Am I going to Hell according to the Church?

[KarmaChameleon]

Here is my dilemma…

If a person has done something that is considered by the Catholic church to be a mortal sin, but (after MUCH contemplation, soul-searching and research) does not themselves believe that act to be mortally sinful and so continues to engage in it, then are the conditions present for mortal sin? If so, then how can that person possibly be forgiven for this sin when a good confession of this sin (i.e. a confession that is truly remorseful and after which the person vows not to commit said sin again) is impossible and therefore invalid?

An example might help to clarify:

I understand the Church teachings on oral sex and withdrawal, the reasons for those teachings, etc. I am not debating this issue itself as it has been done many times over in other threads My problem is that I disagree with the Church’s assertion that these practices are mortally sinful within the confines of marriage. Because of this, I have on occasion and still do occasionally engage in these practices. Now as for me, my conscience is clear. If anything, these things (IMHO, of course) may be venial sins at worst, but certainly not enough to deprive my soul of sanctifying grace. Aside from this one issue, I am pretty much in-line with most of the Church’s teachings. I go to Mass regularly, go to Reconciliation, read the Bible on a regular basis, etc.

Now, I certainly cannot confess these actions because I am not remorseful. I cannot be remorseful because I do not believe them to be wrong. Even if I were to stop doing them altogether at this point (which, since I do not believe them to be inherently evil, why would I?) I could not be truly contrite and any confession of these “sins” would be invalid.

So, according to the Catholic Church, am I just doomed to spend eternity in Hell?

 

[CMatt25]

Here is my dilemma…

If a person has done something that is considered by the Catholic church to be a mortal sin, but (after MUCH contemplation, soul-searching and research) does not themselves believe that act to be mortally sinful and so continues to engage in it, then are the conditions present for mortal sin? If so, then how can that person possibly be forgiven for this sin when a good confession of this sin (i.e. a confession that is truly remorseful and after which the person vows not to commit said sin again) is impossible and therefore invalid?

An example might help to clarify:

I understand the Church teachings on oral sex and withdrawal, the reasons for those teachings, etc. I am not debating this issue itself as it has been done many times over in other threads My problem is that I disagree with the Church’s assertion that these practices are mortally sinful within the confines of marriage. Because of this, I have on occasion and still do occasionally engage in these practices. Now as for me, my conscience is clear. If anything, these things (IMHO, of course) may be venial sins at worst, but certainly not enough to deprive my soul of sanctifying grace. Aside from this one issue, I am pretty much in-line with most of the Church’s teachings. I go to Mass regularly, go to Reconciliation, read the Bible on a regular basis, etc.

Now, I certainly cannot confess these actions because I am not remorseful. I cannot be remorseful because I do not believe them to be wrong. Even if I were to stop doing them altogether at this point (which, since I do not believe them to be inherently evil, why would I?) I could not be truly contrite and any confession of these “sins” would be invalid.

So, according to the Catholic Church, am I just doomed to spend eternity in Hell?

I’m not speaking for the CC on this but I think God is able to understand why you believe and understand something if you truly in good conscience believe something after much contemplation, soul seraching and prayer. But anyway I don’t see how the Catholic Church can condemn you to hell. No one knows who is doomed. We must leave one’s eternal fate in the hands of God and to His grace and mercy. Peace.

 

[St_Francis]

No person here can say for sure if you are going to Hell; only God can judge you.

However, you know the Church’s teachings and you know that your soul might be imperiled. That’s a problem, and I think that the best thing you could do is to talk with a really good priest, preferably one who won’t tell you everything’s hunky-dory no matter what you do.

What I did about the things I didn’t agree with when I returned to the Church was to obey the Church and pray about them, and then over time those issues clarified.

---

Every year, I go through whatever I can find about Lent so my children and I can talk it all over and I always learn a lot. What I ran into several times this year was that what is important is obedience. For example, when you feel like praying and everything is great naturally God likes those prayers. But the ones He *really *appreciates are those said when we soooo do *not *want to pray! And that is because when we pray when we don’t want to, we are not praying because we are getting anything out of it but solely because He wants us to. You are putting His desires over your own.

So following the Church’s teachings will get you a lot of grace, because God will know you are doing so *not *because you feel like it, and *not *because you agree, but solely because you want Him and what He wants *more *than you want to fulfill your own desires.

 

[Moscati]

Just to clarify (if it’s needed). . . I understand it’s perfectly legitimate to engage in oral foreplay.

 

[frindro]

Just to clarify (if it’s needed). . . I understand it’s perfectly legitimate to engage in oral foreplay.

Are you sure about this?

If so, then at the very least, I really hope you mean in the context in marriage.

 

[mfj]

This would fall under the guise of relativism.
“I’m not speaking for the CC on this but I think God is able to understand why you believe and understand something if you truly in good conscience believe something after much contemplation, soul seraching and prayer”

If some thing is wrong or evil it doesn’t matter how many people think it isn’t.
Moralality’s right or wrong is not subjective(not up to one’s acceptance of it).

You also commit the mistake of thinking the church has it’s own teachings or cognitive process aside from GD’s. Gd is speaking when the church speaks on issues of morality.

I agree with the post of St Francis
I think if explained right you would see the injury you cause to your mate in these acts and then you would be penitent. You would be very sorry for being selfish(seeking your pleasure) at the cost of your mate’s soul, spirit, eternal salvation.

 

[PrayHarder]

Now as for me, my conscience is clear. If anything, these things (IMHO, of course) may be venial sins at worst, but certainly not enough to deprive my soul of sanctifying grace. Aside from this one issue, I am pretty much in-line with most of the Church’s teachings. I go to Mass regularly, go to Reconciliation, read the Bible on a regular basis, etc?

As someone else has said, only God knows what your ultimate fate will be. However, be careful about asserting that something is alright because you have a clear conscience about it. Many people use that for other arguments (abortion, drugs, homosexuality, etc.). Just because **you **feel fine with something does not confirm or negate the intrinsic goodness or badness of something.

 

[juiceman96]

You’ve stirred my curiosity. What does the Scripture have to say concerning just that subjec? If at all.

 

[Ferds_Guiang]

I also would like in the spirit of communion that you refer your opinion with a spiritual director. The Church would have us form a good conscience and if it is within our capacity to be educated then we have the moral responsibility to do so. God bless

 

[EnchantedEve]

Just to clarify (if it’s needed). . . I understand it’s perfectly legitimate to engage in oral foreplay.

That is what I heard, although I understood that it could not come to orgasm. From my understanding of moral teaching, the issue of lay sexuality within the context of Holy Matrimony was not heavily discussed or debated prior to Pope John Paul II (very recently!). If someone knows otherwise, please share, but I have had more than one priest, of various theological persuasions, state the Church has no strong and fast views on marital relations. However, the Holy Scriptures seem to at least discourage some of these practices generally, so, at best, if in doubt, I would not do it. One can have a mutually satisfying relationship without these practices anyway, so why one would jeapordise one’s communion with the Lord over this concern is lost on me.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Here is my dilemma…

If a person has done something that is considered by the Catholic church to be a mortal sin, but (after MUCH contemplation, soul-searching and research) does not themselves believe that act to be mortally sinful and so continues to engage in it, then are the conditions present for mortal sin?..

Great question and I cannot give you the answer you look for. I can separate two issues you used to develop this question 1) This is often refered to in the teachings as disordered thought. It means you have reached a false conclusion yet beleive the conclusion to be correct. That is the base for some to beleive sin is not present. 2) Proper conclusion, in the action you discribe you desire something undesirable so what is it? It often takes considrable time to understand the Church’s teaching on sex. When that teaching is understood you will see why the earlier conclusion was disordered.

 

[Moscati]

Are you sure about this?

If so, then at the very least, I really hope you mean in the context in marriage.

Of course, in the context of marriage! I believe I read it somewhere on CAF, originally.

Christopher West explains it in Good News About Sex and Marriage, as have others. There is a difference between oral foreplay ordered toward and in preparation for vaginal intercourse and oral sex as an alternative to vaginal intercourse.

This paper does a good treatment of the subject, with lots of quotes:
nds.edu/old/well-Palermo.htm

 

[thistle]

Here is my dilemma…

If a person has done something that is considered by the Catholic church to be a mortal sin, but (after MUCH contemplation, soul-searching and research) does not themselves believe that act to be mortally sinful and so continues to engage in it, then are the conditions present for mortal sin? If so, then how can that person possibly be forgiven for this sin when a good confession of this sin (i.e. a confession that is truly remorseful and after which the person vows not to commit said sin again) is impossible and therefore invalid?

An example might help to clarify:

I understand the Church teachings on oral sex and withdrawal, the reasons for those teachings, etc. I am not debating this issue itself as it has been done many times over in other threads My problem is that I disagree with the Church’s assertion that these practices are mortally sinful within the confines of marriage. Because of this, I have on occasion and still do occasionally engage in these practices. Now as for me, my conscience is clear. If anything, these things (IMHO, of course) may be venial sins at worst, but certainly not enough to deprive my soul of sanctifying grace. Aside from this one issue, I am pretty much in-line with most of the Church’s teachings. I go to Mass regularly, go to Reconciliation, read the Bible on a regular basis, etc.

Now, I certainly cannot confess these actions because I am not remorseful. I cannot be remorseful because I do not believe them to be wrong. Even if I were to stop doing them altogether at this point (which, since I do not believe them to be inherently evil, why would I?) I could not be truly contrite and any confession of these “sins” would be invalid.

So, according to the Catholic Church, am I just doomed to spend eternity in Hell?

Only God knows who actually ends up in Hell.

What we can objectively state, though, is that anyone who rejects one or more of the teachings of the Church commits heresy and puts his/herself in a state of mortal sin and if such a person dies unrepentant then Hell is their destination.

 

[puzzleannie]

Here is my dilemma…

If a person has done something that is considered by the Catholic church to be a mortal sin, but (after MUCH contemplation, soul-searching and research) does not themselves believe that act to be mortally sinful and so continues to engage in it, then are the conditions present for mortal sin? If ?

yes it is a sin. Every Catholic has the duty to form his conscience in accordance with Catholic teaching. If you refuse to accept the teaching that does not exempt you from what is objectively true. If you continue to do the sin, regardless, yes you do risk hell, but only if you die in an uncompromising stubborn unrepentent state. As long as your interior attitude is willingness to be instructed, willingness to be open to evidence that will change your mind, you are open to grace at the moment of death and will not ask for hell.

Even for someone who was badly instructed and in good faith believes that the action is not sinful, they may not be guilty, or their guilt may be mitigated. Someone who never received any instruction may not have guilt either. However, and this is critical, the action remains objectively immoral and evil and the evil effects still occur.

There is a well in our town noted for its healthful, good tasting water, attracting people from miles around. If the town posts signs saying the water in our well is contaminated, I can demand scientific evidence, but I am free to believe or not believe the evidence of authority. If I drink the water and it is poisoned, I will still be harmed no matter what I believe about the water. If unsuspecting people draw the water thinking it is healthy, they will also be harmed, regardless of their personal belief.

 

[baylee]

Great question…one that I completely “get”. I wish we could get an answer from someone with more authority in here than lay posters.

 

[thistle]

Great question…one that I completely “get”. I wish we could get an answer from someone with more authority in here than lay posters.

CCC 2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

The above is the official Church teaching and not a lay opinion. Any Catholic rejecting one or more of the Church teachings commits heresy.

 

[Vile_Servant]

Here is my dilemma…

If a person has done something that is considered by the Catholic church to be a mortal sin, but (after MUCH contemplation, soul-searching and research) does not themselves believe that act to be mortally sinful and so continues to engage in it, then are the conditions present for mortal sin? If so, then how can that person possibly be forgiven for this sin when a good confession of this sin (i.e. a confession that is truly remorseful and after which the person vows not to commit said sin again) is impossible and therefore invalid?

An example might help to clarify:

I understand the Church teachings on oral sex and withdrawal, the reasons for those teachings, etc. I am not debating this issue itself as it has been done many times over in other threads My problem is that I disagree with the Church’s assertion that these practices are mortally sinful within the confines of marriage. Because of this, I have on occasion and still do occasionally engage in these practices. Now as for me, my conscience is clear. If anything, these things (IMHO, of course) may be venial sins at worst, but certainly not enough to deprive my soul of sanctifying grace. Aside from this one issue, I am pretty much in-line with most of the Church’s teachings. I go to Mass regularly, go to Reconciliation, read the Bible on a regular basis, etc.

Now, I certainly cannot confess these actions because I am not remorseful. I cannot be remorseful because I do not believe them to be wrong. Even if I were to stop doing them altogether at this point (which, since I do not believe them to be inherently evil, why would I?) I could not be truly contrite and any confession of these “sins” would be invalid.

So, according to the Catholic Church, am I just doomed to spend eternity in Hell?

Nancy Pelosi is a Catholic who disagrees with Church teaching regarding abortion. Aside from this one issue, she is pretty much in-line with most of the Church’s teachings. And she said she has done much soul searching and states that her conscience is clear. How do you think she will be judged before God?

 

[manualman]

There are three isues here that need to be cleared up.

1. Sin is NOT an arbitrary list of things that God has decided for no good reason to ban. Sins are, by definition, things that damage the ability of a human soul to give and receive supernatural love and Grace. So regardless of how sincere you are in your convictions, if you are wrong you are WRONG. Think of it this way. A person sits down and does complicated math to design a plastic bullet that will not penetrate a person so that it can be used as a non-lethal riot control weapon. He finishes the design, loads the gun and shoots one of his buddies as an ill conceived prank. Oops, bad math somewhere, buddy dies of the wound. He was SURE that bullet was designed with insufficient mass and rigidity to penetrate the human body. Positive. Doesn’t matter, the buddy is dead anyways. Sin causes harm, even if the harm isn’t intended or the sinner sincerely believes that what he does isn’t sin. This makes it REALLY important to make sure we trust the right sources for our moral compass calibration!
2. Culpability for sin, however, is NOT absolute. This is why nobody here can say for sure you are going to hell for it. That’s simply not our job. In the simplistic example above, the guy can’t reasonably be tried for first degree murder. It’s reckless manslaughter. The result is the same, but intent and culpability were different, see?
3. There is a problem in the attitude that underlies the very question. Whenever someone appears to be attempting to figure out just how serious a wrong he can commit without going to hell for it, it betrays a basic lack of understanding of good and evil. Good is GOOD. Evil isn’t. There is no good in evil. So what you need to do is encounter God personally. Ask for it. Go find Eucharistic adoration. Give it to Him and promise obedience for a time so that He can show you WHY his revelation is good. Also read something on the Theology of the Body for a better explanation of how sexuality is directly related to our relationship with God.

 

[fix]

Here is a reference you may want to look at:

It is of course undisputed that one must follow a certain conscience or at least not act against it. But whether the judgment of conscience or what one takes to be such, is always right, indeed whether it is infallible, is another question. For if this were the case, it would mean that there is no truth—at least not in moral and religious matters, which is to say, in the areas which constitute the very pillars of our existence. For judgments of conscience can contradict each other. Thus there could be at best the subject’s own truth, which would be reduced to the subject’s sincerity…

… someone countered that if this were so then the Nazi SS would be justified and we should seek them in heaven since they carried out all their atrocities with fanatic conviction and complete certainty of conscience. Another responded with utmost assurance that of course this was indeed the case. There is no doubting the fact that Hitler and his accomplices who were deeply convinced of their cause, could not have acted otherwise. Therefore, the objective terribleness of their deeds notwithstanding, they acted morally, subjectively speaking. Since they followed their albeit mistaken consciences, one would have to recognize their conduct as moral and, as a result, should not doubt their eternal salvation. Since that conversation, I knew with complete certainty that something was wrong with the theory of justifying power of the subjective conscience, that, in other words, a concept of conscience which leads to such conclusions must be false…

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

 

[CMatt25]

This would fall under the guise of relativism.
“I’m not speaking for the CC on this but I think God is able to understand why you believe and understand something if you truly in good conscience believe something after much contemplation, soul seraching and prayer”

So now God doesn’t have the capacity to understand?