Is obedience necessary for your salvation?

[Linkowski]

Nicene…I have to tell you…you are way off base and we will have to meet face to face to fix everything that you have down.

From my calculations - close to about of 100% of the Catholics that I have met. The only one that claimed that they were saved through repentant faith in Christ was a person who was born again in a Baptist Church.

Now, you know that I cannot poll all Catholics throughout the world.

 

[Usagi]

Are people here saying that dying in a state of mortal sin would mean that person will not go to heaven? I spoke to the Curate on this very point last week, and that is definitely wrong.

It is definitely Catholic teaching that those who die in a state of unrepented mortal sin go to Hell. That’s why it’s called “mortal.”

Of course, we have no way of knowing whether any particular individual actually dies in a state of unrepented mortal sin.

CCC 1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

I am interested in hearing more of what your curate said, perhaps in a new thread.

Usagi

 

[jack_hawkins]

It is definitely Catholic teaching that those who die in a state of unrepented mortal sin go to Hell. That’s why it’s called “mortal.”

Well I know who I believe between you and my Curate. I asked him a direct question and got a direct answer.

 

[Lazerlike42]

Well I know who I believe between you and my Curate. I asked him a direct question and got a direct answer.

I’m sorry, but your Curate is, either knowingly or (hopefully) mistakenly, not giving you the teaching of the Catholic Church. I once had a priest who said there was no hell, but that does not make it the teaching of the Church. The teaching of the Church is not determined by what priests, bishops, Curates, or anyone else says - it is ther duty to properly pass the teaching of the Church on to those whom they have charge over.

Quotations could be multiplied to show that this individual is mistaken, but I will provide only one.

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.”[615] The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

 

[jack_hawkins]

Ok, let’s define what you mean by a state of mortal sin?
Is that

1. not having been to confession to confess said mortal sin
2. not being repentent for said mortal sin
   3)other (please specify)
   I cannot remember exactly how I worded the question

I could not join a church that denied the power of the cross as you seem to be saying
Tradition can never contradict scripture

 

[Lazerlike42]

I just mean being in a state of mortal sin. Let me explain how one might be in such a state, and that may clear things up.

When God justifies man, He pours His Love into man’s heart through the Holy Spirit (see Romans 5:5). It is this Love - the very Love of God - which makes a person capable of entering Heaven. For this reason, St. Paul writes that a person with all the faith in the world “gains nothing” without love (See 1 Corinthians 13).

When a person sins mortally, it is a sin against - a rejection of - Love. That is what makes an act a mortal sin: it is completely incompatible with love. When a person makes a mistake, or doesn’t think something through properly, or does something on instinct, those can’t be rejections of Love. However, when one willingly commits murder, or beats someone, or fornicates (that is, uses a person for sexual pleasure without being fully and irrevocably committed to that person), or does any number of other things, knowing fully what they are doing, they are rejecting Love. Thus, the Love of God is lost. St. John writes a great deal about this in his first epistle; see chapter 4 particularly.

A person who has sinned against Love no longer has the Love of God in his soul, and thus cannot enter Heaven. Once this has happened, how does that person get it back? Ultimately, it comes from God. All justification comes from God completely freely. However, in order to receive any gift, a person must want it (this, consequently, is why we say Hope is necessary for salvation - Hope means to desire Heaven, and so obviously a person must desire Heaven if he is to receive it).

There are two ways in which a person may want the gift of God’s Love. The first is that he is afraid of going to Hell. If this is the only reason a person is sorry for an act, this is called imperfect contrition, because the person is sorry, but not perfectly - out of love for God - but only imperfectly - out of fear. In this case, a person must go to confession. God designed how salvation works so that even imperfect people can get to Heaven - and so in confession, God’s Love is once more poured into a person’s heart, where it will remain unless he rejects it again. Of course, if a person merely fears Hell without really having greater motives, then chances are that they will reject Love again sometime soon.

There is another way that a person may receive the gift of God’s Love. This is to be sorry not merely out of fear, but also out of Love for God - to be truly sorry for having offended God (and neighbor). Now, such a person may also be afraid of Hell - and probably would be - but he will also sorry simply for having hurt his Lord and neighbor. Here is the rub, though - the only way to Love God is to have God’s Love already! So, any person who is sorry for having offended God - we call this perfect contrition - is sorry because God has already put His Love back into his heart is already out of the state of mortal sin, because he already has God’s Love in his heart again.

What then, is the difference between the two? Why does one person have perfect contrition and another imperfect? Why does God grant to some that Love prior to confession and others must wait? Ultimately, it is a matter of the person’s free will. Ultimately, even the fear of Hell can only exist by a Grace of God. All contrition - whether imperfect or perfect - comes only by God’s Grace. A simple way of putting it is this: when a person is in mortal sin, God offers them two things: fear of Hell, and Love itself.

It is easier for a person to accept the fear of Hell; it doesn’t require any real self sacrifice, and so most people easily accept this Grace. The Love of God, however, requires a dying to self. To accept the Grace of the Love God means not merely to agree that the sin deserves punishment and to agree not to do it anymore, but requires that a person agree to surrender everything to God, because Love of God requires accepting anything He would ask of you. To accept the Grace of the Love of God requires a person to, essentially, say that his own desires don’t matter, but God’s do. Therefore, many people will accept the Grace of fear, but not the Grace of Love.

Now a person who has perfect contrition is still bound by God’s command to go to confession, and so one with perfect contrition always will, having died to self and submitted to do whatever God asks, even if they don’t personally want to. On top of this, we know that our hearts can deceive us, so going to confession makes sure we have God’s Love returned in case we perhaps thought we had perfect contrition but didn’t. This is another reason by sorrow for Love of God goes to confession - to not do so would to take the chance of not seeing God, and Love doesn’t take risks like that. Love also goes to confession to be forgiven by the Church on behalf of all the people that have been wounded by the sin.

 

[Lazerlike42]

So to sum it up, when a person has mortally sinned, if they die before going to confession that does not necessarily mean they go to Hell. If they were truly sorry for Love of God, then they will go to Heaven (for instance, a man getting hit by a bus on the way to confession). If a person is only sorry for fear, he will go to Hell. Of course, God may grant that person an extraordinary Grace of perfect contrition at the time of death. That is where your Curate is correct - just because you are unrepentant of mortal sin at the last second before death, that doesn’t mean God won’t bring you around at the last moment.

What all of this means practically is simply to strive after the virtues that the Scriptures encourage us to: to love God more and more, to die to self, to love our neighbors more and more. A person trying, by God’s Grace, to do this has little to fear.

 

[nerfherder]

One poster said she was told that was part of Catholic belief, but I have not read anything like that here. According to your curate, how much mortal sin is a person allowed, and still be able to pass through the pearly gates? What if the mortal sin is the unforgivable sin?

Fr Vincent recently advised one enquirer that if one were to commit a mortal sin, and then was hit by a bus before confessing (he/she might make a confession to the Lord), that person would go directly to hell.

I was surprised: this seems a bit heavy.

 

[nerfherder]

I went back to the Keating letter on ‘projects’ and the liberal wing of the Church in the US. I noted he wrote about several propositions made by 5,000 Catholic religious and lay people, including the following:

Article 1 All Catholics have the right to follow their informed consciences in all matters.
Article 2: “Officers of the Church have the right to teach on matters both of private and public morality only after wide consultation with the faithful prior to the formulation of the teaching.”
Article 5: “All Catholics have the right to a voice in all decisions that affect them, including the choosing of their leaders.”
Article 16: “All Catholics, regardless of canonical status (lay or clerical), sex or sexual orientation, have the right to exercise all ministries in the Church for which they are adequately prepared, according to the needs and with the approval of the community.”
Article 26: “All Catholic women have an equal right with men to the resources and the exercise of all the powers of the Church.”
Article 28: “All married Catholics have the right to determine in conscience the size of their families and the appropriate methods of family planning.”
Articles 30 and 31: “All married Catholics have the right to withdraw from a marriage which has irretrievably broken down. All such Catholics retain the radical right to remarry. All Catholics who are divorced and remarried and who are in conscience reconciled to the Church have the right to the same ministries, including all sacraments, as do other Catholics.”
Article 32: “All Catholics have the right to expect that Church documents and materials will avoid sexist language, and that symbols and imagery of God will not be exclusively masculine.”

Note that I do not intend to start a bicker between fundamentalists and liberals within RCC on this thread, but simply indicate that there are those within RCC itself who are, in all conscience, challenging the Church’s stance after 2000 years of great mission. All great religions grow or die. All great denominations grow or die. Challenges are not bad, they are good - and this is a theme that runs through Catholic writing.

 

[nerfherder]

I went back to the Keating letter on ‘projects’ and the liberal wing of the Church in the US. I noted he wrote about several propositions made by 5,000 Catholic religious and lay people, including the following:

Article 1 All Catholics have the right to follow their informed consciences in all matters.
Article 2: “Officers of the Church have the right to teach on matters both of private and public morality only after wide consultation with the faithful prior to the formulation of the teaching.”
Article 5: “All Catholics have the right to a voice in all decisions that affect them, including the choosing of their leaders.”
Article 16: “All Catholics, regardless of canonical status (lay or clerical), sex or sexual orientation, have the right to exercise all ministries in the Church for which they are adequately prepared, according to the needs and with the approval of the community.”
Article 26: “All Catholic women have an equal right with men to the resources and the exercise of all the powers of the Church.”
Article 28: “All married Catholics have the right to determine in conscience the size of their families and the appropriate methods of family planning.”
Articles 30 and 31: “All married Catholics have the right to withdraw from a marriage which has irretrievably broken down. All such Catholics retain the radical right to remarry. All Catholics who are divorced and remarried and who are in conscience reconciled to the Church have the right to the same ministries, including all sacraments, as do other Catholics.”
Article 32: “All Catholics have the right to expect that Church documents and materials will avoid sexist language, and that symbols and imagery of God will not be exclusively masculine.”

Note that I do not intend to start a bicker between fundamentalists and liberals within RCC on this thread, but simply indicate that there are those within RCC itself who are, in all conscience, challenging the Church’s stance after 2000 years of great mission. All great religions grow or die. All great denominations grow or die. Challenges are not bad, they are good - and this is a theme that runs through Catholic writing.

 

[nerfherder]

I went back to the Keating letter on ‘projects’ and the liberal wing of the Church in the US. I noted he wrote about several propositions made by 5,000 Catholic religious and lay people, including the following:

Article 1 All Catholics have the right to follow their informed consciences in all matters.
Article 2: “Officers of the Church have the right to teach on matters both of private and public morality only after wide consultation with the faithful prior to the formulation of the teaching.”
Article 5: “All Catholics have the right to a voice in all decisions that affect them, including the choosing of their leaders.”
Article 16: “All Catholics, regardless of canonical status (lay or clerical), sex or sexual orientation, have the right to exercise all ministries in the Church for which they are adequately prepared, according to the needs and with the approval of the community.”
Article 26: “All Catholic women have an equal right with men to the resources and the exercise of all the powers of the Church.”
Article 28: “All married Catholics have the right to determine in conscience the size of their families and the appropriate methods of family planning.”
Articles 30 and 31: “All married Catholics have the right to withdraw from a marriage which has irretrievably broken down. All such Catholics retain the radical right to remarry. All Catholics who are divorced and remarried and who are in conscience reconciled to the Church have the right to the same ministries, including all sacraments, as do other Catholics.”
Article 32: “All Catholics have the right to expect that Church documents and materials will avoid sexist language, and that symbols and imagery of God will not be exclusively masculine.”

Note that I do not intend to start a bicker between fundamentalists and liberals within RCC on this thread, but simply indicate that there are those within RCC itself who are, in all conscience, challenging the Church’s stance after 2000 years of great mission. All great religions grow or die. All great denominations grow or die. Challenges are not bad, they are good - and this is a theme that runs through Catholic writing.

 

[guanophore]

Fr Vincent recently advised one enquirer that if one were to commit a mortal sin, and then was hit by a bus before confessing (he/she might make a confession to the Lord), that person would go directly to hell.

I was surprised: this seems a bit heavy.

It does, especially in the light of the Divine Mercy Sunday coming up. However, I have heard this too. The Church teaching is clear that we must “persevere until the end”. In circumstances of buses, though, I think an act of contrition would suffice. More educated Catholics might correct me on this.

 

[nerfherder]

It does, especially in the light of the Divine Mercy Sunday coming up. However, I have heard this too. The Church teaching is clear that we must “persevere until the end”. In circumstances of buses, though, I think an act of contrition would suffice. More educated Catholics might correct me on this.

Can you tell me how long an act of contrition takes? You may not have much time before the bus hits, or after it hits. It is all about being taken unawares. And it seems to me that if you only go to confession once or twice a year as is required here, you may be in mortal sin a good deal of the time, and therefore at great eternal risk.

 

[nerfherder]

See also thread: An Eternity in Hell for a Moment of Sin which discussed Fr Vincent Serpa’s reply.

 

[Contarini]

Protestants? Catholics?

Please, don’t tell me about the thief on the cross, or about deathbed conversions. I’m asking if you can be saved without obedience?

Obedience is absolutely necessary for final salvation, yes. For initial salvation too, insofar as repentance and faith are acts of obedience!

Edwin

 

[guanophore]

Can you tell me how long an act of contrition takes? You may not have much time before the bus hits, or after it hits. It is all about being taken unawares. And it seems to me that if you only go to confession once or twice a year as is required here, you may be in mortal sin a good deal of the time, and therefore at great eternal risk.

I have not clocked it, but maybe 60 seconds? I think it has more to do with the attitude of one’s heart, whether one is in rebellion against God at the hour of death. You know how they say that one’s life passes before their eyes? you are right, people can be taken unaware, even if you do go to confession regularly. What they were saying on the Divine Mercy (Foustina) teachings is that there is a moment at death where a person has an opportunity. I don’t think that is an official teaching of the Church. Only God can judge the intentions of the heart, and one must err on the side of the fact that God wants all to be saved.

 

[Tom]

I’ll take the protestant view, if you don’t obey His commands and do His works, you weren’t saved to begin with… lol