Trying to understand Catholic tradition on salvation and eternity

[Incomplete]

It will take a few minutes. I did find Ott’s book on Amazon starting at $95 and up for used.
They must be out of print. I will be back.

Thanks. I really appreciate that. And yeah, $95 is a little steep for me.

 

[fred_conty]

From Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ott p. 261
"Without special Divine Revelation no one can know with the certainty of faith, if he be in the state of grace. (De Fide.)

Against the teaching of the Reformers, that the justified possess certainty of faith which excludes all doubt about their justification, the Council of Trent declared: “If one considers his own weakness and his defective disposition, he may well be fearful and anxious as to his state of grace, as nobody knows with the certainty of faith, which permits of no error, that he has achieved the grace of God.” D 802.
S. Sscripture bears witness to the uncertainty of the state of justification. I Cor. 4,4: “For I am not conscious to myself of anything. Yet am I not hereby justified.” Phil. 2,12: “With fear and trembling work out your salvation.”

The reason for the uncertainty of the state of grace lies in this that without a special revelation nobody can with certainty of faith know whether or not he has fulfilled all the conditions which are necessary for the achieving of justification. The impossibility of the certainty of faith, however, by no means excludes a high mopral certainty supported by the testimony of conscience. Cf S th. i II 112, 5.

 

[w_s_s]

Moral certitude doesn’t appear to be enough…

Moral certainty is certainly enough to receive Holy Communion, just as it is enough to receive the sacrament of Matrimony or Holy Orders post annulment.

 

[Vico]

Mortal (serious) sin requires three conditions together: 1) object is grave matter 2) committed with full knowledge and 3) deliberate consent. The grave matter is per the ten commandments.

CCC 1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart[133] do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

CCC 1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

CCC 1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.

Baltimore Catechism No. 3
Q. 292. Can slight offenses ever become mortal sins?
A. Slight offenses can become mortal sins if we commit them through defiant contempt for God or His law; and also when they are followed by very evil consequences, which we foresee in committing them.

baltimore-catechism.com/lesson6.htm

 

[Incomplete]

From Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ott p. 261
"Without special Divine Revelation no one can know with the certainty of faith, if he be in the state of grace. (De Fide.)

Against the teaching of the Reformers, that the justified possess certainty of faith which excludes all doubt about their justification, the Council of Trent declared: “If one considers his own weakness and his defective disposition, he may well be fearful and anxious as to his state of grace, as nobody knows with the certainty of faith, which permits of no error, that he has achieved the grace of God.” D 802.
S. Sscripture bears witness to the uncertainty of the state of justification. I Cor. 4,4: “For I am not conscious to myself of anything. Yet am I not hereby justified.” Phil. 2,12: “With fear and trembling work out your salvation.”

The reason for the uncertainty of the state of grace lies in this that without a special revelation nobody can with certainty of faith know whether or not he has fulfilled all the conditions which are necessary for the achieving of justification. The impossibility of the certainty of faith, however, by no means excludes a high mopral certainty supported by the testimony of conscience. Cf S th. i II 112, 5.

I really appreciate this. But it still makes no sense to me, for all the reasons I posted above. I can understand not knowing if you will stay in a state of grace until death, but to not know from moment to moment makes no sense. This would seem to contradict the teaching of mortal sin. I’m very confused.

 

[Incomplete]

Mortal (serious) sin requires three conditions together: 1) object is grave matter 2) committed with full knowledge and 3) deliberate consent. The grave matter is per the ten commandments.

CCC 1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart[133] do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

CCC 1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

CCC 1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.

Baltimore Catechism No. 3
Q. 292. Can slight offenses ever become mortal sins?
A. Slight offenses can become mortal sins if we commit them through defiant contempt for God or His law; and also when they are followed by very evil consequences, which we foresee in committing them.

baltimore-catechism.com/lesson6.htm

I understand what mortal sin is. My confusion is that Ott states that it is dogma that we cannot know if we are in a state of grace, yet the definition of mortal sin includes knowing what we are doing is sinful.

 

[Vico]

I understand what mortal sin is. My confusion is that Ott states that it is dogma that we cannot know if we are in a state of grace, yet the definition of mortal sin includes knowing what we are doing is sinful.

Read the entire statement from the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IX
**AGAINST THE VAIN CONFIDENCE OF HERETICS

**But though it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted nor ever have been remitted except gratuitously by divine mercy for Christ’s sake, yet it must not be said that sins are forgiven or have been forgiven to anyone who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins,[47] resting on that alone, though among heretics and schismatics this vain and ungodly confidence may be and in our troubled times indeed is found and preached with untiring fury against the Catholic Church.

Moreover, it must not be maintained, that they who are truly justified must needs, without any doubt whatever, convince themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified except he that believes with certainty that he is absolved and justified,[48] and that absolution and justification are effected by this faith alone, as if he who does not believe this, doubts the promises of God and the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ.

 For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the     virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own     weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since     no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has     obtained the grace of God.

**CHAPTER XII
RASH PRESUMPTION OF PREDESTINATION IS TO BE AVOIDED
**No one, moreover, so long as he lives this mortal life, ought in regard to the sacred mystery of divine predestination, so far presume as to state with absolute certainty that he is among the number of the predestined,[74] as if it were true that the one justified either cannot sin any more, or, if he does sin, that he ought to promise himself an assured repentance.
For except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God has chosen to Himself.

But there is the sacrament of penance through which we can have confidence in our state of grace:

**CHAPTER XIV
THE FALLEN AND THEIR RESTORATION
**
Those who through sin have forfeited and received grace of justification, can again be justified when, moved by God, they exert themselves to obtain through the sacrament of penance the recovery, by the merits of Christ, of the grace lost.[82] For this manner of justification is restoration for those fallen, which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost.[83] For on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of penance when He said:

 Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and     whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.[84]

Hence, it must be taught that the repentance of a Christian after his fall is very different from that at his baptism, and that it includes not only a determination to avoid sins and a hatred of them, or a contrite and humble heart,[85] but also the sacramental confession of those sins, at least in desire, to be made in its season, and sacerdotal absolution, as well as satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers and other devout exercises of the spiritual life, not indeed for the eternal punishment, which is, together with the guilt, remitted either by the sacrament or by the desire of the sacrament, but for the temporal punishment which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, to those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Ghost[86] and have not feared to violate the temple of God.[87] Of which repentance it is written: Be mindful whence thou art fallen; do penance, and do the first works;[88] and again, The sorrow that is according to God worketh penance, steadfast unto salvation;[89] and again, Do penance, and bring forth fruits worthy of penance.[90]

ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

 

[fred_conty]

I really appreciate this. But it still makes no sense to me, for all the reasons I posted above. I can understand not knowing if you will stay in a state of grace until death, but to not know from moment to moment makes no sense. This would seem to contradict the teaching of mortal sin. I’m very confused.

I understand how you feel. Joan of Arc felt the same way. Sometimes some of the other
saints felt that as well especially when they were deprived of all spiritual consolation.
One even said, “Lord if I can’t be with you in the next world, at least I can be with you in
this one.” But our feelings are not a good substitute for our intelligence. So we are in good standing unless something we do drives out the H.S. That is what we have to rely on.

 

[Incomplete]

Read the entire statement from the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IX
AGAINST THE VAIN CONFIDENCE OF HERETICS

But though it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted nor ever have been remitted except gratuitously by divine mercy for Christ’s sake, yet it must not be said that sins are forgiven or have been forgiven to anyone who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins,[47] resting on that alone, though among heretics and schismatics this vain and ungodly confidence may be and in our troubled times indeed is found and preached with untiring fury against the Catholic Church.

Moreover, it must not be maintained, that they who are truly justified must needs, without any doubt whatever, convince themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified except he that believes with certainty that he is absolved and justified,[48] and that absolution and justification are effected by this faith alone, as if he who does not believe this, doubts the promises of God and the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ.

 For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the     virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own     weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since     no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has     obtained the grace of God.

CHAPTER XII
RASH PRESUMPTION OF PREDESTINATION IS TO BE AVOIDED
No one, moreover, so long as he lives this mortal life, ought in regard to the sacred mystery of divine predestination, so far presume as to state with absolute certainty that he is among the number of the predestined,[74] as if it were true that the one justified either cannot sin any more, or, if he does sin, that he ought to promise himself an assured repentance.
For except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God has chosen to Himself.

But there is the sacrament of penance through which we can have confidence in our state of grace:

CHAPTER XIV
THE FALLEN AND THEIR RESTORATION

Those who through sin have forfeited and received grace of justification, can again be justified when, moved by God, they exert themselves to obtain through the sacrament of penance the recovery, by the merits of Christ, of the grace lost.[82] For this manner of justification is restoration for those fallen, which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost.[83] For on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of penance when He said:

 Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and     whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.[84]

Hence, it must be taught that the repentance of a Christian after his fall is very different from that at his baptism, and that it includes not only a determination to avoid sins and a hatred of them, or a contrite and humble heart,[85] but also the sacramental confession of those sins, at least in desire, to be made in its season, and sacerdotal absolution, as well as satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers and other devout exercises of the spiritual life, not indeed for the eternal punishment, which is, together with the guilt, remitted either by the sacrament or by the desire of the sacrament, but for the temporal punishment which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, to those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Ghost[86] and have not feared to violate the temple of God.[87] Of which repentance it is written: Be mindful whence thou art fallen; do penance, and do the first works;[88] and again, The sorrow that is according to God worketh penance, steadfast unto salvation;[89] and again, Do penance, and bring forth fruits worthy of penance.[90]

ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

This is very helpful. Thank you. It seems to contradict Ott, or am I just reading things wrong? I do see the part about not knowing who God has chosen to Himself, but that is under the predestination heading, so I would think that would only speak of a few. Because my overall understanding is that God wants us all, and the part about confession and much of the rest of this seems to contradict Ott and gives me some relief.

 

[Incomplete]

I understand how you feel. Joan of Arc felt the same way. Sometimes some of the other
saints felt that as well especially when they were deprived of all spiritual consolation.
One even said, “Lord if I can’t be with you in the next world, at least I can be with you in
this one.” But our feelings are not a good substitute for our intelligence. So we are in good standing unless something we do drives out the H.S. That is what we have to rely on.

I appreciate this, too, and all of your understanding of my confusion. I am the first to say that feelings are not a substitute. That’s why Ott’s statement doesn’t make sense to me. It would seem to me, especially given the definition of the Church on mortal sin, that we could not knowingly drive out the Holy Spirit, at least not those of us who are trying to do God’s will.

Interesting that you mentioned Joan of Arc. She’s my confirmation saint.

 

[Vico]

This is very helpful. Thank you. It seems to contradict Ott, or am I just reading things wrong? I do see the part about not knowing who God has chosen to Himself, but that is under the predestination heading, so I would think that would only speak of a few. Because my overall understanding is that God wants us all, and the part about confession and much of the rest of this seems to contradict Ott and gives me some relief.

Yes, this part from Trent does state what Ott has listed as “Without special Divine Revelation no one can know with the certainty of faith, if he be in the state of grace”.

**CHAPTER XII - RASH PRESUMPTION OF PREDESTINATION IS TO BE AVOIDED
**…
For except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God has chosen to Himself.

 

[Incomplete]

Read the entire statement from the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IX
AGAINST THE VAIN CONFIDENCE OF HERETICS

 For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the     virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own     weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since     no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has     obtained the grace of God.

CHAPTER XII
RASH PRESUMPTION OF PREDESTINATION IS TO BE AVOIDED
No one, moreover, so long as he lives this mortal life, ought in regard to the sacred mystery of divine predestination, so far presume as to state with absolute certainty that he is among the number of the predestined,[74] as if it were true that the one justified either cannot sin any more, or, if he does sin, that he ought to promise himself an assured repentance.
For except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God has chosen to Himself.

But there is the sacrament of penance through which we can have confidence in our state of grace:

CHAPTER XIV
THE FALLEN AND THEIR RESTORATION

Those who through sin have forfeited and received grace of justification, can again be justified when, moved by God, they exert themselves to obtain through the sacrament of penance the recovery, by the merits of Christ, of the grace lost.[82] For this manner of justification is restoration for those fallen, which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost.[83] For on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of penance when He said:

ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

I read the whole thing on the link you provided, including the Canons, and I think I get it.

First, it is dealing with things like the heresies of “faith alone” and “once saved always saved.” So when it says, “No one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error…” I had read it as you can’t have faith that you will be saved. Having read all of it, it seems to me that they’re saying you can’t know by faith that you are saved, which makes sense with the next words because you can’t say that faith itself is in error. In other words, there are ways you can know, but not just by faith. You can’t be certain of God’s grace because you have faith, and need nothing more than that for certainty.

Then the whole predestination thing, especially after reading the canons that followed, and reading the part that says “as if it were true that the one justified either cannot sin any more, or, if he does sin, that he ought to promise himself an assured repentance”, it seems that is just saying we can’t know how we will be at the end of our lives. In other words, it’s not “once saved always saved.” Just because we are justified does not mean we won’t sin in the future.

Then to add to that, saying that through the sacrament of penance we can have confidence in our state of grace, and then giving ways to be justified after that…all of this suggests that it was NOT saying that we can’t know at the present moment if we are saved or not.

In context, this does not seem to suggest at all that we might not be in a state of grace and not even know it. It just means that we can’t presume by faith alone that we are in a state of grace, and that we can’t presume we will maintain a state of grace. All of that I understand, and all of that is consistent with other Church teachings.

 

[codefro]

I do think this topic has veered off course a bit. While I do like discussing means to discern state of grace, my primary focus is the opportunity of salvation within or without the church. I was upset to hear my RCIA instructor basically agree that it doesn’t matter what religion you are if you are a good person you will go to heaven. Nowhere do I see this in the Catechism, the Church Fathers, or even scripture. It really bums me out that other Catholics diminish the role Christ played in dying for our sins that they make claims that Buddha and Krishna were doing just as much to point us to God.

 

[codefro]

It’s very disappointing :dts:

 

[johnruss]

On the question of whether you need to be Catholic to go to Heaven:

St Augustine has a wonderful point of view:
He said that if you want to reach your destination,
you can either take the straight path on the road,
or you can take the round-about way through the fields,
which is less certain and takes much longer.

 

[uther]

I do think this topic has veered off course a bit. While I do like discussing means to discern state of grace, my primary focus is the opportunity of salvation within or without the church. I was upset to hear my RCIA instructor basically agree that it doesn’t matter what religion you are if you are a good person you will go to heaven. Nowhere do I see this in the Catechism, the Church Fathers, or even scripture. It really bums me out that other Catholics diminish the role Christ played in dying for our sins that they make claims that Buddha and Krishna were doing just as much to point us to God.

I understand your question.

The first thing to understand, in my opinion is that the teaching that some can be saved outside of membership in the Catholic Church, is not in itself a license to speculate about who that might be.

The teaching itself is based in large measure, I think, on St. Paul’s letter to the Romans where he discusses law and grace. In chapter 2 he says;

**[14] When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
[15] They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them
[16] on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. **

And if you go back to chapter 1 verses 18 to 32 you find a scathing condemnation of everyone with a conscience;

[18]For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth.
[19] For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
[20] Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse;
[21] for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. …and so on.

He is saying that everyone, Catholic or not, Old Covenant Jew or not, has the capacity to know God and to know right from wrong.

How can he say that?

I think you have to go back to the Fall. Whatever you believe, that the tree was literally a tree or that it was a metaphor in Genesis, the truth of it is inescapable. That truth is that mankind through Adam and Eve gained their knowledge of good and evil right there. Part of their curse was the fall from innocence into the state of having a conscience, and the other part was in separating themselves from God, literally from the tree of life, from the grace that sustained them in communion with God.

So St. Paul can say that nobody has an excuse.

If we reflect on that, then it makes more sense to say that persons in total ignorance of the advent of Jesus Christ, his death and resurrection may participate in the grace of that event if they respond to the grace of the Holy Spirit when he speaks to their hearts. What that entails in terms of faith and a life lived in that grace we can hardly imagine, but it seems to me that it may well be a parallel to a holy Catholic life in esssentials.

Regardless, we are told that although such a case is possible, there is no way for us to know the numbers of such people, nor who they are. As such, the way that we know, the Catholic faith, is the only ordinary way set up by Christ and therefore it is our responsibility to evangelize. We don’t know if that Hare Krishna we meet might be saved without Catholic faith, but we know that he can be saved with it. So that is all we have to know.

 

[uther]

In the case of Protestants. some have spoken of invincible ignorance.

I think we must be careful here as well to understand what St. Paul says about Jesus judging the secrets of men. And we must be judicious in our spreading out of the blanket of invincibility.

In the first instance, we know that someone baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit has received Catholic baptism, whether they know it or not and with that comes some responsibility. Just as there may well be Catholics who go to hell, there may be baptized Protestants there as well.

For the most part we know that Protestants emphasize personal faith, for some almost exclusively. I think that they create their own standard of condemnation by cutting themselves off from the sacraments of the Church, and rather than creating that “assurance of salvation” that many preach, they create more uncertainty because their salvation becomes more, almost exclusively, dependent on their own internal state.

Even those most hide-bound to “once-saved-always-saved” will go to God on their knees when they have committed a serious sin, begging for forgiveness. They will rationalize that in other ways but their instincts tell them that they need forgiveness, that they have separated themselves from grace.

All this to say that they have set themselves up to rationalize away their own sinfulness if such is the case, (as some Catholics do as well) and they hardly have tangible means and method of reconciliation in those times when their feelings are running in a different direction. It can become difficult to distinguish between “feeling saved” and “being saved.”

For the Catholic, those words of absolution by the priest in the confessional have the sacramental power that we can know our sins are forgiven regardless of how we feel. Our feelings cannot get mixed up in that because it is external to us.

The Protestant would have a better chance at salvation than a total pagan, of course, because they know Christ, but their obligation to live a holy life and die in a state of grace must not be underplayed in my opinion. Obstinent and willful hatred of the Catholic Church does not seem to me to be a Christian attitude, even for a Protestant.

A mental or logical hurdle may well keep them out of communion with Christ’s Church, but hate and bloody zealotry are dangerous moral ground for Catholics or Protestants. And to knowingly or simply callously spread lies and misinformation about what the Catholic Church teaches is also dangerous moral ground, in my opinion, for however much zeal you have for Jesus Christ, you have a responsibility to speak the truth about others, and there is every opportunity for a Protestant to know what the Catholic Church actually teaches. In that, ignorance is no excuse. Likewise, it is morally wrong and sinful for a Catholic to spread lies about what Protestants believe.

 

[codefro]

Ya, that helps a lot. With Protestant I realize they don’t have the sacraments and therefore must pray a perfect act of contrition. I suppose I just struggle over the idea of other religions and atheists possibly gaining salvation kmowing that their religion denies Christ.

 

[uther]

Ya, that helps a lot. With Protestant I realize they don’t have the sacraments and therefore must pray a perfect act of contrition. I suppose I just struggle over the idea of other religions and atheists possibly gaining salvation kmowing that their religion denies Christ.

For sure. It is a tough teaching to get our heads around, yet I think the main thing to keep in mind is that we won’t know until we get to heaven ourselves (we hope and pray) and in the meantime it is God’s business, not ours, so that we know the path we have been given and must proclaim it as The Way.

But I do think that it is possible to take this teaching and use it as an excuse not to evangelize and I think God will hold us accountable for that attitude.

 

[codefro]

So just so I understand- the general technicality that a non-Christian (whether another religion or atheist) would gain salvation would be if the person was invincibly ignorant and obeyed the natural law of God-or- if the had an explicit or implicit desire to be in the Church and died thus baptism by desire or baptism by blood. Are those basically the two overall guidelines?