It’s often argued that Catholic beliefs about how individuals are saved are confusing. However, I would argue that it is much harder to recognize if you are saved in the Protestant theological framework.
Although different Protestant groups will likely disagree on the particulars, the question of how one can know he is saved is generally answered in a similar way in Protestant circles. This answer normally involves arguing that although Christians may disagree on certain topics, those who “truly” put their faith in Jesus will be saved.
The question that arises after this is obvious, but I have yet to see a Protestant answer. How exactly do we know who has “truly” put his faith in Jesus? This is an ambiguous proposition.
This is a bigger problem for Protestants like Baptists, who believe in eternal security—the doctrine that once a Christian is truly saved, that person will never lose his salvation. Unfortunately, this belief puts many individuals in those groups in a constant state of anxiety with regard to their salvation, as any future sin may cause them to question whether they were truly saved or had truly put their faith in Christ when they thought they had. This may cause them to repeat the process of “getting saved,” only to repeat the process again next time they fall into sin.
This proposition also creates another issue: What about those who, it currently seems, have put their faith in Jesus? If such a person were to fall away in the future, proponents of eternal security would argue that that person never actually had his faith in Jesus and was just faking it the entire time.
Clearly, this is an ad hoc rationalization for the falling away. However, even if the person in question was faking it the entire time, it would have likely seemed as if that person actually did have faith in Jesus. However, he fell away, leading some to believe that he must never have actually had faith. This raises the previous question once again: How do you know who truly has faith in Jesus and who doesn’t? This system just cannot get us to an objective way to determine salvation.
The Catholic paradigm gives much more assurance. In order to understand the Catholic paradigm, I need to talk about mortal sins. Mortal sins are those serious sins that sever the relationship we have with God.
The concept of mortal sins come from a couple of places in Scripture, one place being Matthew 5:19, where Jesus warns about breaking the “least” of these commandments. This statement by Jesus suggests that certain commandments are more important to keep than others, despite what some Protestants may argue. St. Paul also gives specific mortal sins in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.
In general, there are three criteria for determining a mortal sin:
- Extreme nature
- Full consent
- Full knowledge
In order for a sin to be mortal, one needs to have both full knowledge of and full consent to the seriousness of the sin. Therefore, it would not be possible for someone to be punished for a mortal sin that he truly did not know is mortal, given that he is following the truth to the best of his ability.
Given that this is the case, the way a Catholic can know if he is going to heaven is by asking himself this question: “Do I have unrepented mortal sin?”
This is the only question that needs to be answered. If this answer is no, a Catholic can have assurance about his salvation. If the answer is yes, he should probably get to confession!
Assurance of forgiveness is a much easier thing to have in Catholicism as well. When a Catholic sins, he is encouraged to pray to God and ask for forgiveness. After this, he needs to go to confession and be absolved by a priest. The idea that priests can forgive sins is unanimously attested to by the Fathers, with the apostles in John 20:23 explicitly getting the power to forgive sins.
One may wonder why Jesus set it up this way if we can go directly to God for forgiveness, and be forgiven, if we are truly contrite. Although we can be forgiven in this way (for venial sins, or, narrowly, in danger of death), assurance of forgiveness is much better for the human soul. To understand this better, consider your best friend. If you were to do something to that friend that he really did not like, to a point where it put the friendship in a bad position, it would be in your best interest to contact that friend to apologize. Let’s say this is originally done via text. Although you may have some assurance when your friend texts you back and forgives you, you probably won’t have as much assurance until you see him in person.
The Catholic paradigm of confession of sins to a priest works the same way. Although we can be forgiven by going directly to God, Jesus set up this system of confession so that believers can be completely assured that if they were to die walking out of the confessional, they would see Jesus in heaven. (A similar point can be made about Catholic baptism.) This paradigm does not have the same issues that arise in Protestant circles about going to heaven only if you “truly” put your faith in Christ.
In conclusion, the Catholic approach to salvation offers a far more reassuring and objective framework than what the Protestant model presents. By providing clear criteria for mortal sins and a structured path to forgiveness through confession, Catholics can have a much better understanding of their spiritual state. The ability to confidently answer whether one is in a state of mortal sin likewise gives believers much more peace than the Protestant alternative.