Accepting Jesus as Personal Lord and Savior

[justasking4]

You should start a new thread with this question since it’s off-topic here. In fact, there may already be a thread (or twelve) concerning this topic.

Not really. Since the mortal sin would have a direct bearing on Jesus as Savior i think it is relevant to our discussion of sin. Since mortal sin is so devastating in catholic theology knowing what specifically these sins are is of the utmost importance. As you may know there has been alot of dicussion on abortion and voting for candidates who support it is considered mortal sin from what i have read.

 

[jmcrae]

Not really. Since the mortal sin would have a direct bearing on Jesus as Savior i think it is relevant to our discussion of sin. Since mortal sin is so devastating in catholic theology knowing what specifically these sins are is of the utmost importance. As you may know there has been alot of dicussion on abortion and voting for candidates who support it is considered mortal sin from what i have read.

Yes, it is a mortal sin.

Can you understand why Jesus would be sad if we say it’s okay to kill His little ones before they ever get to see the light of day?

If someone voted for a pro-abortion candidate because he was pro-abortion (and not for some other reason, like that he is a better candidate than the other guy, who is also equally pro-abortion), they would not be able to receive Holy Communion until they repented of this sin, understood why it is bad, and confessed it with sincere sorrow in the Confessional.

 

[mercygate]

Not really. Since the mortal sin would have a direct bearing on Jesus as Savior i think it is relevant to our discussion of sin. Since mortal sin is so devastating in catholic theology knowing what specifically these sins are is of the utmost importance. As you may know there has been alot of dicussion on abortion and voting for candidates who support it is considered mortal sin from what i have read.

Yes. It is. Voting for a pro-abortion candidate when a candidate who is stronger towards the pro-life position is on the ballot constitutes active participation in the promotion of killing innocent life. All other issues are subordinate to the issue of killing innocent life.

Somebody who votes specifically pro-abortion is unlikely to repent of his sin, because he is convinced that he is right, and God and the Church are wrong. Does this limit his culpability and thereby demote the sin from mortal to venial? I wouldn’t count on it because guidance from the Church is widely available for those who are unable to connect the dots for themselves. For Catholics “conscience” means “informed conscience.”

 

[RobGentner]

Is it considered by the church that voting for a pro abortion candidate a mortal sin? If so, must that catholic go to confession before they take commnunion?

freesmileys.org/smileys/forum/offtopic.gif

**
Hi JA4, How’s the family?

I am accepting Jesus as my personal Lord and savior. The OP rules

I am glad you asked me an easy question this time! Since you are so smart, I am always afraid when you ask me questions that I may notbe able to answer.
You have been paying attention to the News haven’t you. You rascal you! Did you know we have a new President-elect? Oshama or something like that!

OK, Now here is the real deal:

If a person knowing attempts to receive communion while in a state of mortal sin, they would commit another mortal sin. A priest could withhold the Eucharist out of charity to prevent that from happening. That would be an act of charity on the priest’s part. Now, in RCC moral theology, a mortal sin, as distinct from a venial sin, must meet all of the following three conditions:

1. its subject must be a grave (or serious) matter;
2. it must be committed with full knowledge, both of the sin and of the gravity of the offense (though nobody is deemed to be ignorant of the moral law, embedded into the consciences of every human being);
3. it must be committed with deliberate and complete consent, enough for it to have been a personal decision to commit the sin.

Boy sounds diffucult doesn’t it? Weather it was a sin at all depends on the above test. And how severe a sin might be depends on all those factors. Abortion is a “grave matter”.
Mortal sin, according to the beliefs of Roman Catholicism, and even some of the not so Lost Protestants denominations, is a sin that, unless confessed and absolved (or at least sacramental confession is willed if not available), condemns a person’s soul to Helll after death. These sins are considered “mortal” because they constitute a rupture in a person’s link to God’s saving grace: the person’s soul becomes “dead”, not merely weakened. The phrase is used in I John 5.16 -17: “If you see your brother or sister committing what is not a mortal sin, you will ask, and God will give life to such a one - to those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin that is mortal; I do not say you should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not mortal.” (NRVS)

The Catechism defines grave matter as "violations of what Jesus told to the man who asked him what the most important commandments were, namely, “do not kill”,(ABORTION IS MURDER!) “do not steal”, “do not commit adultery”, “do not bear false witness”, “do not defraud” and “honor your father and your mother”. All of these, however, are subject both to the conditions above and to mitigating circumstances (like mental illness, emotional or behavioral disturbance, insanity, retardation, young age, affective immaturity, or developmental disorders) of the individual situation.
The Church itself does not provide a precise list of sins, subdivided into the mortal and venial categories. Rather, it is generally considered a matter for a well-formed conscience to decide after a comprehensive, prayer-filled, deliberate examination of conscience.**
These sins must be specifically confessed and named, giving details about the context of each sin: what sin, why, against what or whom, the number and type of occurrences, and any other factors that may exacerbate or lessen one’s responsibility and culpability. It also should not be said that certain of these mortal sins, like purposely missing Mass on Sunday is considered equal in gravity to more grave ones, like first-degree murder: Roman Catholic belief holds that mortal sins can vary somewhat in their seriousness, and thus canon law only criminalizes some of the more serious mortal sins. However, for any sins that lack the above mitigating factors and meet the three criteria listed, the “mortal” effect remains present.

Any more question be sure to ask! I can send the same information again for you to read again!

Oh, by the way I also accept the Blessed Mother as my personal intercessor to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, because she is Full of Grace and sinless! Hail Mary!

Kisses! :flowers:

 

[RobGentner]

Not really. Since the mortal sin would have a direct bearing on Jesus as Savior i think it is relevant to our discussion of sin. Since mortal sin is so devastating in catholic theology knowing what specifically these sins are is of the utmost importance. As you may know there has been alot of dicussion on abortion and voting for candidates who support it is considered mortal sin from what i have read.

**JustAsking4: Using your logic we could discuss the Blessed Mother because she has a direct bearing on Jesus as Savior. What you think doesn’t matter it is OFF TOPIC! **
JustAsking4The100thTimeThisWeekAlone:

As you may know there has been alot of dicussion on abortion and voting for candidates who support it is considered mortal sin from what i have read.

**
JA4T1TTWA, **
freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing025.gif

 

[ron77nyc]

Yes, it is a mortal sin.

Can you understand why Jesus would be sad if we say it’s okay to kill His little ones before they ever get to see the light of day?

If someone voted for a pro-abortion candidate because he was pro-abortion (and not for some other reason, like that he is a better candidate than the other guy, who is also equally pro-abortion), they would not be able to receive Holy Communion until they repented of this sin, understood why it is bad, and confessed it with sincere sorrow in the Confessional.

Another serious offense is hoarding wealth and not caring for the poor so voting for either candidate would leave you in mortal sin. Even the Vatican would be guilty.

 

[guanophore]

Another serious offense is hoarding wealth and not caring for the poor so voting for either candidate would leave you in mortal sin. Even the Vatican would be guilty.

While it is true that hoarding wealth and not caring for the poor is considered a mortial sin, the “Vatican” cannot be “guilty”. In order for a mortal sin to be committed, it must involve a soul (willpower, ability to choose). Cities, Countries,and buildings do not have “souls” so cannot commit sins. Mortal sin requires an act of the will. Or, do you think it is possible for “the Vatican” to choose to accept Jesus as Personal Lord and Saviour?

 

[ron77nyc]

Or, do you think it is possible for “the Vatican” to choose to accept Jesus as Personal Lord and Saviour?

I believe Pope Benedict is doing all that is in his power to keep the Church holy but there are one or more consecrated servants, not only today but in the history of the Vatican who are responsible for hoarding the wealth.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

I believe Pope Benedict is doing all that is in his power to keep the Church holy but there are one or more consecrated servants, not only today but in the history of the Vatican who are responsible for hoarding the wealth.

What wealth?

The majority of the Church’s “wealth” is tied up in real estate and in art work. These assets are “public wealth.” They are open for all to visit and see, much like a public museum.

 

[justasking4]

**JustAsking4: Using your logic we could discuss the Blessed Mother because she has a direct bearing on Jesus as Savior. What you think **doesn’t matter it is OFF TOPIC!

**
JA4T1TTWA, **
freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing025.gif

I’m just using a common tactic that i learned from you and your gang… Its IMPLICIT…View attachment 4563

 

[ron77nyc]

What wealth?

The majority of the Church’s “wealth” is tied up in real estate and in art work. These assets are “public wealth.” They are open for all to visit and see, much like a public museum.

This will take me somewhere I don’t want to go so I’ll just stop here and think about all the good things the Church has done.

 

[guanophore]

I believe Pope Benedict is doing all that is in his power to keep the Church holy but there are one or more consecrated servants, not only today but in the history of the Vatican who are responsible for hoarding the wealth.

This is very generous of you to say about the Holy Father. I agree, he is a very pious man. You are right, though, there have been many consecrated servants of God who have committed sins of putting mammon before God. Let us think on those that are honorable, though, and pray for the souls of those who are not.

A good example is St. Lawrence:

St. Lawrence, one of the deacons of the Roman Church, was one of the victims of the persecution of Valerian in 258, like Pope Sixtus II and many other members of the Roman clergy. At the beginning of the month of August, 258, the emperor issued an edict, commanding that all bishops, priests, and deacons should immediately be put to death (“episcopi et presbyteriet diacones incontinenti animadvertantur” – Cyprian, Epist. lxxx, 1). This imperial command was immediately carried out in Rome. On 6 August Pope Sixtus II was apprehended in one of the catacombs, and executed forthwith (“Xistum in cimiterio animadversum sciatis VIII id. Augusti et cum eo diacones quattuor.” Cyprian, ep. lxxx, 1). Two other deacons, Felicissimus and Agapitus, were put to death the same day. In the Roman Calendar of feasts of the fourth century their feast day is on the same date. Four days later, on the 10th of August of that same year, Lawrence, the last of the seven deacons, also suffered a martyr’s death. The anniversary of this holy martyr falls on that day, according to the Almanac of Philocalus for the year 354, the inventory of which contains the principal feasts of the Roman martyrs of the middle of the fourth century; it also mentions the street where his grave is to be found, the Via Tiburtina (“III id. Aug. Laurentii in Tibertina”; Ruinart, “Acta sincera”, Ratisbon, 1859, 632). The itineraries of the graves of the Roman martyrs, as given in the seventh century, mention the burial-place of this celebrated martyr in the Catacomb of Cyriaca in agro Verano (De Rossi, “Roma Sott.”, I, 178).

newadvent.org/cathen/09089a.htm

Now there is a man who accepted Jesus as his personal lord and saviour!

 

[jmcrae]

I believe Pope Benedict is doing all that is in his power to keep the Church holy but there are one or more consecrated servants, not only today but in the history of the Vatican who are responsible for hoarding the wealth.

What “hoarding” would this be?

As far as I know, every dollar the Vatican gets passes through it in the form of wages for members of staff, public works (which belong to the whole world and are open to the public for their enjoyment), general upkeep, and various charitable societies that assist the poor all over the world. Indeed, I am given to understand that the Catholic Church gives, by itself, double the amount of every other organization - government, religious body, or corporation - combined together, each year, for the poor. In other words, if you combine the contributions of the Salvation Army, Microsoft, the Canadian government, and every other government, corporation, and religious body together, the amount is less than half of what the Catholic Church gives all by itself.

So, go ahead and call the Church greedy, and call for shutting it down - two thirds of the world’s poor will probably lynch you for it, though!

And by the way, the art can’t be sold. It belongs to you and me. (And wouldn’t get much on the open market anyway - it’s valuable because it belongs to the Church. Once the Church no longer owns it, it’s no longer even interesting.)

 

[Pixie_Dust]

And by the way, the art can’t be sold. It belongs to you and me. (And wouldn’t get much on the open market anyway - it’s valuable because it belongs to the Church. Once the Church no longer owns it, it’s no longer even interesting.)

Should we call the Louvre and ask them to sell the Mona Lisa, while we’re at it?

 

[ron77nyc]

What “hoarding” would this be?

So, go ahead and call the Church greedy, and call for shutting it down - two thirds of the world’s poor will probably lynch you for it, though!

And by the way, the art can’t be sold. It belongs to you and me. (And wouldn’t get much on the open market anyway - it’s valuable because it belongs to the Church. Once the Church no longer owns it, it’s no longer even interesting.)

I never said the Church was greedy or it should be shut down. If you don’t know what I’m talking about then that’s good. :coffeeread:

 

[justasking4]

What wealth?

The majority of the Church’s “wealth” is tied up in real estate and in art work. These assets are “public wealth.” They are open for all to visit and see, much like a public museum.

Do you think the way the Catholic church raised money before the Prostentant Reformation by Tetzel who was entrusted by the Holy See with the proclamation of indulgences in which the money was used to build the church in Rome should be returned since it was raised on a false premise?

 

[jmcrae]

Do you think the way the Catholic church raised money before the Prostentant Reformation by Tetzel who was entrusted by the Holy See with the proclamation of indulgences in which the money was used to build the church in Rome should be returned since it was raised on a false premise?

I’m going to be “jesuitical” here and answer a question with a question.

Do you think that Oral Roberts should return all of the money that he has raised for his University (and presumably shut down his University and throw all of his employees out on the street), because of the fact that he claimed to have had a vision from God that he would die if the money was not raised?

 

[justasking4]

I’m going to be “jesuitical” here and answer a question with a question.

Do you think that Oral Roberts should return all of the money that he has raised for his University (and presumably shut down his University and throw all of his employees out on the street), because of the fact that he claimed to have had a vision from God that he would die if the money was not raised?

Yes. Integrity is more important than money. The church must always have the highest integrity and should not allow itself to be stifled by tax exempt laws if it must speak out.

 

[mercygate]

Yes. Integrity is more important than money. The church must always have the highest integrity and should not allow itself to be stifled by tax exempt laws if it must speak out.

An admirable view, and I agree 80% – but the tax exempt status churches enjoy relates to their charitable works, and reflects the $$ we save the State. Now: come up with a plan that will protect the charitable effort without a gag order, and I’ll sign on the dotted line.

Does your parish operate under the exemption?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

You know, Ron, if you’re going to accuse people of ‘hoarding wealth’ you need to back up your accusation with documentation, not a ‘hit and run’ with you saying you ‘don’t want to go there’ or ‘if you don’t know what I’m talking about that’s good.’

Either you have proof that people in the Church are ‘hoarding wealth’ or you don’t.

I’m calling you on it. What wealth is being hoarded and by whom, and where is your proof?