- No. The only way Mary is needed for the salvation of individuals is long past; it was her saying, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me according to thy word”, which was her consent to the Incarnation, through which God Incarnate, being Crucified, we are redeemed.
However, Mary is a sure way to Christ, as the mother points to the son, and the Son to his Mother and his Father; all honor given to Mary, redounds and reposes in Christ.
- This is tricky and should be in another thread, because it depends so much from situation to situation, as the interpretation of the dogmata vary widely. My interpretation: one must believe on Christ as Lord and Savior, and intend to be baptized as soon as possible, if not already baptized in to the Trinity. This is what is required for the first justification, the bare-minimum for salvation (i.e. being configured to God instead of Satan, being transformed by God’s grace from a God-loather to a God-lover, from a rebel to a faithful son, like the Prodigal Son).
On matters of salvation, I adhere to sola gratia, solus Christus, and sola fide, and Bañezian-Thomism, which is the Catholic equivalent of Calvinism, and is quite close to the Reformed understanding, with some differences. However, the majority of differences are very intricate, and require an in-depth knowledge of soteriology in order to be able to comprehend that they are even differences (imputation v. infusion, the relation of prevenient, sufficient, and efficacious grace, the division of God’s will in to antecedent and consequent, for example): to the average lay Christian, they would appear to be very traditional Reformed, with an emphasis on baptismal regeneration. The above are all considered very conservative or traditionalist views by the Church.
I believe that only those who hear the Gospel can be saved, or, through a mysterious working, those who had no possible opportunity to hear the Gospel, can be saved. Those who heard and rejected, who did not convert, or who did not hear the gospel out of laziness or sloth, even though they would have had the chance if they tried (e.g. the entire theory of the “Anonymous Christian” of Rahner, which I categorically reject), are damned. This restricts “not capable of hearing the gospel” to tribesmen in the jungle, and some people living under dictatorial atheistic or Islamic regimes.
Such things as sacraments and works of mercy do not avail for basic justification: they are conduits of grace and tools for growing in holiness, or
sanctification, which is not required for a bare-minimum “salvation as if by fire”.
Think of the example of St Dismas (the Good Thief): Christ promised him heaven, and all he did was believe on Christ (he likely intended to be baptized, as well). Baptism is normally necessary for salvation, but God is not bound by the sacraments he instituted. A man who believes on Jesus, and dies before he can be baptized, is justified by his faith, and saved, as long as he did not commit a mortal sin (or committed a mortal sin without experiencing perfect contrition/contrition of charity, nor received penance) between his justification through believing on Christ as Lord and Saviour, son of the living God, and his death.
)
Might want to check that out too.