Is sinning sometimes necessary for the advancement of civilization?

[Rau]

For example,

There was a time during the Vatican 1 days when women weren’t allowed to play sports. That was the culture of the time and Pope, bishops, agreed with this sentiment.

Women rebelled and played sports anyway, people began to realize “hey, girls can play sports too!”…now it would be considered discriminatory in our culture today by the church if we were to forbid women from playing sports.

What sin was it to Play sports?

 

[Edmundus1581]

What sin was it to Play sports?

I agree that it would be interesting for the OP to provide some citations for this, however, apart from that I am 99% sure that one could find examples where something has been defined as a “sin” in one era, and not another, and the some good people have advanced civilization by obeying God first, and done something regarded as “sinful” at the time.

It’s not something I can readily support, apart from the example I provided in my first post of St Mary McKillop, who disobeyed her bishop (a “sin” of disobedience) and was excommunicated. Someone else mentioned that his or her parents were told that it would be a “mortal sin” to not send the child to a Catholic school - but did anyway. In times past, Catholics read and used books which were on The Index of Forbidden Books and scientific progress was made.

These were (apparent) “sins” of disobedience, rather than against the God’s law. Whether we can find more fundamental “sins” (defined, not actual) - I don’t know.

Hopefully the OP will provide some citations for his claim about women in sport.

I find this an interesting topic.

We are in universal agreement that one may not commit an actual sin (mortal or venial) in order for good to come from it. However I argue that one can, in conscience, disobey Church authority. It’s a big call - but sometimes it’s valid, and may even be necessary.

Another one that’s just come to mind. I recall that in the time of Queen Elizabeth of England the Pope ordered English Catholics to disobey Elizabeth and rise against her - and most didn’t. I don’t think there was any subsequent censure from the Church for their disobedience. There are probably other examples from the times when the Church was more involved in politics.

On the other hand, it would be helpful, very helpful, for the OP to give more information about his own example.

CCC 1790:

A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

 

[Rau]

Bearing an illegitimate child who becomes an Einstein is an example of a sin that advances civilization.

What can be learned from this that can be applied in practice?

 

[Rau]

I agree that it would be interesting for the OP to provide some citations for this, however, apart from that I am 99% sure that one could find examples where something has been defined as a “sin” in one era, and not another, and the some good people have advanced civilization by obeying God first, and done something regarded as “sinful” at the time.

It’s not something I can readily support, apart from the example I provided in my first post of St Mary McKillop, who disobeyed her bishop (a “sin” of disobedience) and was excommunicated. Someone else mentioned that his or her parents were told that it would be a “mortal sin” to not send the child to a Catholic school - but did anyway. In times past, Catholics read and used books which were on The Index of Forbidden Books and scientific progress was made.

These were (apparent) “sins” of disobedience, rather than against the God’s law. Whether we can find more fundamental “sins” (defined, not actual) - I don’t know.

Hopefully the OP will provide some citations for his claim about women in sport.

I find this an interesting topic.

We are in universal agreement that one may not commit an actual sin (mortal or venial) in order for good to come from it. However I argue that one can, in conscience, disobey Church authority. It’s a big call - but sometimes it’s valid, and may even be necessary.

Another one that’s just come to mind. I recall that in the time of Queen Elizabeth of England the Pope ordered English Catholics to disobey Elizabeth and rise against her - and most didn’t. I don’t think there was any subsequent censure from the Church for their disobedience. There are probably other examples from the times when the Church was more involved in politics.

On the other hand, it would be helpful, very helpful, for the OP to give more information about his own example.

CCC 1790:

Conclusions about what is immoral often rest on a view about the balance of consequences of the behaviour in question. These are then “merely” prudential judgements and need to be taken with a grain of salt. It is not a sin to, in good conscience, reject anyone’s prudential judgement, including that of the pope, and to act contrary to that judgement.

 

[BornInMarch]

For example,

There was a time during the Vatican 1 days when women weren’t allowed to play sports. That was the culture of the time and Pope, bishops, agreed with this sentiment.

Cite your sources! If you don’t cite a source or document reference this, then I’ll have no reason to think it isn’t another myth made up by Protestants (like “One Pope was a woman pretending to be a man”) or Gnostics (like “Jesus was married”) or Atheists (like “Pope Pius liked the Nazis”).

Sorry, but I can’t just take your word for it without a source.

 

[BornInMarch]

I only exist because of the commission of a mortal sin, and I have big plans for advancing civilization. So yes, it’s sometimes necessary.

In all seriousness though, the mental energy expended in considering the question of whether a sin is necessary would be much better spent reflecting on the sheer wonder of a God who takes our worst sins and produces good out of them. If we reflected on that more often, maybe we wouldn’t be so grumpy.

First off, I think the world is better off for you being in it. Keep up the good work.

Secondly, what do you mean we shouldn’t be counting angels on the heads of pins?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_the_head_of_a_pin%3F

 

[Robert_Sock]

In the Carmelite tradition, I think it may have been Saint Theresa of Avila who said it, we must sometimes come down from our mountain of holiness and risk sin so that a greater good can be achieved.

 

[Rau]

In the Carmelite tradition, I think it may have been Saint Theresa of Avila who said it, we must sometimes come down from our mountain of holiness and risk sin so that a greater good can be achieved.

Which would seem to mean “live in the world”. To risk sin is of course not to choose it.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Cite your sources! If you don’t cite a source or document reference this, then I’ll have no reason to think it isn’t another myth made up by Protestants (like “One Pope was a woman pretending to be a man”) or Gnostics (like “Jesus was married”) or Atheists (like “Pope Pius liked the Nazis”).

Sorry, but I can’t just take your word for it without a source.

I agree.

While I have supported the OP’s general argument by mentioning similar historical incidents, they are few and not directly bearing on the topic of “sin”.

There are far too many outright lies about Catholic Church history to accept this particular contention without citation.

Also, ***if ***it is true, then it would a very good example of the point he (and I) are making.

 

[Edmundus1581]

In the Carmelite tradition, I think it may have been Saint Theresa of Avila who said it, we must sometimes come down from our mountain of holiness and risk sin so that a greater good can be achieved.

Which would seem to mean “live in the world”. To risk sin is of course not to choose it.

Good points!

Thankyou.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Which would seem to mean “live in the world”. To risk sin is of course not to choose it.

Some forms of sin are virtually inescapable, such as many forms of the Seven Deadly Sins. For example, you can tell yourself that you’re not going to get angry, but it’s often more of a reflex. Putting ourselves in such situations so that good may come about is righteousness!

 

[Rau]

Some forms of sin are virtually inescapable, such as many forms of the Seven Deadly Sins. For example, you can tell yourself that you’re not going to get angry, but it’s often more of a reflex. Putting ourselves in such situations so that good may come about is righteousness!

Yes, but not for the reason that sin is a risk. For the good we can do.

 

[CRATUS]

I do not know what the correct attitude towards sin should be. Never sin but do not expect to not sin? I keep going over the what ifs in my head. I come from one of those families that believe in destiny and that everything happens for a reason. I seriously don’t understand this whole sin thing. I mean why does God expect so much from us if we will inevitably fail?