Closer to God..... but farther from salvation?

[Julius_Caesar]

Not you or me

You give me the exact opposite with your commentary.

You seem to think you know, in some black and white sense, while I make it clear that God judges,

Yeah. You make it clear God judges while giving free passes.

while I make it clear that God judges, based on what we do with what we’re given.The Parable of the Talents sheds light on this.

While forgetting the parable of the Servants in the Household which states people will still get punished for disobeying God’s commands but it varying degrees.

 

[fhansen]

Yeah. You make it clear God judges while giving free passes.

Um, no, nope, didn’t say that. Again, and again, and again, as the Church teaches, culpability for sin changes based on circumstances, knowledge being a big one. God wants us to take responsibility, to the extent we can, for what we believe and how we act based on all we’ve received during our lifetime., and that is a living, growing journey.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Um, no, nope, didn’t say that.

You must not be reading your statement and the logical conclusions that come from them.

 

[fhansen]

You must not be reading your statement and the logical conclusions that come from them.

You must not be either. As I’ve maintained, “A” is guilty of sin, but not nessarily culpable, or fully culpable, for it. You say otherwise. Similarly, when I left the Church, my culpability would’ve been mitigated compared to my leaving the Church now…

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Julius_Caesar:

You must not be reading your statement and the logical conclusions that come from them.

You must not be either. As I’ve maintained, “A” is guilty of sin, but not nessarily culpable, or fully culpable, for it.

Then deny it seconds later.

 

[fhansen]

Where have I denied it, or changed my position? Show me the inconsistency if you’re going to make the accusation. Sin is objectively wrong regardless. Our responsibility for it changes.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Sin is objectively wrong regardless.

And objectively damaging to one’s relationship with God.

 

[fhansen]

And objectively damaging to one’s relationship with God.

If her relationship with God improved, it wasn’t due to sin, but due to her drawing nearer to Him, acting on faith in some manner or another.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

I can guarentee half the priests would agree with that one priest and half would disagree. The truth is, only God knows for sure and He judges everyone on Individual basis.

 

[fhansen]

I can guarentee half the priests would agree with that one priest and half would disagree. The truth is, only God knows for sure and He judges everyone on Individual basis.

True. My question involves whether or not anyone is confused enough to really think that, by her act, "A"s purpose was most likely to willingly and knowingly give up salvation. This would require sheer malice on her part, not to mention stupidity. From Lumen Gentium, quoted in CCC 846:

"Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336"

 

[EugeneCharles]

“WHO am I to judge” -Pope Francis

We don’t know if God would deny her and I’m pretty sure that even Catholics can go to hell. But each one of us is called to salvation. Didn’t God send His only begotten Son for His love of the world? Isn’t it that God gave salvation to everyone, the Gentiles, and the Jews? At the end of the day, we’re still glorifying the Name of Jesus and so the salvation had been for all of us, sons and daughters of God.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

“WHO am I to judge” -Pope Francis

Way to take the original context of what the Holy Father said