Is our free choice real

[BobCatholic]

• Mortal sin is a free will choice per the dogma of the Church, and free will means exactly what you said, optional. It is not forced on a person but an option.

For some people, going to hell is not optional. For some reason you don’t address the issue of the virgins whose grace ran out. The issue of the rich young ruler, you dismiss as he was not baptized (no baptism of desire?) Guess being rich must be a mortal sin.

• A person does not have to be without imperfections in order to remain free from mortal sin.

Where is this teaching?

The account of the virgins running out of oil contradicts this. They had imperfections and their grace ran out.

I told you: Imperfections make us like a leaky bucket, and the grace eventually runs out.

• A person may be free from all temporal punishments at death even though full of imperfections, for example, those that die with a plenary indulgence, or with the apostolic blessing at the sacrament of annotating of the sick, and those that have baptism of blood.

If one is not blessed enough to get those, game over, to purgatory they go. There is no choice.

 

[Vico]

For some people, going to hell is not optional. For some reason you don’t address the issue of the virgins whose grace ran out. The issue of the rich young ruler, you dismiss as he was not baptized (no baptism of desire?) Guess being rich must be a mortal sin.

Where is this teaching?

The account of the virgins running out of oil contradicts this. They had imperfections and their grace ran out.

I told you: Imperfections make us like a leaky bucket, and the grace eventually runs out.

If one is not blessed enough to get those, game over, to purgatory they go. There is no choice.

As stated before the Catholic teaching is that one when one has sanctifying grace it is possible to remain free from mortal sin (1) and that one does not go to hell unless dying without sanctifying grace which can occur one of two ways: by state of original sin (not a personal free will act) or by a state of mortal sin (a personal free will act). The Church also hopes for the unbaptized infants that die without baptism.

(1) Council of Trent: “Can. 18. If anyone shall say that the commandments of God are even for a man who is justified and confirmed in grace impossible to observe: let him be anathema”.

I addressed the Old Testament period before Jesus descended into hell in the earlier post.

You ask again about what was answered a few times before, where does it say that: “A person does not have to be without imperfections in order to remain free from mortal sin.”

It is the clear teaching of the Church that acts or omissions can be:

• not a sin
• a venial sin, or
• a mortal sin.

And that sanctifying grace is only destroyed by mortal sin. Catechism:

1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.

Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. …
1863 … “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.”…

 

[BobCatholic]

As stated before the Catholic teaching is that one when one has sanctifying grace it is possible to remain free from mortal sin (1) and that one does not go to hell unless dying without sanctifying grace which can occur one of two ways: by state of original sin (not a personal free will act) or by a state of mortal sin (a personal free will act). The Church also hopes for the unbaptized infants that die without baptism.

And there’s a third way: the grace leaks. The person gets to the end of their life, and Christ says “I do not know you” and game over, elevator down. No hope. No choice.

(1) Council of Trent: “Can. 18. If anyone shall say that the commandments of God are even for a man who is justified and confirmed in grace impossible to observe: let him be anathema”.

Yes. They can keep the commandments and still go to hell. That’s why the rich young ruler was rejected by Christ. What mortal sin was there? None. Unless being rich is a mortal sin.

Then there are those who perform signs and wonders in the name of Christ, and healed people in the name of Christ. Then they hear “Go away evildoers, I do not know you.” What mortal sin was there? None.

I addressed the Old Testament period before Jesus descended into hell in the earlier post.

“A person does not have to be without imperfections in order to remain free from mortal sin.”

They have to be without imperfections to keep the grace that they have within them. Otherwise, it leaks.

And that sanctifying grace is only destroyed by mortal sin.

It also disappears when it leaks.

.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itsel

The former is easy to do, the latter is horrifically difficult to do.

How to love someone who never shows himself to me or talks to me? I want to love him, but there’s no way if he’s playing hard to get.

When God plays hard to get, that’s the grace leaking and God not doing anything about it. This is the third possibility.

So saith the leaky bucket (me).

Imperfections cause people to leak grace, there is no choice. Thus, free will is a cruel joke at best or non-existent at worst.

 

[Vico]

And there’s a third way: the grace leaks. The person gets to the end of their life, and Christ says “I do not know you” and game over, elevator down. No hope. No choice.
Yes. They can keep the commandments and still go to hell. That’s why the rich young ruler was rejected by Christ. What mortal sin was there? None. Unless being rich is a mortal sin.
Then there are those who perform signs and wonders in the name of Christ, and healed people in the name of Christ. Then they hear “Go away evildoers, I do not know you.” What mortal sin was there? None.
They have to be without imperfections to keep the grace that they have within them. Otherwise, it leaks.
It also disappears when it leaks.
The former is easy to do, the latter is horrifically difficult to do.
How to love someone who never shows himself to me or talks to me? I want to love him, but there’s no way if he’s playing hard to get.
When God plays hard to get, that’s the grace leaking and God not doing anything about it. This is the third possibility.
So saith the leaky bucket (me).
Imperfections cause people to leak grace, there is no choice. Thus, free will is a cruel joke at best or non-existent at worst.

One that dies in sanctifying grace attains heaven, and sanctifying grace is never lost without a free will choice.

There is no such thing as leaking sanctifing grace, unless one defines leak as a mortal sin and accepts that that only occurs through a free will choice. All of those conclusions are false that derive from that idea that sanctifying grace is lost without free will choice.
One is not damned to hell through death in a state of venial however, and there is still what you call imperfection.

See the Catechism

1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.

1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. "Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness."134

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.135​

 

[Elf01]

Mortal sin is optional. That’s why those virgins “leaked” grace - their lamps (filled with grace) ran out.

This was a parable, I agree with you that the oil was grace, however I see falling asleep as committing a mortal sin. Filling the lamps would then be repenting and going to confession.

The rich young ruler committed the mortal sin of having wealth.

No, he broke the first commandment when he chose his wealth over God.

The fig tree committed the mortal sin of not doing something at the wrong time for it to be done.

The fig tree was an example of having the exterior signs without interior conversion.

 

[BobCatholic]

There is no such thing as leaking sanctifing grace,

Yes, there is, it is called imperfections.

unless one defines leak as a mortal sin

Mortal sin is not a leak. It is spilling the entire contents of the bucket in one fell swoop.

All of those conclusions are false that derive from that idea that sanctifying grace is lost without free will choice.

We are created imperfect. No choice in that.
God’s grace does not fix imperfections. No choice in that.
Imperfections cause us to leak grace. No choice in that.

One is not damned to hell through death in a state of venial however, and there is still what you call imperfection.

Original sin cannot be mortal, it is not our choice. But yet you say people go to hell for having that. In addition, we are held temporally responsible for the sins of Adam and Eve.

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.135

Thank you. That’s the quote I was talking about.

Venial sins can pile up to a certain level when the grace is depleted. So theoretically, one can go to hell for having a lot of venial sins.

This was a parable, I agree with you that the oil was grace, however I see falling asleep as committing a mortal sin. Filling the lamps would then be repenting and going to confession.

Someone being tired and falling asleep is an imperfection, no choice there. In addition, the virgins had no opportunity to repent and confess. No choice there.

No, he broke the first commandment when he chose his wealth over God.

He followed the first commandment from his youth, and Christ didn’t say “you lie”
So clearly he was telling the truth.

So it is obvious, that if we have money in our pocket, we are evil people and God does not want us. Rich. Middle class. Poor. Got a dollar? Elevator down.

The fig tree was an example of having the exterior signs without interior conversion.

This interpretation dose not fit.

The fig tree was approached by Christ in the off-season for fruit, and Christ demanded that the fruit already be there. The time was wrong, but that was not enough. Imagine approaching the blueberry bush in the middle of winter with 3 inches of snow on top of it and demanding to eat blueberries. OF COURSE it won’t have fruit. That’s not the proper season for it and that is how it is created - to give fruit in due season.

Using your interpretation, someone who is in a wheelchair will be condemned for not being able to run the race. Someone mentally disabled will be condemned for not learning about God…

More proof that imperfections cause people to be rejected and there is no free will involved there.

God creates people imperfect and demands perfection - always. God creates an imperfect fig tree who can’t make fruit on the off season and condemns it for not making fruit in the off season. This sounds like God is irrational or unreasonable, but I refuse to paint God that way. This is why I say: Free will is a cruel joke at best or non-existent at worst. I say this to maintain God’s reasonableness.

 

[Vico]

Yes, there is, it is called imperfections.
Mortal sin is not a leak. It is spilling the entire contents of the bucket in one fell swoop.
We are created imperfect. No choice in that.
God’s grace does not fix imperfections. No choice in that.
Imperfections cause us to leak grace. No choice in that.
Original sin cannot be mortal, it is not our choice. But yet you say people go to hell for having that. In addition, we are held temporally responsible for the sins of Adam and Eve.
Thank you. That’s the quote I was talking about.
Venial sins can pile up to a certain level when the grace is depleted. So theoretically, one can go to hell for having a lot of venial sins.
Someone being tired and falling asleep is an imperfection, no choice there. In addition, the virgins had no opportunity to repent and confess. No choice there.
He followed the first commandment from his youth, and Christ didn’t say “you lie”
So clearly he was telling the truth.
So it is obvious, that if we have money in our pocket, we are evil people and God does not want us. Rich. Middle class. Poor. Got a dollar? Elevator down.
This interpretation dose not fit.
The fig tree was approached by Christ in the off-season for fruit, and Christ demanded that the fruit already be there. The time was wrong, but that was not enough. Imagine approaching the blueberry bush in the middle of winter with 3 inches of snow on top of it and demanding to eat blueberries. OF COURSE it won’t have fruit. That’s not the proper season for it and that is how it is created - to give fruit in due season.
Using your interpretation, someone who is in a wheelchair will be condemned for not being able to run the race. Someone mentally disabled will be condemned for not learning about God…
More proof that imperfections cause people to be rejected and there is no free will involved there.
God creates people imperfect and demands perfection - always. God creates an imperfect fig tree who can’t make fruit on the off season and condemns it for not making fruit in the off season. This sounds like God is irrational or unreasonable, but I refuse to paint God that way. This is why I say: Free will is a cruel joke at best or non-existent at worst. I say this to maintain God’s reasonableness.

So by leak you mean venial sin. The Council of Trent, Session VI, Chapter XI teaches that sanctifying grace is not lost by venial sin. So no, venial sins cannot pile up to a certain level when the grace is depleted. That is not Catholic teaching.

The Catholic teaching is that after baptism, the loss of sanctifying grace (mortal sin) or weakening (venial sin) is through the will – there is no actual sin without a willful act – and no number of venial sins add up to a mortal sin. This is clear from the definition of mortal and venial sin as given in the Catechism. There you read that unrepented venial sin disposes one to mortal sin. That is an attitude towards sin not actual sin. Because of that, which is a willful choice not to repent, there may be by our attitude, less actual grace received in the future to help us.

Remember from the thread on Mortal Sin. Objective sin may be neither mortal sin nor venial sin, but no actual sin at all.

Catechism

1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

 

[BobCatholic]

So by leak you mean venial sin. The Council of Trent, Session VI, Chapter XI teaches that sanctifying grace is not lost by venial sin.

Quote please?

So no, venial sins cannot pile up to a certain level when the grace is depleted. That is not Catholic teaching.

You just posted the Catechism quote which confirms what I’m saying, to wit:

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.

Why is confession hope for venial sins if venial sin does not deplete grace?

Remember from the thread on Mortal Sin. Objective sin may be neither mortal sin nor venial sin, but no actual sin at all.

Then why do you say people go to hell for having original sin? Clearly that must be mortal! Only mortal sinners go to hell.

In such a case, there is no free will involved.

1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

I don’t know where nullified part comes from, but Sacred Scripture definitely says diminished. The nullified part must come from somewhere in Sacred Tradition.

The problem I see is from “inordinate attachments” - you say the Rich Young ruler went to hell, because of his inordinate attachment to wealth, but here the Church appears to say the opposite. This confuses me.

 

[Elf01]

Yes, there is, it is called imperfections.

Someone being tired and falling asleep is an imperfection, no choice there. In addition, the virgins had no opportunity to repent and confess. No choice there.

Just as the oil is not literally oil falling asleep is not literally falling asleep. The not having the chance to repent and confess is the exact message of the parable. We don’t know the moment of our judgement so do not delay confession.

He followed the first commandment from his youth, and Christ didn’t say “you lie”
So clearly he was telling the truth.

So it is obvious, that if we have money in our pocket, we are evil people and God does not want us. Rich. Middle class. Poor. Got a dollar? Elevator down.

Lets examine Matthew’s account of that incident from the RSVCE.

16 And behold, one came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?” 17 And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? One there is who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” 18 He said to him, “Which?” And Jesus said, “You shall not kill, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, 19 Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 20 The young man said to him, “All these I have observed; what do I still lack?” 21 Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” 22 When the young man heard this he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions.

.

The bold part is where I see a possible mortal sin (breaking of the first commandment). Also in verse 17, Jesus specifies keeping the commandments as the conditions for inheriting eternal life. Not being poor, not being perfect, keeping the commandments. Also, in the list Jesus gives that the rich man states he has kept from his youth, the first is not included. What I think is going on here, is that while the rich young man is doing all that is needed, he feels called to do more (i.e. a call to ministry), which is why he asks what he still lacks. I would go as far as to say that the man may not have gone to hell. He simply followed a less perfect path.

Mark says that Jesus loved him, so he was not automatically rejected for being rich. See his account below. Emphasis mine.

17 And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 19 You know the commandments: ‘Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’” 20 And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have observed from my youth.” 21 And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” 22 At that saying his countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions

I have made a typo correction in this quote highlighted in bold.

This interpretation does not fit.

The fig tree was approached by Christ in the off-season for fruit, and Christ demanded that the fruit already be there. The time was wrong, but that was not enough. Imagine approaching the blueberry bush in the middle of winter with 3 inches of snow on top of it and demanding to eat blueberries. OF COURSE it won’t have fruit. That’s not the proper season for it and that is how it is created - to give fruit in due season.

The tree had leaves, leaves imply fruit

Alfred Edersheim has called attention to the fact that “in Palestine the fruit appears before the leaves” (p. 374; emphasis added). Thus, to see a leafed fig tree (even at an unseasonable time — v. 13b), warranted the assumption that there would be fruit on the tree.

from christiancourier.com/articles/646-why-did-jesus-curse-the-fig-tree

 

[Vico]

Quote please?
You just posted the Catechism quote which confirms what I’m saying, to wit:
Why is confession hope for venial sins if venial sin does not deplete grace?
Then why do you say people go to hell for having original sin? Clearly that must be mortal! Only mortal sinners go to hell.
In such a case, there is no free will involved.
I don’t know where nullified part comes from, but Sacred Scripture definitely says diminished. The nullified part must come from somewhere in Sacred Tradition.
The problem I see is from “inordinate attachments” - you say the Rich Young ruler went to hell, because of his inordinate attachment to wealth, but here the Church appears to say the opposite. This confuses me.

If the state of sanctifying grace were lost by venial sin one would be damned for it if dying without forgiveness of it. The Council of Trent states that venial sin does not make one unjust.

Council of Trent, Session V, Chapter XI

For though during this mortal life, men, however holy and just, fall at times into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial, they do not on that account cease to be just, for that petition of the just, forgive us our trespasses,[62] is both humble and true; for which reason the just ought to feel themselves the more obliged to walk in the way of justice, for being now freed from sin and made servants of God,[63] they are able, living soberly, justly and godly,[64] to proceed onward through Jesus Christ, by whom they have access unto this grace.[65]

For God does not forsake those who have been once justified by His grace, unless He be first forsaken by them.

The Catechism does not confirm what you are saying because there is a difference between “unrepented venial sin disposes one to mortal sin” and depletion. No sanctifying grace is lost with venial sin so there is no depletion. Sanctifying grace is a state of habitual grace and it is still maintained even with countless venial sins.

For adults

Catechism 846 … Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. … 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. …

Nullification could arise from those factors concerned with ability to act with free will and knowledge of the moral character:
“ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors”.

 

[BobCatholic]

Just as the oil is not literally oil falling asleep is not literally falling asleep. The not having the chance to repent and confess is the exact message of the parable. We don’t know the moment of our judgement so do not delay confession.

OK, so it is not literally falling asleep, but it is definitely an imperfection. In addition, they attempted to repent and confess (buy more oil) but were not permitted to.

This is a great parable that says that grace leaks from imperfections…

Free will = 0

.

The bold part is where I see a possible mortal sin (breaking of the first commandment).

You keep overlooking the key part: The Rich young ruler said he kept the commandments from his youth. Jesus agreed with that, so your interpretation was wrong.

The teaching is that wealth is evil, nothing more. Christ wants us to never have any money. We are all supposed to be monks and nuns, living on a vow of poverty.

Also in verse 17, Jesus specifies keeping the commandments as the conditions for inheriting eternal life

Which the rich young ruler did, and that was not good enough.

Not being poor, not being perfect, keeping the commandments.

“not being perfect” is wrong.

You didn’t notice the part where Jesus said “If you you want to be perfect…”

Clearly the requirement IS to be perfect. So your statement is incorrect. Christ rejected him precisely because he was imperfect and the imperfection was wealth.

“not being poor” is wrong too. Christ believes that the rich guy having money was wrong, and told him to give it up. At the least it is an imperfection, at the most a mortal sin for being wealthy.

so, in the list Jesus gives that the rich man states he has kept from his youth, the first is not included.

First, I don’t think that Christ intended to list all the commandments. He didn’t list not coveting neighbor’s wife and not coveting neighbor’s goods. I believe Christ did a shorthand list of all the commandments to point out the Ten Commandments as a whole.

Second, if what your interpretation were true, Christ would have said “No, you forgot the first commandment!”

Third, Christ said the commandments were necessary to enter life, and if what you say is true, one doesn’t need to follow the first one anyway.

The objection about commenting on the list of commandments listed to the rich young ruler being short reminds me of the oneness Pentecostals who baptize in the name of Jesus because of a verse in Acts instead of Matthew 28:19. The shorthand was used there as well.

What I think is going on here, is that while the rich young man is doing all that is needed,

Christ didn’t think he was doing all that was needed. He wanted the young guy to take a vow of poverty and get rid of all that evil money.

Mark says that Jesus loved him, so he was not automatically rejected for being rich.

Jesus loves those in hell, doesn’t mean they’re not rejected.

from christiancourier.com/articles/646-why-did-jesus-curse-the-fig-tree

Interesting article.

Some quotes:

First, it cannot be established that the tree had an owner. Matthew observes that it was growing “by the wayside”

Second, W. M. Thompson, a scholar eminently familiar with Palestinean customs, pointed out that it was common for travelers to pick fruit from road-side trees, or from any tree that was not enclosed; there was no censure associated with such

So here’s a tree that’s by the wayside, and I bet people would pick fruit from it all day long.
Especially the poor people, who were in abundance. So a bunch of people picked fruit off of it, and it had no fruit left for the Lord and the Lord cursed it.

Another good example of people leaking grace due to imperfections. The fruit was a symbol of God’s grace getting picked away throughout an imperfect life.

In addition, this is another interpretation, where it is possible to serve the Lord (serving the poor) all one’s life and oops, get condemned anyway. Where’s the free will?

Free will is =0

 

[BobCatholic]

If the state of sanctifying grace were lost by venial sin one would be damned for it if dying without forgiveness of it. The Council of Trent states that venial sin does not make one unjust.

Saying Venial sin does not make one unjust is not the same as saying Venial sin does not cause one to lose grace.

OK, I have a gallon of grace, and commit a venial sin that loses an ounce, so 127 ounces are left. I am still in a state of grace and am still just. So what Trent says is true.

Trent does not teach venial sin does not cause one to lose ANY grace.

In addition, the Catechism teaches that venial sin wounds charity (grace). A wound means an injury, or a part of the skin cut away - grace reduced.

In addition, venial sins must be forgiven or else they pile up. That Catechism quote shows this. They pile up to a big thing - and that’s a euphemism for grave sin.

We leak, and there’s no fix for that. God only refills with confession, not fixes the leaks.

Nullification could arise from those factors concerned with ability to act with free will and knowledge of the moral character:
“ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors”.

The Church hasn’t taught where the line is drawn between culpability and non-culpability.

How imperfect does one have to be before one is no longer culpable? How imperfect is one before they don’t have free will?

I’m concerned that I am so imperfect, that I can never be accepted by God (especially since He is silent to me all the time and refuses to talk to me).

 

[Vico]

Saying Venial sin does not make one unjust is not the same as saying Venial sin does not cause one to lose grace.

OK, I have a gallon of grace, and commit a venial sin that loses an ounce, so 127 ounces are left. I am still in a state of grace and am still just. So what Trent says is true.

Trent does not teach venial sin does not cause one to lose ANY grace.

In addition, the Catechism teaches that venial sin wounds charity (grace). A wound means an injury, or a part of the skin cut away - grace reduced.

In addition, venial sins must be forgiven or else they pile up. That Catechism quote shows this. They pile up to a big thing - and that’s a euphemism for grave sin.

We leak, and there’s no fix for that. God only refills with confession, not fixes the leaks.

The Church hasn’t taught where the line is drawn between culpability and non-culpability.

How imperfect does one have to be before one is no longer culpable? How imperfect is one before they don’t have free will?

I’m concerned that I am so imperfect, that I can never be accepted by God (especially since He is silent to me all the time and refuses to talk to me).

Nobody is damned to hell for venial sin.

No, only mortal sin involves the* loss of grace*, per the Church. Catholic Encyclopedia explains this was declared at the Council of Trent. Also venial sins are not necessary to be confessed, and are forgiven through reception of communion, for one example.

In consonance with his doctrine of justification by faith alone, Luther made the loss or forfeiture of justification depend solely upon infidelity, while Calvin maintained that the predestined could not possibly lose their justification; as to those not predestined, he said, God merely aroused in them a deceitful show of faith and justification. On account of the grave moral dangers which lurked in the assertion that outside of unbelief there can be no serious sin destructive of Divine grace in the soul, the Council of Trent was obliged to condemn (Sess. VI, can. xxiii, xxvii) both these views. The lax principles of “evangelical liberty”, the favourite catchword of the budding Reformation, were simply repudiated (Trent Sess. VI, can. xix-xxi). But the synod (Sess. VI cap. xi) added that not venial but only mortal sin involved the loss of grace. In this declaration there was a perfect accord with Scripture and Tradition.

Pohle, J. (1909). Sanctifying Grace. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. newadvent.org/cathen/06701a.htm

Catechism1458 Without being strictly necessary, confession of everyday faults (venial sins) is nevertheless strongly recommended by the Church.59 Indeed the regular confession of our venial sins helps us form our conscience, fight against evil tendencies, let ourselves be healed by Christ and progress in the life of the Spirit. By receiving more frequently through this sacrament the gift of the Father’s mercy, we are spurred to be merciful as he is merciful:60

Whoever confesses his sins . . . is already working with God. God indicts your sins; if you also indict them, you are joined with God. Man and sinner are, so to speak, two realities: when you hear “man” - this is what God has made; when you hear “sinner” - this is what man himself has made. Destroy what you have made, so that God may save what he has made. . . . When you begin to abhor what you have made, it is then that your good works are beginning, since you are accusing yourself of your evil works. The beginning of good works is the confession of evil works. You do the truth and come to the light.61

1416 Communion with the Body and Blood of Christ increases the communicant’s union with the Lord, forgives his venial sins, and preserves him from grave sins. Since receiving this sacrament strengthens the bonds of charity between the communicant and Christ, it also reinforces the unity of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ.​

Note the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas in Summa Theologiae > Third Part > Question 87. The remission of venial sin. Article 2. Whether infusion of grace is necessary for the remission of venial sins?

On the contrary, The advent of venial sin neither destroys nor diminishes grace, as stated in the II-II:24:10. Therefore, in like manner, an infusion of grace is not necessary in order to remove venial sin.

S. Th. III: 87:2: newadvent.org/summa/4087.htm
S. Th. II-II:24:10: newadvent.org/summa/3024.htm#article10

There is nothing in Catholic teachings that state that God will talk to the faithful. Some receive messages through angels, as did the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Joseph. We are divinized through sanctifying grace.

Catechism 1988 has:
[God] gave himself to us through his Spirit. By the participation of the Spirit, we become communicants in the divine nature. . . . For this reason, those in whom the Spirit dwells are divinized. 37

37 St. Athanasius, Ep. Serap. 1,24G 26,585 and 588.

 

[BobCatholic]

Nobody is damned to hell for venial sin.

People are damned for not having grace. You mentioned people go to hell for original sin because of the deprivation of grace.

One can leak grace until it is all gone then elevator down.

One leaks grace due to imperfections and venial sin.

The lax principles of “evangelical liberty”, the favourite catchword of the budding Reformation, were simply repudiated (Trent Sess. VI, can. xix-xxi). But the synod (Sess. VI cap. xi) added that not venial but only mortal sin involved the loss of grace. In this declaration there was a perfect accord with Scripture and Tradition.

I cannot find this citation (Sess. VI cap. xi).

thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm

It does say “That, by every mortal sin, grace is lost” but it doesn’t say that’s the only way grace is lost (per your statement). It says that mortal sin loses grace, and I agree with that. But does it really say that’s the ONLY way to lose grace?

I also searched for venial sins not losing grace, and there is nothing here about that. Is this in another section of Trent?

1458 Without being strictly necessary, confession of everyday faults (venial sins) is nevertheless strongly recommended by the Church.

I’m there, and love confession, but remember, we are imperfect, everyday faults occur everyday because we are imperfect.

Note the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas in Summa Theologiae > Third Part > Question 87. The remission of venial sin. Article 2. Whether infusion of grace is necessary for the remission of venial sins?

On the contrary, The advent of venial sin neither destroys nor diminishes grace, as stated in the II-II:24:10. Therefore, in like manner, an infusion of grace is not necessary in order to remove venial sin.

Then why do people go to purgatory for having unremitted venial sins?

There is nothing in Catholic teachings that state that God will talk to the faithful. Some receive messages through angels, as did the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Joseph. We are divinized through sanctifying grace.

So how do I know God? Where is my choice in this, if he refuses to talk to me? How do I relate to someone who doesn’t want to talk to me?

I don’t want to go through a life filled with horrific suffering, trying my best to follow Christ’s commands, only to find out at the time of my personal judgment that I was fooling myself and Christ tells me “I do not know you, go away you evildoer!”

For me, hearing those words is far more devastating than going to hell.

When I have no choice in the matter whether I can know God, where is the free will?

 

[Vico]

People are damned for not having grace. You mentioned people go to hell for original sin because of the deprivation of grace.
One can leak grace until it is all gone then elevator down.
One leaks grace due to imperfections and venial sin.
I cannot find this citation (Sess. VI cap. xi).
thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm
It does say “That, by every mortal sin, grace is lost” but it doesn’t say that’s the only way grace is lost (per your statement). It says that mortal sin loses grace, and I agree with that. But does it really say that’s the ONLY way to lose grace?
I also searched for venial sins not losing grace, and there is nothing here about that. Is this in another section of Trent?
I’m there, and love confession, but remember, we are imperfect, everyday faults occur everyday because we are imperfect.
Then why do people go to purgatory for having unremitted venial sins?
So how do I know God? Where is my choice in this, if he refuses to talk to me? How do I relate to someone who doesn’t want to talk to me?
I don’t want to go through a life filled with horrific suffering, trying my best to follow Christ’s commands, only to find out at the time of my personal judgment that I was fooling myself and Christ tells me “I do not know you, go away you evildoer!”
For me, hearing those words is far more devastating than going to hell.
When I have no choice in the matter whether I can know God, where is the free will?

The Trent citation is for Session VI, Chapter XI On keeping the Commandments, and on the necessity and possibility thereof., no loss of justice by venial sins.

For, although, during this mortal life, men, how holy and just soever, at times fall into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial, not therefore do they cease to be just.

Same is said in The Catholic Encyclopedia which is approved by the Church so why are you fighting it?

So no, one cannot go to hell for venial sins because they do not entail a loss of sanctifying grace. No leaking by venial sin like you describe.

Purgatory is for temporal punishment for sins to remove the attachments to creatures that remain, and it is not necessary to confess venial sins, but recommended:
1473 The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains.
…

1458 Without being strictly necessary, confession of everyday faults (venial sins) is nevertheless strongly recommended by the Church. …

Prayer is your relationship with God and sanctifying grace your divinization.

 

[BobCatholic]

The Trent citation is for Session VI, Chapter XI On keeping the Commandments, and on the necessity and possibility thereof., no loss of justice by venial sins.

For, although, during this mortal life, men, how holy and just soever, at times fall into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial, not therefore do they cease to be just.

Same is said in The Catholic Encyclopedia which is approved by the Church so why are you fighting it?

It says that one does not cease to be just. That means the bucket still has grace in it.
It does not say the bucket remains FULL or at the same level of grace.

Where does it say that the level of grace in the bucket is not declining due to venial sin? No place.

You have yet to cite one citation that says the level of grace in a person is always the same or growing. The writings do indicate two states - grace or no grace but remember, the Catholic Church does not usually go “either or” but “both and” - in other words, there is a state between grace and no grace where one’s grace is lower, just as there is a state between heaven and hell being purgatory.

So I’m not fighting Catholic teaching. I’m just believing something that the Church has not expounded on, and does not contradict dogma.

So no, one cannot go to hell for venial sins because they do not entail a loss of sanctifying grace. No leaking by venial sin like you describe.

So why do venial sins need to be forgiven if grace is not lost? When there are different levels of sancity that shows different levels of grace.

I think the one who has the ability to heal people has more grace than the one who does not . I think the one who has had mystical experiences connecting with God has more grace than the one who does not.

Think about it. Do you have the same level of grace as Mother Mary? Or St. John of the Cross? Or St. Pio? Or St. John Paul II? No way. They had far more than you or I.

Purgatory is for temporal punishment for sins to remove the attachments to creatures that remain,

And to remove all venial sins and imperfections. Heaven is closed to the imperfect so imperfections must be gone before they can enter. Heaven is closed to sinners, so venial sins must be gone before they can enter.

Prayer is your relationship with God and sanctifying grace your divinization.

In my view, prayer is a monologue, since God does not respond except when he says yes and what I prayed for actually occurs.

The closest thing to a relationship I have with God is that I have a corporate relationship (I’m in the body, but not the heart yet). Despite my many attempts to get closer.

 

[Vico]

It says that one does not cease to be just. That means the bucket still has grace in it.
It does not say the bucket remains FULL or at the same level of grace.
Where does it say that the level of grace in the bucket is not declining due to venial sin? No place. …

I gave the citations in the prior posts from Trent, Catholic Encyclopedia, and Summa Theologicae that the state of sanctifying grace is not lost by venial sins. That means countless venial sins. Unrepented venial sin hinders the reception of graces God would otherwise give. Mortal sin “results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace” note that it is privation not reduction.

It is not necessary to confess venial sins – that is only required for removal of eternal punishment not temporal punishment due sin. Indulgences remove temporal punishments due sin. Catechism 1472 has on the punishment of sin: “A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.”

There is a difference between actual graces and the state of sanctifying grace. Quotes below I.

Also the charisms that you are referring to do not require a state of sanctifying grace. Quotes below II.

I. Catechism on grace

1863 … “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.” …

2000 Sanctifying grace is an habitual gift, a stable and supernatural disposition that perfects the soul itself to enable it to live with God, to act by his love. Habitual grace, the permanent disposition to live and act in keeping with God’s call, is distinguished from actual graces which refer to God’s interventions, whether at the beginning of conversion or in the course of the work of sanctification.

Summa Theologiae > Third Part > Question 87. The remission of venial sin. Article 2. Whether infusion of grace is necessary for the remission of venial sins?:

I answer that, Each thing is removed by its contrary. But venial sin is not contrary to habitual grace or charity, but hampers its act, through man being too much attached to a created good, albeit not in opposition to God, as stated in I-II:88:1; II-II:24:10. Therefore, in order that venial sin be removed, it is not necessary that habitual grace be infused, but a movement of grace or charity suffices for its forgiveness.

II. Catechism on Charisms

2003 Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” "benefit."53 Whatever their character - sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues - charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.54

Council of Trent on the measure of grace given to each (Denzinger):
799 Justification itself follows this disposition or preparation, which is not merely remission of sins [can. II], but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts, whereby an unjust man becomes a just man, and from being an enemy becomes a friend, that he may be “an heir according to hope of life everlasting” [Tit. 3:7].

The causes of this justification are: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Christ and life eternal; the efficient cause is truly a merciful God who gratuitously “washes and sanctifies” [1 Cor. 6:11], “signing and anointing with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance” [Eph. 1:13f.]; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, “who when we were enemies” [cf. Rom. 5:10], “for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us” [Eph. 2:4], merited justification for us [can. 10] by His most holy passion on the wood of the Cross, and made satisfaction for us to God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the "sacrament of faith,’’* without which no one is ever justified.

Finally the unique formal cause is the “justice of God, not that by which He Himself is just, but by which He makes us just” * [can. 10 and 11], that, namely, by which, when we are endowed with it by him, we are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and not only are we reputed, but we are truly called and are just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the “Holy Spirit distributes to everyone as he wills” [1. Cor. 12:11], and according to each one’s own disposition and cooperation.

 

[BobCatholic]

I gave the citations in the prior posts from Trent, Catholic Encyclopedia, and Summa Theologicae that the state of sanctifying grace is not lost by venial sins. That means countless venial sins.

And I have not contradicted that.

Venial sin does not lose the state of sanctifying grace. Venial sin does not go from having a bucket full of grace to having a bucket with no grace in one fell swoop. It empties a few drops from the bucket. The bucket still has grace in it, but it is lessened.

Unrepented venial sin hinders the reception of graces God would otherwise give.

And how is this different from unrepented venial sin reducing the level of grace? The effect is the same! I could have a higher level of grace but that darn venial sin blocks it. I could be at level 59 of grace, but am stuck at level 4 instead.

Mortal sin “results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace” note that it is privation not reduction.

Correct. Mortal sin goes from grace to no grace, a 100% reduction. Bucket with grace to all spilled out and empty bucket. One fell swoop.

Indulgences remove temporal punishments due sin.

But not the original one, we are still in this jail cell.

There is a difference between actual graces and the state of sanctifying grace. Quotes below I.

Venial sin prevents one from getting those actual graces and reduces the amount of grace in one’s soul.

Also the charisms that you are referring to do not require a state of sanctifying grace.

The devil has no power to do good, so doing good shows God’s grace in action.

1863 … “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.” …

Let’s look at the whole quote.

1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.”

Look at the red parts. Venial sin prevents graces from taking hold, it kicks them out of the house and keeps one at a lower level of grace than they otherwise would be at. In addition, it predisposes us to do mortal sin - little by little - showing a regression of grace - lowering the level of grace little by little. It doesn’t make us go to mortal sin all at once, but gets us closer and closer and closer like a 3000-mile trip across the country, mile by malicious mile…we get closer to Mortal Sin City.

And pay attention to this part that you ignore:

But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap.

So, how can a number of light objects make a great mass if there is no addition? On the other side of the coin, a large mass can be worn away by a bunch of little chips away of the stone.

This teaches what I’ve been saying: venial sins pile up. A bunch of venial sins can make it mortal.

2000 Sanctifying grace is an habitual gift, a stable and supernatural disposition that perfects the soul itself to enable it to live with God, to act by his love. Habitual grace, the permanent disposition to live and act in keeping with God’s call, is distinguished from actual graces which refer to God’s interventions, whether at the beginning of conversion or in the course of the work of sanctification.

If it were stable, it would be difficult to lose. But it is ridiculously easy to lose grace. Sins of omission are most deadly.

Summa Theologiae > Third Part > Question 87. The remission of venial sin. Article 2. Whether infusion of grace is necessary for the remission of venial sins?:

I answer that, Each thing is removed by its contrary. But venial sin is not contrary to habitual grace or charity, but hampers its act, through man being too much attached to a created good, albeit not in opposition to God, as stated in I-II:88:1; II-II:24:10. Therefore, in order that venial sin be removed, it is not necessary that habitual grace be infused, but a movement of grace or charity suffices for its forgiveness.
​

If one can be attached to a created good, albeit not in opposition to God, then there was no reason for Jesus to reject the rich young ruler nor he be required to give up all his wealth. The good Doctor does not address this.

The quote seems to treat grace as one big piece, that does not have a varying level. If that were true, we all should be equally sainty. There is no seventh heaven, just one. Every saint can attain the grace level of Mary. The venial sinner and the the perfect saint are on the same level.

I don’t think the Church teaches any of that.​

 

[BobCatholic]

II. Catechism on Charisms

2003 Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” "benefit."53 Whatever their character - sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues - charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.54

Correct, these are additional graces. Venial sin prevents them from being obtained so one is reduced in level in effect. You’re supposed to be at level 4 but stuck at level 2 due to venial sins, amount of grace is different between those levels, so one is reduced in rank and level due to venial sin.

Council of Trent on the measure of grace given to each (Denzinger):
799 Justification itself follows this disposition or preparation, which is not merely remission of sins [can. II], but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts, whereby an unjust man becomes a just man, and from being an enemy becomes a friend, that he may be “an heir according to hope of life everlasting” [Tit. 3:7].

Note it says remission of sins, which includes both imperfections, venial and mortal.

, but we are truly called and are just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the “Holy Spirit distributes to everyone as he wills” [1. Cor. 12:11], and according to each one’s own disposition and cooperation.

Thank you. This is exactly what I’m saying.

Receiving “justice” - the state of being just - grace - according to one’s own measure. Some people have more grace, others less. Venial sins is one of the difference. If people have different levels of grace, that confirms what I’m saying. One can go down or not allowed to go up (same effect) through venial sin.

according to each one’s disposition - imperfections negatively affect cooperation and makes one more disposed to fail - thus imperfection reduce one’s free will and one sins more often. Thus, imperfections rob us of free will, by making us more disposed to evil.

God does not treat everyone equally when it comes to grace. Not everyone is on the same level of grace. If that were true, EVERYONE WOULD BE A SAINT. No sin in the world because nobody would WANT to sin (using 100% free will). We would have universal salvation.

But let’s say we have grace vs no grace only, no levels as you are implying. Then we would have 100% of mortal sinners are hellbound with no ability to change that and 100% of people stepping out of confession heavenbound with no desire to change that. Grace is not binary 1 and 0. Save that for the computers, not people.

 

[Vico]

Correct, these are additional graces. Venial sin prevents them from being obtained so one is reduced in level in effect. You’re supposed to be at level 4 but stuck at level 2 due to venial sins, amount of grace is different between those levels, so one is reduced in rank and level due to venial sin.
Note it says remission of sins, which includes both imperfections, venial and mortal.
Thank you. This is exactly what I’m saying.
Receiving “justice” - the state of being just - grace - according to one’s own measure. Some people have more grace, others less. Venial sins is one of the difference. If people have different levels of grace, that confirms what I’m saying. One can go down or not allowed to go up (same effect) through venial sin.
according to each one’s disposition - imperfections negatively affect cooperation and makes one more disposed to fail - thus imperfection reduce one’s free will and one sins more often. Thus, imperfections rob us of free will, by making us more disposed to evil.
God does not treat everyone equally when it comes to grace. Not everyone is on the same level of grace. If that were true, EVERYONE WOULD BE A SAINT. No sin in the world because nobody would WANT to sin (using 100% free will). We would have universal salvation.
But let’s say we have grace vs no grace only, no levels as you are implying. Then we would have 100% of mortal sinners are hellbound with no ability to change that and 100% of people stepping out of confession heavenbound with no desire to change that. Grace is not binary 1 and 0. Save that for the computers, not people.

Council of Trent, Chapter VII
799 Justification itself follows this disposition or preparation, which is not merely remission of sins [can. II], but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts, whereby an unjust man becomes a just man, and from being an enemy becomes a friend, that he may be “an heir according to hope of life everlasting” [Tit. 3:7].

You wrote: “Note it says remission of sins, which includes both imperfections, venial and mortal.”

Justification is not needed for venial sins, through which one cannot become unjust. This is specifically about mortal sins through which sanctifying grace is lost. Justification follows from:

• disposition (not merely remission of sins) and
• sanctification and renewal via voluntary reception of the grace and gifts.

Remember the other excerpt from the Council of Trent, we have sufficient grace to remain without mortal sin (with state of sanctifying grace) and venial sin does not make one unjust (does not loose state of sanctifying grace). Also, mortal sin cannot be committed by one without free will consent.

Chap. II. The Observance of the Commandments, and the Necessity and Possibility thereof

804 But no one, however much justified, should consider himself exempt from the observance of the commandments [can. 20]; no one should make use of that rash statement forbidden under an anathema by the Fathers, that the commandments of God are impossible to observe for a man who is justified [can. 18 and 22: cf. n. 200]. “For God does not command impossibilities, but by commanding admonishes you both to do what you can do, and to pray for what you cannot do, and assists you that you may be able”; * “whose commandments are not heavy” [1 John 5:3], “whose yoke is sweet and whose burden is light” [Matt. 11:30]. For they who are the sons of God, love Christ: “but they who love him, (as He Himself testifies) keep his words” [John 14:23], which indeed with the divine help they can do. For although in this mortal life men however holy and just fall at times into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial [can. 23], they do not for that reason cease to be just.