N
nguirado
Guest
People know what foods are most healthy, yet don’t always eat them. We can say the same thing about anything where what’s good for us isn’t always the most immediately gratifying.
- Status
J
JDaniel
Guest
R:What a great post, sinnerdexter.
Obviously a devout believer could “sin” by mistake, not realizing that the act is “sinful” at the time it happens, but would never do it if he/she had time to contemplate the ramifications of the action.
It is virtually impossible to sin by mistake, especially by pure mistake. God allows for mistakes. But, He knows our “hearts,” so, it better be a pure mistake. However, if later on I discovered that a certain action was sinful, I would still confess it. But, that’s just me.
Exactly.
In a way, it is both sadness and joy - providing that one can assess with some certainty that a loved one died with no more than possibly a few venial sins attached to him or her. The least time one can spend in Purgatorio, the better, but, at least it is not Hell.
To you, I can see that it would be. Sorry for that, though.
And I used to be an atheist. Oops! That reminds me.
God bless you friend,
jd
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
sinnerdexter
I do imagine that Christians seriously think that they believe, but this is only because they have never seriously examined the incongruities of their behavior in the situations I have sketched above.
I think you are onto something here. I think many Christians falsely identify themselves as Christians for one reason or another. So the number of true Christians in the world is probably much small than the billions we imagine.
However, there are those true Christians who do fail from time to time, not because they are not Christians so much as because they are not quite Christian enough. The instances you bring up are, it seems to me, instances of saintly Christians who could not bring themselves to sin no matter what. We are certainly not all in that category, and it may be for some of us that our sinning will be the detour we take to get to our true destination. God loves all sinners, and they are all the reason he came to be among us and die for us.
The apostle Peter was a Christian sitting at the feet of our Lord. I think he was a true follower of Jesus, but he was not a “finished” Christian. When he denied our Lord three times, you could say he was a despicable Christian. But he knew himself for what he had done, greatly repented, and tradition has it died also on a cross. Judas, on the other hand, truly abandoned Jesus and did not repent (so far as we know). How much he ever was a Christian is in doubt, for if he was a true Christian, he would not have dared to sell out Jesus in the first place. It appears he was an opportunist and that his values were more materialistic than spiritual.
Satan tried to tempt Jesus, Peter and Judas. Satan is after all of us and will not rest until he has won or lost the game.
I do imagine that Christians seriously think that they believe, but this is only because they have never seriously examined the incongruities of their behavior in the situations I have sketched above.
I think you are onto something here. I think many Christians falsely identify themselves as Christians for one reason or another. So the number of true Christians in the world is probably much small than the billions we imagine.
However, there are those true Christians who do fail from time to time, not because they are not Christians so much as because they are not quite Christian enough. The instances you bring up are, it seems to me, instances of saintly Christians who could not bring themselves to sin no matter what. We are certainly not all in that category, and it may be for some of us that our sinning will be the detour we take to get to our true destination. God loves all sinners, and they are all the reason he came to be among us and die for us.
The apostle Peter was a Christian sitting at the feet of our Lord. I think he was a true follower of Jesus, but he was not a “finished” Christian. When he denied our Lord three times, you could say he was a despicable Christian. But he knew himself for what he had done, greatly repented, and tradition has it died also on a cross. Judas, on the other hand, truly abandoned Jesus and did not repent (so far as we know). How much he ever was a Christian is in doubt, for if he was a true Christian, he would not have dared to sell out Jesus in the first place. It appears he was an opportunist and that his values were more materialistic than spiritual.
Satan tried to tempt Jesus, Peter and Judas. Satan is after all of us and will not rest until he has won or lost the game.
R
reggieM
Guest
I scanned through responses on this thread and I think one thing is missing.
In the classic phrase explaining the sources of temptation, we know they are …
The World, the Flesh and the …] ?
The …] there has been missing.
Life as a Christian is not merely a question of making the right choice not to touch the third rail. It’s not merely a question of being weak or strong.
We do face a very subtle and intelligent enemy who watches to exploit any opening in our character. How could there be this deception?
Without prayer, we cannot see the illusion. Prayer brings the spiritual insight necessary to avoid the temptations – from our own selfishness, the pressures of others, or from our preternatural enemies.
Now, one might say – “I was deluded, so I wasn’t conscious of the sin – that couldn’t be a mortal sin then”.
Ok, but what caused you to be deluded? What caused your weakness?
Neglect of prayer? Avoidance of the sacraments? Lack of reflection about venial sins – and repeating and compiling many venial sins?
When one moves to a condition of spiritual blindness – that is a gravely sinful condition in itself.
In the classic phrase explaining the sources of temptation, we know they are …
The World, the Flesh and the …] ?
The …] there has been missing.
Life as a Christian is not merely a question of making the right choice not to touch the third rail. It’s not merely a question of being weak or strong.
We do face a very subtle and intelligent enemy who watches to exploit any opening in our character. How could there be this deception?
Without prayer, we cannot see the illusion. Prayer brings the spiritual insight necessary to avoid the temptations – from our own selfishness, the pressures of others, or from our preternatural enemies.
Now, one might say – “I was deluded, so I wasn’t conscious of the sin – that couldn’t be a mortal sin then”.
Ok, but what caused you to be deluded? What caused your weakness?
Neglect of prayer? Avoidance of the sacraments? Lack of reflection about venial sins – and repeating and compiling many venial sins?
When one moves to a condition of spiritual blindness – that is a gravely sinful condition in itself.
J
JRKH
Guest
Well said. This is what those in the quality profession call - Root cause analysis.
Something we should all apply to our lives and our journey toward God.
Peace
James
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
You’re right-for a moment, out of pride perhaps, you go mad and think that, or whatever reason, God’s rules don’t apply to you.
This is bad logic and ridiculous folly but it is human nature.
This leads nicely into the problem of evil but that’s not a discussion for this forum…
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Marc Anthony
*As sinndexter observed, those people who knowingly commit a “mortal sin” do not really believe what they preach. *
Again, I am at sixes and sevens about that.
Certainly in some cases that is true. The chronic sinner of the revolving door suggests a bit of the pharisee. But then how do you explain the person who gets down on his knees and begs forgiveness for his sins? Repentance is a sign of humility and fear of the Lord. If a man didn’t really believe, wouldn’t he just chuck the whole business when he decided that sinning was more fun than holiness? Did Peter not really believe when he denied our Lord three times? Or wasn’t he just a coward who took a whole lifetime to learn courage and how to die on his own cross?
*As sinndexter observed, those people who knowingly commit a “mortal sin” do not really believe what they preach. *
Again, I am at sixes and sevens about that.
Certainly in some cases that is true. The chronic sinner of the revolving door suggests a bit of the pharisee. But then how do you explain the person who gets down on his knees and begs forgiveness for his sins? Repentance is a sign of humility and fear of the Lord. If a man didn’t really believe, wouldn’t he just chuck the whole business when he decided that sinning was more fun than holiness? Did Peter not really believe when he denied our Lord three times? Or wasn’t he just a coward who took a whole lifetime to learn courage and how to die on his own cross?
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
I believe you meant to respond to R Daneel.
K
kamaan
Guest
This.
I don’t see how someone can suggest that committing mortal sin proves disbelief.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Marc Anthony
My mistake. Thanks for the correction.
kamaan
*I don’t see how someone can suggest that committing mortal sin proves disbelief. *
It’s a tricky business. I think maybe the way Christ exposed the Pharisees is a case in point. Outwardly they were white, supposedly true followers of the Mosaic law. Inwardly they were black as sin. The mortal sin was in their pretense of being pure, their hypocrisy. Jesus had nothing but contempt for them and would not acknowledge them as truly under the Old Covenant.
But the woman who was taken in adultery is a different case. Her sin also is mortal. But she repented of it. Jesus forgave her, told her to go and sin no more. Her faith was real, but her fidelity was wavering. We are all weak.
In our time we have Catholics who pretend to be Catholics but who seem not to believe what the Church teaches. They defend homosexual acts and abortion, you name it. They are Catholics in name only. As purveyors or enablers of sin, they go to Mass and receive Communion, then campaign for the right of homosexual marriage and the right to kill unborn babies. They do not repent. They are proud of their sinfulness, and even declare the Church to be wrong in her teachings. They are apostate Catholics; while pretending virtue, they are vicious as can be. There is no redemption for them because they really do not believe … unless at some point they come to their senses and learn to weep for their sins.
My mistake. Thanks for the correction.
kamaan
*I don’t see how someone can suggest that committing mortal sin proves disbelief. *
It’s a tricky business. I think maybe the way Christ exposed the Pharisees is a case in point. Outwardly they were white, supposedly true followers of the Mosaic law. Inwardly they were black as sin. The mortal sin was in their pretense of being pure, their hypocrisy. Jesus had nothing but contempt for them and would not acknowledge them as truly under the Old Covenant.
But the woman who was taken in adultery is a different case. Her sin also is mortal. But she repented of it. Jesus forgave her, told her to go and sin no more. Her faith was real, but her fidelity was wavering. We are all weak.
In our time we have Catholics who pretend to be Catholics but who seem not to believe what the Church teaches. They defend homosexual acts and abortion, you name it. They are Catholics in name only. As purveyors or enablers of sin, they go to Mass and receive Communion, then campaign for the right of homosexual marriage and the right to kill unborn babies. They do not repent. They are proud of their sinfulness, and even declare the Church to be wrong in her teachings. They are apostate Catholics; while pretending virtue, they are vicious as can be. There is no redemption for them because they really do not believe … unless at some point they come to their senses and learn to weep for their sins.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
If a person goes mad, crazy, or insane then he is no longer in command of his faculties, and that is a mitigating circumstance for his acts. Any court will judge the acts of a sane person differently from the acts of an insane one.
But this is only applicable to believers, of course. Atheists can never commit a mortal sin, since the definition of a mortal sin includes the acceptance that the act is a “grave matter”, includes that the person commits the act while fully knowing that the act is sinful, and commits the act with full consent. An atheist’s act can fulfill the first and the third criterion, but not the second one, since the atheist does not accept the notion of “sin”.
Observe, that for Catholics missing the attendance of a mass for no good, compelling reason (for example serious illness) is a mortal sin, but that does not apply to anyone else, Protestants or unbelievers alike.
J
JRKH
Guest
Atheists have already committed a mortal sin by their being atheist. That is, they have denied God’s very existance and therefore His Lordship over their lives. They have, in sound mind and body, rejected the salvic plan and the promise of eternal life and happiness in heaven. Any other act after this one, no matter how grave, pales in comparison to this act of denial - of “Blaspheming the Holy Spirit”.
So, I have to say that your statement that an Atheist cannot commit a mortal sin is in error.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
The very nature of Mortal Sin involves a willful rejection of God’s grace and salvic promise.
Remember that Mortal sin involves full knowledge and full consent of the will. When a person knows that they are sinning and chooses to do so anyway, they are willfully rejecting God’s graces.
If one Truly Believes both in the promise of salvation and the reality of condemnation, would anyone willingly risk such condemnation?
If one is willing to risk such condemnation, do they Truly Believe?
Peace
James
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Uh-oh. Sounds pretty omninous.
But, you see, I do not reject God, I reject that the concept of God is a meaningful idea. I do not believe that God exists.In your other post you explicity say that "When a person knows that they are sinning… ". But that is not applicable to atheists. I don’t “know” that I am sinning, because I reject the concept of sin. Furthermore, the Catholic Church asserts that no can speculate if any one is going to hell. So your speculation about the atheists all are hellbound is contradicted by the Church’s teaching. But, of course the Catholic Church also teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church, so can choose, which of the two “infallible” and contradictory teachings you happen to accept in any given moment. Ain’t it wonderful that the Church gives you two contradictory teachings, so you could argue both ways? All you need is a little “doublethink”.
J
JRKH
Guest
In order for one to “Not Believe” in something there must have some basis, some knowledge of the subject, for that disbelief. In other words disbelief is different from ignorance.Uh-oh. Sounds pretty omninous.
In your other post you explicity say that "When a person knows that they are sinning… ". But that is not applicable to atheists. I don’t “know” that I am sinning, because I reject the concept of sin. Furthermore, the Catholic Church asserts that no can speculate if any one is going to hell. So your speculation about the atheists all are hellbound is contradicted by the Church’s teaching. But, of course the Catholic Church also teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church, so can choose, which of the two “infallible” and contradictory teachings you happen to accept in any given moment. Ain’t it wonderful that the Church gives you two contradictory teachings, so you could argue both ways? All you need is a little “doublethink”.
In order for you to say, “I do not believe that God exists”, you have to have look into the subject and rejected the idea. You demonstrate this in your prior statement where you say, “I reject that the concept of God is a meaningful idea”. Since you are here on this Catholic website, it is safe to assume you have not rejected the concept of God without having given it some thought, so we can safely eliminate “ignorance” as a factor. Therefore, what we have is a rejection of God, in whatever description.
Likewise you can say you do not sin because you reject the idea of sin, but the effect is the same. If you reject the salvic plan, even rejecting a skeptical possiblity of it, the possibility of life after death, then you will indeed receive the wages of such rejection…Death.
The Church teaches that we cannot know who is in hell. The Church also teaches that certain acts and opinions, if not repented of, will send someone to hell. There is nothing contradictory in this. The teachings on what things are mortal is pretty clear. What is never clear is the heart of any given individual at the moment of death.
When I say that Atheists have already committed a mortal sin, it is a true statement. The very term Atheist means one who does not believe in, that is rejects, God (in any form). Since this is the source of any mortal sin, it is simple to say that an atheist is on the wrong path. Whether an individual “atheist” might repent near or at the end of their life, and whether such repentance is sufficient for salvation, is up to God.
Therefore, simple reasoning shows that I have not contradicted Church teaching, nor does Church teaching contradict itself.
As to the teaching of no salvation outside of the Church, you might want to sudy up on how the term Church is defined for this purpose.
Peace
James
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Atheism is the rejection of God as a false notion. The atheist would like to think this does not constitute a sin, because the atheist does not believe in sin either. But the atheist cannot get a free pass to sin because God planted in all hearts the knowledge of God. Covering up that knowledge constitutes a deception. The atheist deceives himself in denying God, and there are a thousand reasons why he might do that. “The fool in his heart says there is no God.” The lie is a sin of the first magnitude and violates the first and greatest commandment. ("Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment.” Matthew 22: 37-40) The atheist, when he comes to his final judgment, cannot say to the Lord, “I honestly didn’t believe in you. So let me through the gate.”
“Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.” Matthew 10:32-33
“Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.” Matthew 10:32-33
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Indeed, R Daneel has a point-in a way, it can be said that all sins are due to lack of faith.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
So far, I agree.
Except for your last sentence I agree. Yes, I was a believer for a while, since I was brought up as one. I believed that God exists. But that changed. As I started to think about it, I realized that the belief was without a sound foundation.
I must repeat: “I do not reject God, because in order to reject something (or someone) one must at the very least believe (preferably know!) that the object of the rejection exists”. Yes, I reject the concept of God, on the very same ground that I reject the concept of the Tooth Fairy. Neither of them is founded in reality.
“In any form” is meaningless here. Now, if I believed that God actually exists, then I might reject him, that is for sure. After all there is nothing in the stories about God, that would compel me to “love” such a being.
Oh yes… let’s just define the “church” for “this purpose”… come on.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
This is a vessel of fertilizer - using a euphamistic phrase.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Why?
- Status