Augustinism and Pelagianism

[OneSheep]

When one, like Pelagius, skips the Catholic teaching on Original Sin which is about relationship between humanity and Divinity, (John 3: 16) the next step is to skip the divinity of Jesus Christ which, obviously, would not be needed when the true view of Original Sin is individually removed.

Hi Granny. You have again made the assertion, but you have nothing to support this position. It is a “slippery slope”. Why would a person not believe in the divinity of Jesus if they do not believe that there is a stain on the soul?

God created us, and created us good. When man does create, he does so through the hand of God. So, man cannot create a stain, and God did not create a stain either. There is nothing about God’s creation that is not there by His intention. Can you find anything about our existence that is not here by His intention? True, God does not intend the lousy choices we sometimes make, but these choices are understandable and predictable in light of our ignorance and capacity for blindness. God intends that we learn from our errors, and He knows we are going to make those errors. Humanity has done nothing but become more and more aware of our Creator through the ages.

Where does Christ’s divinity come in? It is a matter of faith. We are seeing that Jesus is true God, that Jesus behaved among us as truly divine, but divinity in the shrine of a real human. We are to follow Him. By following Him, we make better choices and know eternal life, a freedom from the enslavements of our nature.

Please, Granny, will you stop making the assertion without explaining why? This “next step” simply does not follow for me. Are you saying that the only way for a person to appreciate the divinity of Christ is to believe that we are stained? So that to evangelize people we must first tell them that their soul is destined for Hell because something is intrinsically wrong with them? Please, Granny, we don’t have to establish such a need. Need is already established through life experience: people make hurtful choices, and people suffer because of those choices. Jesus offers us a way.

I have explained this to you over and over again, but you don’t seem to hear me. I believe in the divinity of Christ, and I do not believe the “stain” aspect of humanity. I am not accusing you of calling me a liar, it seems to me that you just do not understand or listen to my position on the matter. I am not asking you to see things the same way. I am asking that you understand that there is room in the Church for different journeys, different ways of looking at things.

 

[OneSheep]

Thanks.
Yeah, I mean, how does a person see Christ as the saviour of their soul, if they don’t believe the soul needed to be saved from the O.S.
Its becoming clearer to me how it is you think/believe in Jesus.

A person could see Jesus as savior without believing in any kind of “original sin” at all, as I explained in the post to granny. We need “saving” from enslavement to our nature.

See I always took the prayer of St Michael as literal, praying to be saved from the fires of hell, as hell as a place I could end up if I died with a mortal sin on my soul. No matter how many people would say, God knows us better than we know ourselves and so would show mercy on a good person, the threat was still there, that fear that I couldn’t be sure…

Many people say they are living hell on earth through the problems life.

I know what I think about God, I see him as accepting of any person of any walk of life, but then I have trouble thinking of God as a him, I know he came in the person of Jesus, but he isn’t a human, God is a pure spirit…

Yes, we can live in hell on earth. When we do not take the path, we can experience plenty of hell. I’m not understanding the part about “thinking of God as a him”.

 

[grannymh]

Why would a person not believe in the divinity of Jesus if they do not believe that there is a stain on the soul?

I have no clue, because post 100 addressed the necessity for Christ’s Divinity and not the “belief” in Christ’s Divinity. For general information, there are faiths which consider Jesus a [human] prophet among a list of prophets.

If Christ were Divine as He hung from His cross, He would know who was repentant for their sins and who was not repentant. He would know each individual who chose to follow Him and each individual who denied Him.

We learn from the Catholic teaching on Original Sin, that the only way that Adam could remain in union with God was to freely live in obedience to God. Because Adam had intellect and will, Adam had to make the choice. (CCC, 1730-1732; CCC, 396)

The Catholic teaching on forgiveness includes that the sinner freely chooses to live in union with God. That should be obvious. Also obvious, is that when an unrepentant sinner refuses to leave his or her sin, that in itself demonstrates the sinner’s choice not to live in union with God.

By the way, I am using the word “union” as another way of saying that God calls each person to share in His divine life. (CCC, 356; CCC, 396;
CCC, 1730)
Luke 23: 34. “Then Jesus said, Father, forgive them they, they know not what they do.”

We listen to Jesus asking the Father to have mercy on the people. If Christ were Divine as He hung from His cross, both He and the Father would know who was repentant for their sins and who was not repentant – those who were seeking forgiveness because they wanted to be back in union with God, and those who flat out denied the opportunity to be in union with God. Because Jesus Christ is Divine, knowing the state of each person’s soul, we cannot say that Luke 23: 24 means that God forgave an unrepentant crowd. Forgiveness means restoration of union with God which is the State of Sanctifying Grace. One person cannot be in two extremely different states at the same time. A person who chooses to remain in the State of Mortal Sin is not living in the State of Sanctifying Grace, that is, he or she is not living in union, sharing in God’s life.

I have explained this to you over and over again, but you don’t seem to hear me. I believe in the divinity of Christ, and I do not believe the “stain” aspect of humanity. I am not accusing you of calling me a liar, it seems to me that you just do not understand or listen to my position on the matter. I am not asking you to see things the same way.

I do understand the position you have chosen which is why it is fair and proper that I present a different position. Free speech, you know.

I am asking that you understand that there is room in the Church for different journeys, different ways of looking at things.

Personally, there are different journeys and different journeys, different ways of looking at things and different ways of looking at things. Free speech allows me to speak about any view.

If my view means that I do not understand the Big Tent theory…So be it. I am comfortable with talking about Catholicism.

 

[simpleas]

From the position of Catholicism – One of the major issues of Original Sin is the necessity for the Divinity of Jesus Christ.
From CCC, 389. The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

Granted that the* mystery of Christ can refer to many things like feeding a crowd of 5,000. From the Catholic position, one of the deepest mysteries is the Hypostatic Union which is the union of the divine and human natures in the one Divine Person.
From CCC*, 406, small print. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example.

Pelagianism is alive and well, dressed up in the latest fashions, as people turn to their own personal interpretations of Original Sin. The version of Original Sin now depends on the individual viewer. Interestingly, without ever hearing about Pelagius, some people prefer to downplay the really serious consequences of a broken relationship between humanity and Divinity.

Certainly, one can skip Original Sin. Jesus can be viewed as a savor/prophet who brings people to God just like other Evangelists. But, according to the Catholic Church, there is only one Evangelist who is True God and True Man. (Hypostatic Union) And only True God knows the “state” of each person’s soul. Regardless of individual views about Mortal Sin and its need for sincere repentance, the condition of obedience to the True Divine Creator has not changed since the time of Adam.
When one, like Pelagius, skips the Catholic teaching on Original Sin which is about relationship between humanity and Divinity, (John 3: 16) the next step is to skip the divinity of Jesus Christ which, obviously, would not be needed when the true view of Original Sin is individually removed.

Could you explain alittle more on this please?

 

[simpleas]

A person could see Jesus as savior without believing in any kind of “original sin” at all, as I explained in the post to granny. We need “saving” from enslavement to our nature.

Yes, we can live in hell on earth. When we do not take the path, we can experience plenty of hell. I’m not understanding the part about “thinking of God as a him”.

God is neither male or female, but true pure spirit. This spirit came in human form, Jesus Christ. I often ponder on Christ’s Ascension, he speaks of his father, our father, his God and our God. Yet he is God.
So we refer to Christ as father, yet the spirit is neither male/female in a human way of thinking.
I’ve probably been watching to many cosmos programmes lately!

 

[grannymh]

Could you explain alittle more on this please?

Adam was asked to obey God by refraining from eating the fruit of a particular tree. We are asked to obey God by following the Ten Commandments and the teachings of the Catholic Church. We are not the Creator; therefore, if we, who are creatures, want to live in union with God, we need to live in obedience to God.

 

[grannymh]

Could you explain alittle more on this please?

Not much to explain. Adam was to obey God and we are to obey God. All the personal opinions in the world cannot change the fact that we creatures are to obey God which means that our repentance is necessary for the restoration of our broken relationship with God. Forgiveness is not an empty word. Forgiveness means that God has restored our broken relationship caused by our Mortal Sin.

The Catholic teaching on forgiveness includes that the sinner freely chooses to live in union with God. That should be obvious. Also obvious, is that when an unrepentant sinner refuses to leave his or her sin, that in itself demonstrates the sinner’s choice not to live in union with God. One person cannot be in two extremely different states at the same time. A person who chooses to remain in the State of Mortal Sin is not living in the State of Sanctifying Grace, that is, he or she is not living in union, sharing in God’s life.

Repentance for sin is necessary because repentance is saying that we are giving up sinning so that we can receive forgiveness which puts us into the State of Sanctifying Grace. By repenting, we are obeying and thus, we receive forgiveness which restores the State of Sanctifying Grace.

 

[simpleas]

Not much to explain. Adam was to obey God and we are to obey God. All the personal opinions in the world cannot change the fact that we creatures are to obey God which means that our repentance is necessary for the restoration of our broken relationship with God. Forgiveness is not an empty word. Forgiveness means that God has restored our broken relationship caused by our Mortal Sin.

The Catholic teaching on forgiveness includes that the sinner freely chooses to live in union with God. That should be obvious. Also obvious, is that when an unrepentant sinner refuses to leave his or her sin, that in itself demonstrates the sinner’s choice not to live in union with God. One person cannot be in two extremely different states at the same time. A person who chooses to remain in the State of Mortal Sin is not living in the State of Sanctifying Grace, that is, he or she is not living in union, sharing in God’s life.

Repentance for sin is necessary because repentance is saying that we are giving up sinning so that we can receive forgiveness which puts us into the State of Sanctifying Grace. By repenting, we are obeying and thus, we receive forgiveness which restores the State of Sanctifying Grace.

Thanks.
I wasn’t clear on what you meant by obedience since the time of Adam, belief in what God wants of us or how we should live has changed through each generation I think.
We sin against each other all the time, yet I’m to understand how we affect our relationship with God. The crusaders thought that they were doing Gods will by killing non Christians. We know that was wrong, but at the time it was justified.

Asking for forgiveness is the first step in acknowledging we are in sin, how then do people who receive grace so easily fall back into a sin? If we love God so much why do we continue to sin, I mean nations who justify wars, but declare their love of God etc.
It seems grace given by God doesn’t work the way it should, because I don’t see God as wanting anyone to kill in his name.

 

[grannymh]

Please, Granny, will you stop making the assertion without explaining why? This “next step” simply does not follow for me.

May I respectfully point out that the reason for not following is that you have mentioned before that you do not accept the existence of Adam and Original Sin. Once the basic truths of Adam and Original Sin and the subsequent truths are accepted, the simple logic of Catholicism is before one’s eyes.

 

[grannymh]

Thanks.
I wasn’t clear on what you meant by obedience since the time of Adam, belief in what God wants of us or how we should live has changed through each generation I think.
We sin against each other all the time, yet I’m to understand how we affect our relationship with God. The crusaders thought that they were doing Gods will by killing non Christians. We know that was wrong, but at the time it was justified.

Asking for forgiveness is the first step in acknowledging we are in sin, how then do people who receive grace so easily fall back into a sin? If we love God so much why do we continue to sin, I mean nations who justify wars, but declare their love of God etc.
It seems grace given by God doesn’t work the way it should, because I don’t see God as wanting anyone to kill in his name.

May I respectfully point out that one should not judge other people’s souls as to the amount, great or little, of real love they have for God. One can “love” God for the wrong reasons such as wishing God would bless wrongful deeds.

Note: When reading Scripture, one needs to be careful of anthropomorphism.

 

[OneSheep]

If Christ were Divine as He hung from His cross, He would know who was repentant for their sins and who was not repentant. He would know each individual who chose to follow Him and each individual who denied Him.

There is no support in the CCC or elsewhere that Jesus was asking The Father to only forgive the repentant, Granny. Jesus was using forgiveness in this context as forgiveness from the heart, which is how He used the word “forgiveness” throughout the gospel.

What you are referring to is “union with God” which does call for choice on the part of the sinner. God always forgives and wants such union, but a person who prefers disunion is respected. As I have stated before, such preference for disunion is always a matter of blindness and/or ignorance, and this is the premise for which you have never been able to present a counterexample. However, I grant you this, the choice, the possibility is still there for a person to prefer disunion.

The Catholic teaching on forgiveness includes that the sinner freely chooses to live in union with God. That should be obvious. Also obvious, is that when an unrepentant sinner refuses to leave his or her sin, that in itself demonstrates the sinner’s choice not to live in union with God.

People do not understand the gravity of their sin, Granny. So, yes, the possibility is there that a person could freely choose to refuse to leave their sin, in full knowledge of the gravity of their sin in terms of damage to the self and/or others. But if one follows this through, ignorance and blindness again surface. Why does a person refuse to leave his sin? Either he is not aware of the gravity of the injury to himself, or not aware of the gravity of the injury to others. Do people ever do injury to the self or others knowing the value of who they are injuring? Do people ever do injury to a person while simultaneously seeing God within that person, be it self or others? No, and no.

By the way, I am using the word “union” as another way of saying that God calls each person to share in His divine life. (CCC, 356; CCC, 396;
CCC, 1730)
Luke 23: 34. “Then Jesus said, Father, forgive them they, they know not what they do.”

We listen to Jesus asking the Father to have mercy on the people. If Christ were Divine as He hung from His cross, both He and the Father would know who was repentant for their sins and who was not repentant – those who were seeking forgiveness because they wanted to be back in union with God, and those who flat out denied the opportunity to be in union with God. Because Jesus Christ is Divine, knowing the state of each person’s soul, we cannot say that Luke 23: 24 means that God forgave an unrepentant crowd. Forgiveness means restoration of union with God which is the State of Sanctifying Grace. One person cannot be in two extremely different states at the same time. A person who chooses to remain in the State of Mortal Sin is not living in the State of Sanctifying Grace, that is, he or she is not living in union, sharing in God’s life.

Forgiveness in the sense that Jesus was talking about is a bit different than such restoration. God always forgives, and that is the catechesis I received. However, union does mean that the person has chosen to be with God. You have yet to come up with an example of the circumstances by which a person will come to choose disunion with full knowledge of the gravity of his choice. Please, do not present Adam, that goes nowhere. You turn Adam into an omniscient being, quite different from the rest of us.

Personally, there are different journeys and different journeys, different ways of looking at things and different ways of looking at things. Free speech allows me to speak about any view.

And your view is perfectly acceptable to me, and Catholic. I have no problem with you presenting your view, and I encourage such presentation. Listen to my request, though, Genuine Granny, I wish that you could see that my point of view is also quite acceptable in our great Church.

If my view means that I do not understand the Big Tent theory…So be it. I am comfortable with talking about Catholicism.

Catholicism includes a big tent theory. God’s love applies to everyone. Jesus died for all of us. Heaven is open to everyone who chooses it. As a priest once told me, even the person of another religion who goes to heaven does so through Christ.

And they do so, Granny, and God waits with open arms.

It is the conscience, Granny, that wants to disallow people, to remove them from the tent.

 

[OneSheep]

"OneSheep:

Please, Granny, will you stop making the assertion without explaining why? This “next step” simply does not follow for me.

May I respectfully point out that the reason for not following is that you have mentioned before that you do not accept the existence of Adam and Original Sin. Once the basic truths of Adam and Original Sin and the subsequent truths are accepted, the simple logic of Catholicism is before one’s eyes.

I never said that I do not accept the existence of Adam. I have said that the creation story is a story, not a scientific journal. I do not see the “stain” aspect of Original Sin, but we are all truly born with a capacity to sin. This could serve as “Original Sin”.

However, you seem to have misplaced the “next step” I was referring to. I was referring to this part of your post:

When one, like Pelagius, skips the Catholic teaching on Original Sin which is about relationship between humanity and Divinity, (John 3: 16) the next step is to skip the divinity of Jesus Christ which, obviously, would not be needed when the true view of Original Sin is individually removed.

See, this “next step” is the issue. A person can truly see that Christ “needed” to be divine, but such “need” was for a different reason, a reason of showing us who God really is. Are you saying that such a need is invalid? Not as good? UnCatholic?

This is not the “next step”, Granny. That is a slippery slope argument. I it possible that a person think that Christ’s divinity was unnecessary because he does not believe in os the way you do? Yes. Is it likely? I doubt it. People’s belief in Christ’s divinity is a matter of faith, Granny. It is independent of what we see as “need”.

 

[grannymh]

There is no support in the CCC or elsewhere that Jesus was asking The Father to only forgive the repentant, Granny.

Luke 23: 34. Then Jesus said, “Father forgive them , they know not what they do.”

So that I do not offend you,

I will continue to present the truths of the Catholic Church either in a general post which refers to general objections to Catholic teachings or in response to someone who is interested in some of the foundational Catholic doctrines.

You need to realize that what you are proposing has been proposed in various forms in the early centuries, plus the additional propositions seen in this century and the 20th century. Thus, when I present the Catholic position, I am presenting it to readers and not necessarily to you. This way, I can respect your position.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect.

 

[simpleas]

May I respectfully point out that one should not judge other people’s souls as to the amount, great or little, of real love they have for God. One can “love” God for the wrong reasons such as wishing God would bless wrongful deeds.

Note: When reading Scripture, one needs to be careful of anthropomorphism.

The crusades were in the middle ages, not in scripture. They came after Christ’s teaching on loving one another.
I’m not trying or even thinking of judging anyones soul… I am not God…
I’m just observing how and where we are now in the 21st century.
The people gone before me lived in a very different world, so they did only what they thought best imo.
Most all of us now wouldn’t think it necessary to kill people just because they don’t live or believe what we do, we have become more accepting of our differences, and can live and enjoy each others cultures rather than be threatened by it.
I do like to read your answers, because I trust I get the catholic text, maybe not a catholic opinion, but I respect your stand on that

 

[simpleas]

I never said that I do not accept the existence of Adam. I have said that the creation story is a story, not a scientific journal. I do not see the “stain” aspect of Original Sin, but we are all truly born with a capacity to sin. This could serve as “Original Sin”.

However, you seem to have misplaced the “next step” I was referring to. I was referring to this part of your post:

See, this “next step” is the issue. A person can truly see that Christ “needed” to be divine, but such “need” was for a different reason, a reason of showing us who God really is. Are you saying that such a need is invalid? Not as good? UnCatholic?

This is not the “next step”, Granny. That is a slippery slope argument. I it possible that a person think that Christ’s divinity was unnecessary because he does not believe in os the way you do? Yes. Is it likely? I doubt it. People’s belief in Christ’s divinity is a matter of faith, Granny. It is independent of what we see as “need”.

So do you believe in the first man and woman created by God? But not created with original holiness and justice, that was lost by them, and wounded our nature?

Can we believe God made man, but man did not break his union with God, he just thought he did?

 

[grannymh]

The crusades were in the middle ages, not in scripture. They came after Christ’s teaching on loving one another.
I’m not trying or even thinking of judging anyones soul… I am not God…
I’m just observing how and where we are now in the 21st century.
The people gone before me lived in a very different world, so they did only what they thought best imo.
Most all of us now wouldn’t think it necessary to kill people just because they don’t live or believe what we do, we have become more accepting of our differences, and can live and enjoy each others cultures rather than be threatened by it.
I do like to read your answers, because I trust I get the catholic text, maybe not a catholic opinion, but I respect your stand on that

I was answering what I thought was the question – how then do people who receive grace so easily fall back into a sin? If we love God so much why do we continue to sin?

I do like to read your answers, because I trust I get the catholic text, maybe not a catholic opinion, but I respect your stand on that:thumbsup:

Please, I am curious as to what “catholic text” you are referring to? And what “not catholic opinion” are you referring to?
.

 

[grannymh]

The protocol of the visible Catholic Church requires a thorough study of all writings/teachings that pertain to a particular topic to be discussed at a major Ecumenical Church Council. For example, guided by the wisdom of the promised Holy Spirit, Divine Revelation regarding Original Sin was clarified, that is, made more explicit at the Second Council of Orange and the Council of Trent. (Information sources. Chapter 14, Gospel of John; CCC, 65-66; CCC, 406, small print) Naturally, writings of both St. Augustine and Pelagius were presented for discernment guided by the Holy Spirit.

One of the works at major Church Councils is the affirmation of basic, foundational beliefs. Apparently, one of the foundational beliefs is the direct connection of Original Sin with the existence of the first human, Adam. Therefore, when one accepts the existence of the first human Adam and consequently the relationship of Adam with his Creator, one also accepts the existence of Original Sin. Like that very old Frank Sinatra song, “you can’t have one without the other.”

 

[OneSheep]

So do you believe in the first man and woman created by God? But not created with original holiness and justice, that was lost by them, and wounded our nature?

Can we believe God made man, but man did not break his union with God, he just thought he did?

Thanks for your reply. I thank you, also, for setting an example of gratitude.

Do you remember this info from Cardinal Ratzinger, pulled up by Vames?:

Joseph Ratzinger’s Introduction to Christianity criticizes the old theory about a vengeful God needing reparation: “Almost all religions centre round the problem of expiation; they arise out of man’s knowledge of his guilt before God and signify the attempt to remove this feeling of guilt, to surmount the guilt through conciliatory actions offered up to God”. He states that “God does not wait until the guilty come to be reconciled; he goes to meet them and reconciles them”, because “His righteousness is grace”, so the crucifixion “does not stand there as the work of expiation which mankind offers to the wrathful God, but as the expression of that foolish love of God’s which gives itself away to the point of humiliation in order thus to save man”.

Do you remember what Paul said, that nothing separates us from the love of God? The only possibility that we have of breaking a union with God is by knowingly refusing God. I have yet to see that happen. God does not wait for the guilty to be reconciled. Jesus did not wait from the cross to for the unrepentant to be reconciled. God forgives, always, and the only time disunion happens is when people refuse union.

In addition, when people sin, it is not for the purpose of refusing union. People sin because of lack of empathy, which is due to lack of relationship with the Father. It is not sin that causes the lack of relationship, but the other way around; lack of relationship, an undeveloped relationship, allows sin to continue. To the degree that we see Jesus in every person, that is an indicator of awareness of God and relationship with Him. And to me, forgiveness plays a huge role in development of empathy. Any depiction of God as less than unconditionally forgiving compromises the development of empathy, compassion, and “the law written in our hearts”.

God-as-our-conscience gives us the impression that we have broken our relationship. The conscience beats us up and says we are bad and so forth when we break the rules, which is what it is supposed to do. Of course, God-as-our-conscience is going to give us the impression that bad behavior shoves God away from us. This is my answer to this question:

“Can we believe God made man, but man did not break his union with God, he just thought he did?”

Belief in Adam being more aware, thus more compassionate and “wholey”, and more aware of God than any other born human, omniscient? Well, why not? However, if he had such awareness, then he would not have sinned, he would know that his sin would have caused great suffering for so many, so then the story does not make sense. The story is, to me, about man being given a conscience. It is more of an allegory.

 

[grannymh]

In my Catholic Parish, people are talking about the Pope’s call to all of us to come celebrate the Sacrament of Penance. The necessity for sorrowful repentance is front and center. Assumptions about some kind of automatic forgiveness treat need to be replaced by the actual requirements for being reinstated in Sanctifying Grace.

Jesus instituted this Sacrament of Forgiveness for all sinners, especially those who lost their Baptismal grace, aka State of Sanctifying Grace. According to* CCC*, 1446, the Sacrament of Penance "… offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification. The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament as “the second plank [of salvation] after the shipwreck which is the loss of grace.” “Convert” is the action needed on our part.

We cannot assume that we are like the crowd watching the obedient and victorious death of Jesus.

“Death is swallowed up in victory.
Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?”’
1 Corinthians, 15: 54-55

​

The crowd is not responsible for our sins. In our personal responsibility, we are like the sinful woman who brought an alabaster flask of ointment into the Pharisee’s house where Jesus was. We need to be like her weeping so that she bathed Jesus’s feet with her tears, wiping them with her hair. Kissing His feet, she anointed them with the ointment. In His gentle voice, Jesus told her that her many sins have been forgiven. “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” (Luke 7: 36-50)

This Lent, we need to come to Jesus, with our own alabaster flask of repentance. We need to hear the sound of Jesus’s voice which is within the voice of the Priest as we humbly present our sorrow in the Sacrament of Confession/Reconciliation.

 

[grannymh]

In my Catholic Parish, people are talking about the Pope’s call to all of us to come celebrate the Sacrament of Penance. The necessity for sorrowful repentance is front and center. Assumptions about some kind of automatic forgiveness treat need to be replaced by the actual requirements for being reinstated in Sanctifying Grace.

Jesus instituted this Sacrament of Forgiveness for all sinners, especially those who lost their Baptismal grace, aka State of Sanctifying Grace. According to* CCC*, 1446, the Sacrament of Penance "… offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification. The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament as “the second plank [of salvation] after the shipwreck which is the loss of grace.” “Convert” is the action needed on our part.

We cannot assume that we are like the crowd watching the obedient and victorious death of Jesus.

“Death is swallowed up in victory.
Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?”’
1 Corinthians, 15: 54-55

​

The crowd is not responsible for our sins. In our personal responsibility, we are like the sinful woman who brought an alabaster flask of ointment into the Pharisee’s house where Jesus was. We need to be like her weeping so that she bathed Jesus’s feet with her tears, wiping them with her hair. Kissing His feet, she anointed them with the ointment. In His gentle voice, Jesus told her that her many sins have been forgiven. “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” (Luke 7: 36-50)

This Lent, we need to come to Jesus, with our own alabaster flask of repentance. We need to hear the sound of Jesus’s voice which is within the voice of the Priest as we humbly present our sorrow in the Sacrament of Confession/Reconciliation.