How about if I give an example, although I don’t want to derail the conversation, either. So - when contemplating the matter in the example below - please refer back to the original question.
Example: For various reasons, I have a difficulty with the rule that basically says we shouldn’t go to communion, unless we can receive it worthily. I’m a 50 y/o cradle Catholic, and I never had this problem (because I never really thought much about it) until I was upwards to 40. When I found out receiving unworthily was a mortal sin, I stopped going, unless I first went to confession before every mass to ensure I was in the proper disposition. Then - for various reasons - it happened I couldn’t always make it to confession, and now I rarely go to communion at all. I watch just about everyone else go, and I would bet a nickle a lot of them aren’t confessed, but I won’t go unless I have been able to avoid sin altogether, or I have been confessed.
Difficulty: The rule makes no logical sense to me at all for one simple reason. If one has committed a mortal sin, one is already damned, so why not just go ahead and receive communion? Spiritually, I can’t tell, but logically it seems like not going to communion on account of a mortal sin on one’s soul is the same as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. So where is the temptation in the spirit or the logic? I kind of feel stupid going to church and just sitting there without going to communion (which is the pinnacle of the mass).
Either way, now, let us return to the main question: "Is doubting Christ’s absolute mercy a sin?"
If I had my druthers, I think Christ’s absolute mercy would say, “Do it.”
But the rule, which I either dont agree with or see the logic to, says, “No you can’t go to communion (because of bad habits or the unavailability of Priests or scheduling problems or etc…)”
So, I don’t go, but then it gives rise to my original question.
My gut says, Christ is absolutely merciful, so dont believe that rule. The rule, as a limit, says no - that’s a temptation, so just sit in the pew. The result is that I doubt my gut.
My mind says, the correct procedure is to stay in the proper graces and/or go to confession first, and then receive worthily. My gut says, “Who made up these rules that don’t make any sense? Exactly where are all the Priests? Scheduling problems, conflicts of opinion, formalities, etc, etc, etc - where is the justice in it all? I seriously doubt this is what Christ meant…” The result is that I doubt both my own thinking and the rule itself, although perhaps somehow managing to uphold a sense of grace in a damnable posture anyway.
Does this example help clarify the nature of my question in the original post?
Let us please NOT begin a discussion on the nature of worthy reception. The rule for a worthy reception is what it is, and I dont think a forum discussions going to convince even Pope Francis (whom I like a great deal) to make strikingly new and infallible decisions on the matter. My question is aimed more at just understanding… probably… where I am going wrong?
