O
OneSheep
Guest
So, to apply what I related, would you do the sin again?
- Status
O
OneSheep
Guest
We are all responsible for our acts, regardless of our state of awareness, right? So this question has no negative effect on responsibility, but does have to do with using the gift of understanding toward the goal of forgiveness, as Christ did from the cross.
Does anyone know what they are doing when they love? Certainly we cannot know everything about what we are doing, but love flows from the Father, and it touches those around us anyway. We are vehicles for His love.
O
OneSheep
Guest
Of course you have the power to deny, but the way blindness works is like this, “This really is not such a big deal” or “no one is going to get hurt by this”, correct? Our subconscious is blind to the ramifications.
Think back to when you felt regret. Would you have sinned again when you were feeling the regret, when you really had a sense of the ramifications?
S
steve-b
Guest
I brought it up because sin has consequences. Depending on the sin, one can be lost forever. That’s why people need to know what they are doing when they sin because of eternal consequences.steve-b:
Not sure why you brought that up here. Heaven is a choice, so people may not choose it, right?
Jesus is always instructing. Therefore He is giving us / the crowd, what we / they need to know to get to heaven.
OR, one resists knowing, or one resists correction, because they don’t want to stop their particular sin.
Last edited:
O
OneSheep
Guest
Yes, people need to know what they are doing, for if they truly know the ramifications and consequences, they would not sin. As much as we can promote awareness of consequence, and condemn lack of awareness, there is so much more to knowing what we are doing than simply “knowing it is a sin”. A person who is not mindful of consequence in the moment may sin, and this blindness is a demonstration of not knowing what they are doing.
The important word in your additions here are “should”. The important word in my question is “does” or “is”.
Have you read the writings of recent popes? There is much more focus on “eternal life” as it begins right this moment. Jesus’ ministry was about setting people free from slavery right now, at the moment He addressed them, not just after they die. So when He said “forgive them, for they know not what they do”, He was giving all of us the means by which we can forgive at a deeper level right now, and overcome our grudges and negative feelings toward people. It is true, we can relate to the worst actors alive and in history because all of us do not know what we are doing when we sin.
… remember, I am working from “is” not “should”… “Should” is a great topic, but does not enter into truly understanding people.
I think you are saying that people resist knowing that a sin is a sin. Yes, I think that does happen. When it does happen, does the person know what he is doing?
In my observations, the answer is no. The person is not aware of the ramifications of the sin.
J
jcm2017
Guest
I would hope a person makes a conscious decision to love! If not, then we don’t have love.
Love is “to will the good of another, for the sake of the other”. This is not a mechanistic “over-thinking” approach, it recognizes that love orients one’s will toward the other, such that true freedom flourishes. A person who loves well and is oriented toward others might not have a “forced” thinking aspect to love but might love fully and freely from the heart. “The heart” is not merely feelings. The heart knows what it is doing when it loves well, it is not some sort of unconscious unwilled thing. It might be freeflowing and natural, but it’s not unconscious.
O
OneSheep
Guest
Well, the side question, “do we know what we are doing when we love?” is not really the focus here. I’m focusing on sin because it is our reaction to sin that leads to negative feelings, and that is what Jesus addressed from the cross.
What can be seen is that the crowd felt very negatively toward Jesus, and Jesus with His forgiveness “turned cheek” in a very big way. We react to hate with hating haters, right? But Jesus shows us a way to deal with hate, to turn it all around and forgive - through understanding. He understood their hate, he saw their blindness. As human, He had to have known what it means to be blind, so He understood that people do not will blindness, it is what happens in the mind when we feel resentment.
I agree that we have an autonomy, that we participate in love. The word “vehicle” may take away from the autonomy, so it is not such a great word. The autonomy of the self vs. the presence of God within is a mystery, I just leave it at that; it is too complex to understand.
J
jcm2017
Guest
This is not a side question. It is the looking at the whole.
Questions of sin only make sense in relation to the good.
This is the heart of any discussion about sin or morality.
So when asking if a person knows what we are doing when we sin, we have to know if love is willed or not. Sin is a void in the good.
Questions of sin only make sense in relation to the good.
This is the heart of any discussion about sin or morality.
So when asking if a person knows what we are doing when we sin, we have to know if love is willed or not. Sin is a void in the good.
O
OneSheep
Guest
Okay, in the example I gave, the crowd willed what they saw as justice. They willed love, in a sense, for order and “right thinking” as they saw it. They willed the stability of doctrine and hierarchy built in their society, and they saw Jesus as a threat. These observations, however, make it sound like the people were all thinking rationally, free from the enslavement of resentment. The resentment blinded them to the value of the person they hung.
When a person in their actions is not willing love for an individual, they do not know what they are doing, correct?
Thanks for your important points here!
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Then given that understanding, it could be argued that no body is guilty of anything.steve-b:
As much as we can promote awareness of consequence, and condemn lack of awareness, there is so much more to knowing what we are doing than simply “knowing it is a sin”. A person who is not mindful of consequence in the moment may sin, and this blindness is a demonstration of not knowing what they are doing.
The operative word is choice. People choose to sin or they don’t choose to sin.
People, lower the bar that Jesus sets high. And they will pay for that action.
Last edited:
J
jcm2017
Guest
Not correct. Truly a shrug here.jcm2017:
Okay, in the example I gave, the crowd willed what they saw as justice. They willed love, in a sense, for order and “right thinking” as they saw it. They willed the stability of doctrine and hierarchy built in their society, and they saw Jesus as a threat. These observations, however, make it sound like the people were all thinking rationally, free from the enslavement of resentment. The resentment blinded them to the value of the person they hung.
When a person in their actions is not willing love for an individual, they do not know what they are doing, correct?
from the CCC:
Note that sin is an offense, or an act. Unless you see human beings as robots, then an act is willed, including the will to love.
Note also that the offense is defined by the good that if offends: “reason, truth, conscience, love of God and neighbor, perverse attahment to certain goods”. These are all the goods that stand in contrast to sin and sort of give it definition and meaning. That’s probably not theologically precise but you get the idea. The void of sin only makes sense in relation to the love that it offends.
If a person is going to love God, the we must be free and responsible. Resentment can blind a person to the good, but that is simply not a wave of the hand to freedom and responsibility. The Church also speaks of “structures of sin”. Maybe you want to call that “mass resentment”, but that is not an excuse to sin and evil.
Last edited:
O
OneSheep
Guest
There are some important distinctions to be made. I am totally “guilty” (responsible) for every choice I have ever made, regardless of my awareness. However, when I understand a sinner, I no longer hold anything against him. I will think, probably, that some behavioral mitigation is appropriate, but I would carry out such mitigation (“punishment” with the person’s wellbeing in mind) with a forgiving heart. Is the person still responsible in my eyes? Yes. Do I hold anything against him? No, I understand why he did what he did, and given his awareness could have very well done the same. I see good intent - and blindness.
Well, that is an important word, yes! The observation I am making is that when people choose to sin, they do not know what they are doing. If we are instead saying, “He chose to sin, and should be punished” then the focus is on what to do about people sinning, not discovering why people sin or understanding.
I’m not completely sure what your comma means, but your statement again reflects our natural desire to punish wrongdoing, it is a statement from conscience.
To apply the theme of this thread, we could ask “Why do people lower the bar?”. My observation is that when people “lower the bar” (a harmful lowering) , they do not know what they are doing.
O
OneSheep
Guest
I’m a little confused. What are you seeing in those sections of the CCC that contradict this observation:
Could you be more specific?
Our choices are limited to the awareness we have about choices. Our free will is limited to our scope of the situation at hand and the choices present in our cognition. Nothing in the CCC contests this.
Jesus said, “forgive them, for they know not what they do”. The crowd acted out of ignorance. If they had known differently, they would have behaved differently.
Yes, we must be responsible. That is also Steve’s point. It is a good one.
And it is also a good point that we are not to “make excuses” for people. After all, what does it mean to “make excuses for people”? It is an attempt to waylay or bypass penalty or punishment.
Jesus was not making excuses for people. He was forgiving, and by using the gift of understanding, He was showing us how to forgive at a deeper level.
Forgiveness does not change the need for penalty when appropriate, it only changes the way penalties are carried out (with mercy) and the reason why such penalty is carried out (in mercy).
Last edited:
O
OneSheep
Guest
There was something about the desire, though, that made it a priority over those other things. Otherwise, with a clear mind, a mind of reason, you would have chosen differently. Desire blinds us to the priorities in the moment. It is really helpful to stay mindful of this, right? When we have desire, we are not thinking straight.
When you had regret, you were indeed thinking straight. You had the ramifications in mind, right? And the desire, well, the desire was out of the picture at that moment. So, in which time did you know more about what you were doing: when you were blinded by desire, or when you felt regret? Do you see what I’m seeing? This is not about “making excuses”. This is about understanding why we sin, and how we can use the gift to forgive ourselves and others.
It is really hard to tease out the objectives, but I think it is worthwhile. When we can get beyond the whole blaming compulsion and just observe, the path forms to an inner reconciliation.
We want to hang onto blame, right? Self-blame helps us keep our behaviors in check. The price of such blame, though, is a lack of inner reconciliation. In my experience, hanging onto self-blame is not worth it. I can understand and forgive myself. And you know what? Our own gut-level reactions to sin do not change when we understand and forgive; the conscience remains intact!
Last edited:
J
jcm2017
Guest
No I don’t believe I can be more specific. You are trying to confirm your point of view against what others (and the Church) are saying.
The fact that God is merciful does not take away our freedom. Sin is chosen just like love. And we should not confuse the culpability of disordered personalities with the fact that their actions are chosen and may be objectively sinful, despite their mis-formed consciences. (all of us are disordered to some extent)
The case you are making is the case for universalism.
Last edited:
O
OneSheep
Guest
Well, Jesus said that they did not know what they were doing, and I simply make the same observation. The Church does profess that people know what they are doing when they sin.
Correct.
This is true to a degree, yes, some terms would need defining.
Yes, people’s actions can be sinful. Culpability (blame) is what takes place in the individual observer. Jesus calls us to forgive, not to hold onto blame. We can still enact penalties for behavior without holding blame in our hearts, right?
Again, He calls us to forgive, and He gives us the means to do so, through understanding.
If by “universalism” you mean that everyone goes to heaven; universalism completely ignores the fact that heaven is a choice for people. God wants us with Him, but He gives us a choice. What needs to be also stated, though, is that a loving Father does not allow His children to make choices based on lack of information. At some point, every person will very clearly know when they are choosing to turn away from God.
The priest who taught our scripture class shared with us his image of God. “If we choose to go to hell, we do so screaming and kicking against God the whole way”, this is a God who does all He can to keep us.
J
jcm2017
Guest
Just to address your original post:
Morality is not subject to a person’s knowledge. Morality is based on the good, which is unchanging in that God is the ultimate good that we are oriented to.
Ignorance of the morality of an action does not change the fact that the act is evil and is freely chosen.
Questions that can be asked:
Is the person culpable?
Is the act imputable to the person?
Is the person fully responsible?
If a person is to become united to God in heaven, all these things must come to light in God’s way and time. It’s good to take responsibility now, to assume responsibility and reconcile actions.
Real life example:
When I procured an abortion, I committed an evil act that was objectively sinful. I freely chose it despite the screaming of my conscience against it. I had many “head reasons” that were false. Circumstances being what they were, my sense of knowledge, freedom, and responsibility were badly diminished.
As I came to love God, this sin (choice) came to the fore and called for reconciliation. The sense of responsibility grows in freedom, it is not passed off. As freedom grows these things must be faced for what they are: choice for evil actions.
Ignorance, weakness, vice, and slavery to sin are no excuse for these realities. If they are held as the ground for our redemption, we cannot possibly be loving God.
Last edited:
O
OneSheep
Guest
Yes!
This means “blameable”. Yes, we are all blameable for our actions, but we are invited to forgive.
Great question. This is a process of discovery.
“respond-able”, yes, we are called to respond for our actions. Our ability to respond is hindered by our grasp of the situation, but we are still called to respond for our actions.
Yes!
Yes
Yes, your conscience screamed, but its screaming was compromised by the following:
Yes, you did not have an objective grasp of what you were doing. You wanted “freedom”, but freedom meant destroying a life, a life that suddenly had far less meaning than your desire for freedom, your fears, your anger, whatever other emotion or desire would allow. We are inadvertently blinded by many emotions. Later on, when the emotions are gone, we say “I should have known better.”
You did not know what you were doing at the moment, you believed the “head reasons”.
I apologize if it sounds like I am making a bunch of assumptions about you. I am saying what would have happened in my mind if I had chosen the same. I’m also assuming a lot of circumstantial stuff, please forgive me, I don’t know the specifics.
Yes. I especially relate to “the sense of responsibility grows in freedom”. When I discovered the reasons why I did all the bad I have ever done, I was able to forgive myself at a deeper level. I can take complete ownership of my sin because I forgive myself. I did not know what I was doing.
S
steve-b
Guest
If no body knows what thy are doing when they do something, then no one is responsible for what they do either good or bad. They are innocent of everything, guilty of nothing they do, either good or bad.steve-b:
There are some important distinctions to be made. I am totally “guilty” (responsible) for every choice I have ever made, regardless of my awareness. However, when I understand a sinner, I no longer hold anything against him. I will think, probably, that some behavioral mitigation is appropriate, but I would carry out such mitigation (“punishment” with the person’s wellbeing in mind) with a forgiving heart. Is the person still responsible in my eyes? Yes. Do I hold anything against him? No, I understand why he did what he did, and given his awareness could have very well done the same. I see good intent - and blindness.
Well, that is an important word, yes! The observation I am making is that when people choose to sin, they do not know what they are doing. If we are instead saying, “He chose to sin, and should be punished” then the focus is on what to do about people sinning, not discovering why people sin or understanding.
I’m not completely sure what your comma means, but your statement again reflects our natural desire to punish wrongdoing, it is a statement from conscience.
To apply the theme of this thread, we could ask “Why do people lower the bar?”. My observation is that when people “lower the bar” (a harmful lowering) , they do not know what they are doing.
That might be reality for the mentally challenged, and insane, but not reality for the rest of humanity.
Last edited:
O
OneSheep
Guest
I already addressed the falsity of universalism in another post. Here is the point of view I agree with:
Is this “universalism”?
My observation is that people do not know what they are doing when they sin, it is grounded in the words of Jesus from the cross.
Now, there is also very good reason to support your position, a complete rejection of understanding the sinner. If it is feared that such understanding would diminish self-condemnation, then the fear goes into the thinking that if I stop condemning myself for my past sins, then I will sin again. There is a time to hang onto condemnation, we are not ready to forgive.
In time, though, the guilt does more harm than good. If I hang onto the self-grudge, I am a slave to my resentment, which is not the “eternal life” we are called to. Pope Francis says that if we do feel forgiven, we are not “fully Christian”! And how are we to feel forgiven if we continue to beat up on ourselves?
Blessings to you, Brittany, pray for me, I will pray for you.
- Status