O
oliver109
Guest
It is possible but for me it is very hard, living trying hard to avoid mortal sin is driving me to drink and depression.
You won’t, with God’s grace and cooperating with it. But believing Hell doesn’t exist will not help. You can’t reject something you don’t believe exists, nor is an impossibility. If you’re having these struggles, I sincerely believe you should find a holy and orthodox priest and discuss this with. This is not something to be settled over the internet.That wont help, what will help is being certain that I will never choose Hell
I’m sure there are zillions of souls saved in heaven, but the Church has only officially canonized relatively few as models for us to emulate. The Church has never said anyone is specifically in hell; there’s no need to do that. It doesn’t mean there aren’t countless lost souls there.the church has not ever, in her entire 2,000 year history practiced what might be called “reverse canonization.” That is, a positive pronouncement than someone is in Hell.
Nonsense again. The eternal condition of the damned us rooted in Scripture and has been the constant teaching of the Church.That’s the historical record, my friend, there’s no sense arguing against it.
Again, it is Jesus Christ who teaches it. The problem is that you are not reading the Scriptures very carefully…The question before us is whether St Augustine was right—are there any actions that would entail neverending torment and torture, thwarting the will and love of God? The will of man thwarts the will and love of God?
Again, the point of canonizing saints is to raise them up as role models. So your argument is pointless.The church has canonized thousands. And yet, she has not ever positively said anyone to be damned—not Hitler, not Genghis Khan, not Stalin, Mao, Alexander the Great…no one. Silence.
Nonsense. Those saints never claimed that there is no hell or that it is not eternal, or that there aren’t damned souls. It sounds like your source is the internet…I gave you numerous names of those who believe that God’s love wins (saves) all, in the end
Again, read what Jesus said. There are many many passages in Sacred Scripture. What part of this do you not understand:suggest that you read the Fathers and contemporary theologians on this issue.
We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves . . . To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him forever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.” (CCC 1033)Get reading, my friend. Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved?
You’ve got a long way to go.
It’s rather pointless; better thing to do is to pray for the conversion of sinners.All Catholics are free to hope for the salvation of all people, and I defy you to quote a council or a creed or a dogmatic pronouncement otherwise.
From the Catechism:“The Reformers had not been slow in taking advantage of the situation; their popular tracts and catechisms were flooding every country and leading thousands of souls away from the Church. The Fathers of Trent, therefore, “wishing to apply a salutary remedy to this great and pernicious evil, and thinking that the definition of the principal Catholic doctrines was not enough for the purpose, resolved also to publish a formulary and method for teaching the rudiments of the faith, to be used by all legitimate pastors and teachers” (Cat. praef., vii). This resolution was taken in the eighteenth session (26 February, 1562) on the suggestion of St. Charles Borromeo; who was then giving full scope to his zealfor the reformation of the clergy. Pius IV entrusted the composition of the Catechism to four distinguished theologians: Archbishops Leonardo Marino of Lanciano and Muzio Calini of Zara, Egidio Foscarini, Bishop of Modena, and Francisco Fureiro, a Portuguese Dominican. Three cardinals were appointed to supervise the work.”
While we’re on the subject of denying Hell, here’s a question: during Mass, the consecration of the wine into the Precious Blood uses the words “Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my blood: the blood of the new and eternal covenant, poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins”. If all will ultimately be saved, then why isn’t it for all instead of many?“Turning next to those who shall stand on His left, He will pour out His justice upon them in these words: Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. The first words, depart from me, express the heaviest punishment with which the wicked shall be visited, their eternal banishment from the sight of God, unrelieved by one consolatory hope of ever recovering so great a good. This punishment is called by theologians the pain of loss, because in hell the wicked shall be deprived forever of the light of the vision of God. The words ye cursed, which follow, increase unutterably their wretched and calamitous condition. If when banished from the divine presence they were deemed worthy to receive some benediction, this would be to them a great source of consolation. But since they can expect nothing of this kind as an alleviation of their misery, the divine justice deservedly pursues them with every species of malediction, once they have been banished. The next words, into everlasting fire, express another sort of punishment, which is called by theologians the pain of sense, because, like lashes, stripes or other more severe chastisements, among which fire, no doubt, produces the most intense pain, it is felt through the organs of sense. When, moreover, we reflect that this torment is to be eternal, we can see at once that the punishment of the damned includes every kind of suffering.”
Great point.While we’re on the subject of denying Hell, here’s a question: during Mass, the consecration of the wine into the Precious Blood uses the words “Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my blood: the blood of the new and eternal covenant, poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins ”.
(Denzinger 797)Can. 4. If anyone shall say that man’s free will moved and aroused by God does not cooperate by assenting to God who rouses and calls, whereby it disposes and prepares itself to obtain the grace of justification, and that it cannot dissent, if it wishes, but that like something inanimate it does nothing at all and is merely in a passive state: let him be anathema [cf. n. 797].
http://patristica.net/denzinger/#n800It [the Synod] furthermore declares that in adults the beginning of that justification must be derived from the predisposing grace [can. 3] of God through Jesus Christ, that is, from his vocation, whereby without any existing merits on their part they are called, so that they who by sin were turned away from God, through His stimulating and assisting grace are disposed to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and cooperating with the same grace [can. 4 and 5], in such wise that, while God touches the heart of man through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself receiving that inspiration does not do nothing at all inasmuch as he can indeed reject it, nor on the other hand can he [can. 3] of his own free will without the grace of God move himself to justice before Him. Hence, when it is said in the Sacred Writings: “Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you” [Zach. 1:3], we are reminded of our liberty; when we reply: “Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted” [Lam. 5:21], we confess that we are anticipated by the grace of God.
Here’s what happened—the emperorJustinian was not impressed by the particular apokatastasis of Origen. He wrote several anathemas that he wanted the council fathers at Constantinople II to adopt—he wanted the force of an ecumenical council behind his condemnations of the particular teachings of Origen on this issue. However, as Norman Tanner notes in his introduction to Const II in his Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, “Our edition does not include the text of the anathemas against Origen since recent studies have shown that these anathemas cannot be attributed to this council,” (pp. 105-106).In point of fact, the ancient councils rejected the theory . . . according to which the world would be regenerated after destruction, and every creature would be saved; a theory which abolished hell. . . .
Yes, I read my Bible, it’s the Word of God; and the Church was established by God to teach the truth. so I also study the Catechism. If you don’t want to believe Jesus, then that’s your problem. But hell, demons, lost damned souls, are as real as the nose on your face.That’s sweet Gab, it really is. I imagine you with your Bible and your trusty CCC believing that you can’t be led wrong with those two items. I kind of admire the innocent naïveté. But you have no idea who you’re talking to (me) - not what I’ve read or what I know. You also very clearly didn’t realize this was an open debate. You thought it was all settled dogma! Thank God that it isn’t. You owe it to yourself to ponder these issues more deeply. But best wishes to you no matter what. :+1:t3: