No one so far has mentioned the “fundamental option.” I’m certainly not an expert in it, and I just know what I read about 30 years ago. I’m also aware of various criticisms, which I think are valid, but don’t invalidate the whole theory.
But in the context of this thread, my understanding of it is this: To sin, we have to make a free choice. But on earth there are all sorts of things affecting our choice–on the one hand, the things in the world around us; on the other hand, the state of our own minds. (For example, is stealing $100 from a poor man the same sin as stealing $100 from Bill Gates? What if we think what we’re doing is wrong, but are unclear on how wrong it is and what consequences might spring from it–we tell a lie about someone, and that lie is passed down through two or three people until it gets to a wronged husband, who kills his wife because of my original lie.) Without nit-picking, you get the idea. So we are never truly, perfectly “free.”
As I understand the “fundamental option,” the idea is that at death God presents us with our past sins. Now we have perfect understanding of the sins, and our minds are also truly free–no constraints of past habits, etc. etc. So if at this point you say, “My God, what was I thinking! I would never have done that if I ….” then you are forgiven and go to Heaven. If, on the other hand, you embrace your past sin and say, “Yes. Now I understand everything about that sin. And I would do it again.” Then too bad for you.
It makes sense to me, and it certainly solves a lot of the issues brought up by previous posters (for example, a man spends his entire life doing good and misses Mass once).
True.