has taught are all those who fail to acknowledge the true Church in which they really believe.
6. Q. Can they who fail to profess their faith in the true Church in which they believe expect to be saved while in that state? A. They who fail to profess their faith in the true Church in which they believe cannot expect to be saved while in that state, for Christ has said: “Whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.”
7. Q. Are we obliged to make open profession of our faith? A. We are obliged to make open profession of our faith as often as God’s honor, our neighbor’s spiritual good, or our own requires it. “Whosoever,” says Christ, “shall confess Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven.”

 

[fhansen]

Baltimore Catechism #4.

1. Q. What do you mean by grace?A. By grace I mean a supernatural gift of God bestowed on us, through the merits of Jesus Christ, for our salvation.
   “Supernatural,” that is, above nature. “A gift”; something, therefore, that God does not owe us. He owes us nothing, strictly speaking. Health, talents, and such things are natural gifts, and belong to our nature as men; but grace is something above our nature, given to our soul. God gives it to us on account of the love He has for His Son, Our Lord, who merited it for us by dying for us. “Merits.” A merit is some excellence or goodness which entitles one to honor or reward. Grace is a help we get to do something that will be pleasing to God. When there is anything in our daily works that we cannot do alone, we naturally look for help; for example, to lift some heavy weight is only a natural act, not a supernatural act, and the help we need for it is only natural help. But if we are going to do something above and beyond our nature, and cannot do it alone, we must not look for natural, but for supernatural help; that is, the help must always be like the work to be done. Therefore all spiritual works need spiritual help, and spiritual help is grace.
2. Q. Is grace necessary for salvation?A. Grace is necessary for salvation, because without grace we can do nothing to merit Heaven.
3. Q. Can we resist the grace of God?A. We can and unfortunately often do resist the grace of God.
   Grace is a gift, and no one is obliged to take a gift; but if God offers a gift and we refuse to take it, we offend and insult Him. To insult God is to sin. Therefore to refuse to accept, or to make bad use of the grace God gives us, is to sin.
4. Q. What is the grace of perseverance?A. The grace of perseverance is a particular gift of God which enables us to continue in the state of grace till death.
   “Perseverance” here does not mean perseverance in our undertakings, but perseverance in grace – never in mortal sin, always a friend of God. Now, if God keeps us from all sin till the day of our death and takes us while we are His friends, then He gives us what we call the gift of final perseverance. We cannot, strictly speaking, merit this great grace, but only pray for it; so anyone who commits mortal sin may be taken just in that state and be lost for all eternity.
5. Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation? A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
   Those who through no fault of theirs die without Baptism, though they have never committed sin, cannot enter Heaven neither will they go to Hell. After the Last Judgment there will be no Purgatory. Where, then, will they go? God in His goodness will provide a place of rest for them, where they will not suffer and will be in a state of natural peace; but they will never see God or Heaven. God might have created us for a purely natural and material end, so that we would live forever upon the earth and be naturally happy with the good things God would give us. But then we would never have known of Heaven or God as we do now. Such happiness on earth would be nothing compared to the delights of Heaven and the presence of God; so that, now, since God has given us, through His holy revelations, a knowledge of Himself and Heaven, we would be miserable if left always upon the earth. Those, then, who die without Baptism do not know what they have lost, and are naturally happy; but we who know all they have lost for want of Baptism know how very unfortunate they are.
   Think, then, what a terrible crime it is to willfully allow anyone to die without Baptism, or to deprive a little child of life before it can be baptized! Suppose all the members of a family but one little infant have been baptized; when the Day of Judgment comes, while all the other members of a family-father, mother, and children-may go into Heaven, that little one will have to remain out; that little brother or sister will be separated from its family forever, and never, never see God or Heaven. How heartless and cruel, then, must a person be who would deprive that little infant of happiness for all eternity-just that its mother or someone else might have a little less trouble or suffering here upon earth.
6. Q. Is Baptism of desire or blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water? A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.
7. Q. What do we promise in Baptism? A. In Baptism we promise to renounce the devil with all his works and pomps.

The Church no longer teaches strictly according to 154 above

 

[Gorgias]

No, I get that, but since a long drawn-out RCIA process is relatively new

Actually, a lengthy period of catechesis isn’t “relatively new”: it was present in the Church at least by the 6th century AD. It may be relatively newly restored, but it’s been part of the history of the Church.

, it gives me pause to wonder why, if Confession is necessary for conversion and forgiveness of sins, that it is withheld.

It’s not necessary for conversion, per se: one enters the confessional already repentant.

And, of course, it is not absolutely withheld: the pastor may decide when the appropriate time, leading up to the Easter Vigil, might be to offer the Sacrament to the Candidates for Confirmation. Moreover, for those ‘in danger of death,’ the sacrament may be administered. (The phrase ‘in danger of death’ has a particular and precise meaning in canon law. Without getting too far off onto a tangent, rest assured that it doesn’t simply mean “on one’s deathbed.”)

I don’t know, I’m not sure that’s what Jesus would’ve said if someone fell at His feet in true repentance and remorse.

He would have said, “Go and sin no more,” wouldn’t He have? And yet, what He didn’t say was “ok, now – go get yourself baptized, and confirmed, and receive the Eucharist.” No – it wasn’t the proper time for that; so, those who believed in Jesus had to wait, didn’t they…?

Well, I certainly hope not, but there are some on these threads that might have that attitude and present it as the Church’s attitude

Right. And they would be in dire need of catechesis.

see how confusing and tricky this all seems

See how valuable completing a good, solid program of catechesis is?

Again, though, was the process for entering His Church in the Apostolic era easier/harder than it is today?

Apostolic era? The first few centuries of the Church was the time that the catechumenate was developed!

Now, in the time of Scripture, we see the Ethiopian eunuch (“what is to prevent my being baptized?”). But, note the context: that was not an ordinary occurrence – rather, it was extraordinary and unconventional! It was a special intervention by the Holy Spirit for this one man! We see no other occurrences of such an event. So… we conclude, I’d assert, that the Church – having been given authority – was allowed to make its own decisions and set its own standards… which, as it turns out, is exactly what the situation today is?

Should there be a shorter process to get people into the Church and access to the Sacraments followed then by an intense period of Catechesis? These are the questions I ponder.

It’s an interesting question, and probably worthy of a thread in its own right. My brief answer might be that entrance into the Church is an irreversible process (‘once a Catholic, always a Catholic’), and before a person commits himself to the obligations he assumes as a Catholic, he must know what he’s getting himself into. Otherwise, we’re at risk of being perceived as a cult or a bait-and-switch operation. That’s not something that the Church has ever been.

(By the way: the current standard – in a good RCIA program – is ‘access to the sacraments followed by an intense period of’ mystagogy, when the newly-initiated Catholic is asked to reflect on not only the meaning of the sacraments he’s received, but also the context of his experience of them. There’s already that “intense period” built into the program – but it’s meant to reinforce, not learn, what he’s just done.)

 

[ichabode]

A good RCIA program should bring two lovers together. The catechumen and God. The more one knows about someone the more their is to love. RCIA is meant as the ultimate match maker between sinner and Jesus.

If it helps consider RCIA as an expanded examination of conscience. A time of fasting in the desert to prepare for a good confession, the sacrament of the dead, so that afterwards Jesus will call you forth from your tomb as he called forth Lazarus.