Finite Transformed To Infinite

  • Thread starter Thread starter PrisonerOfChrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PrisonerOfChrist

Guest
In Catholic theology, we understand any sin we commit turns into an infinite offense because God is offended and his dignity is infinite.

Since the offence becomes infinite because it’s directed to God. Why can’t our finite reparation be transformed into an infinite reparation the same way our finite sin becomes infinite? Why is there a difference in value between the two when the initiator and the recipient are the same in both scenarios?
 
PrisonerOfChrist said:
Why can’t our finite reparation be transformed into an infinite reparation the same way our finite sin becomes infinite? Why is there a difference in value between the two when the initiator and the recipient are the same in both scenarios?
Click to expand...
I don’t know that we really are the initiator in repentance/reparation. We are spurred on by God’s grace.
You see, when we do anything good, are we really giving anything to God that was not already His right? Or, are we simply giving Him back what He already had and justly deserves?
 
Last edited:
It’s true that any good we do is a grace from God. Ok let’s expand on that. Any reparation we offer is a grace from God. Grace comes from the infinite God, so why doesn’t the reparation (God’s grace) contain infinite value? Why does it remain finite?
 
“PrisonerOfChrist said:
… Why can’t our finite reparation be transformed into an infinite reparation the same way our finite sin becomes infinite? …

Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote: “it is possible to repair it by the power of God”

Summa Theologiae > First Part of the Second Part > Question 87. The debt of punishment > Article 3. Whether any sin incurs a debt of eternal punishment?
I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), sin incurs a debt of punishment through disturbing an order. But the effect remains so long as the cause remains. Wherefore so long as the disturbance of the order remains the debt of punishment must needs remain also. Now disturbance of an order is sometimes reparable, sometimes irreparable: because a defect which destroys the principle is irreparable, whereas if the principle be saved, defects can be repaired by virtue of that principle. For instance, if the principle of sight be destroyed, sight cannot be restored except by Divine power; whereas, if the principle of sight be preserved, while there arise certain impediments to the use of sight, these can be remedied by nature or by art. Now in every order there is a principle whereby one takes part in that order. Consequently if a sin destroys the principle of the order whereby man’s will is subject to God, the disorder will be such as to be considered in itself, irreparable, although it is possible to repair it by the power of God. Now the principle of this order is the last end, to which man adheres by charity. Therefore whatever sins turn man away from God, so as to destroy charity, considered in themselves, incur a debt of eternal punishment.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
It seems to me that the word “infinite” is inappropriate to this question. How would the word be defined in this situation?
 
Sorry I thought you meant the part I was challenging about finite vs infinite
 
“Vico said:
PrisonerOfChrist said:
… Why can’t our finite reparation be transformed into an infinite reparation the same way our finite sin becomes infinite? …

Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote: “it is possible to repair it by the power of God”

Summa Theologiae > First Part of the Second Part > Question 87. The debt of punishment > Article 3. Whether any sin incurs a debt of eternal punishment?
I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), sin incurs a debt of punishment through disturbing an order. But the effect remains so long as the cause remains. Wherefore so long as the disturbance of the order remains the debt of punishment must needs remain also. Now disturbance of an order is sometimes reparable, sometimes irreparable: because a defect which destroys the principle is irreparable, whereas if the principle be saved, defects can be repaired by virtue of that principle. For instance, if the principle of sight be destroyed, sight cannot be restored except by Divine power; whereas, if the principle of sight be preserved, while there arise certain impediments to the use of sight, these can be remedied by nature or by art. Now in every order there is a principle whereby one takes part in that order. Consequently if a sin destroys the principle of the order whereby man’s will is subject to God, the disorder will be such as to be considered in itself, irreparable, although it is possible to repair it by the power of God. Now the principle of this order is the last end, to which man adheres by charity. Therefore whatever sins turn man away from God, so as to destroy charity, considered in themselves, incur a debt of eternal punishment.
Click to expand...
Perfect, that’s the answer I was looking for - thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top