Mortal sin at death

[FanChan]

I don`t believe that my beliefs are dissenting

You don’t believe what the Church believes; in fact, the beliefs being spoken of here are contrary to beliefs stated by the Church, therefor they are dissenting. Whether or not your beliefs are correct and the church is wrong is irrelevant; take it somewhere else, please.

 

[SteveGC]

In all fairness to Methodi…

I would say that Celebration44 was the troll regarding the non-existence of Hell and reincarnation theologies, which is obvious dissent.

And although I also would call Methodi’s positions as dissenting, I believe his posts, as well as those of peary’s, are still on-topic, considering the fact that we are discussing Church teaching regarding the state of one’s soul at the end of one’s life.

I do think the OP’s intent was to engage in this dialogue with the assumption that views would be stated in light of official Church teaching, and so in that regard, we do unfortunately move away from that intent when members formulate and offer their opinions based on ignorance of those official teachings.

Nevertheless, if these somewhat off-topic posts allow devout Catholics to reach out and perhaps re-align mis-informed Catholics about authentic Church teaching, I think we could be tolerant of such dialogue, inasmuch as we don’t become overly argumentative and inflammatory.

God Bless

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

I Nevertheless, if these somewhat off-topic posts allow devout Catholics to reach out and perhaps re-align mis-informed Catholics about authentic Church teaching, I think we could be tolerant of such dialogue, inasmuch as we don’t become overly argumentative and inflammatory.God Bless

This would be wonderful if that were the case. But invincible ignorance seems to reign, or perhaps another TROLL

 

[palmas85]

To Plamas85,
I never implied that Jesus was wrong. Jesus was often misquoted. Remember, the gospels were written many, many years after the events, and probably by men who were not even present. They are stories told through others. The bible is of value, but quoting is should never be construed as quoting Jesus or quoting truth … it is merely quoting the bible.

As for how long did it take me to learn about reincarnation …
It took years of reading, including reading Catholic scholars who are absolutely certain of the truth of reincarnation. I have spoken with many priests who belive in it … they just aren’t supposed to talk about it. The church, in its wisdom, fears that people will decide that it is okay to “be bad” in this life, if they know they get another chance. I maintain that the church has no right to treat us as children/adled. The actual effect it has is to make you realize that we choose to be here, to “work” on getting better and better, because we will keep coming back until we do!!!

Which Catholic scholars are you referring to? I would be interested in reading what they have to say. As far as Jesus being misquoted that could be possible I suppose. The problem is though that He spoke so extensively on Hell it would seem that it would seem to have been a concerted effort on the part of these later writers to project their own ideas into it. Christ doesn’t speak of Hell once or twice but rather a multitude of times.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Steve GC,
Thanks. You had a good answer in part 1. You also had a kinder tone.

Regarding being taken aback over reincarnation and the lack of hell, I was once once in your shoes in that regard. However, my response was to learn and grow, not to assume I was right (or that the church was right.) No one has posted a thoughtful response or rebuttal to what I have described. “Tradition” or “past scholars” is not a thoughtful response. God would never have created a church that required only “learned men” to explain it. It must make sense. Meaning, it must be compatible with the premise of God’s perfection and goodness. All people should be able to see it clearly. It is also strains credulity to only trust/believe in writings of people whose vested interest was to maintain their position of power and wealth. I do not mean to pass blanket judgement on church scholars, but I do mean to mention that it assisted some people to change Jesus’ teachings if it made people feel more scared/guilty ---- resulting in more money given to the VERY rich and VERY powerful church. Such is not remotely as much the case today … but we are relying upon “scholars” from the past, for whom it very much was the case. So, given that God would not create a “confusing religion”, all things should really be easily understood through his unconditional love and goodness. Hell makes no sense, and does not exist. Reincarnation make total sense, and clearly exists. To think otherwise is to call God foolish, inconsistent, unfair, less loving than humans, and less forgiving than humans. I will get great joy when the whole world realizes this, thus knowing how very loved they are. What gain is there to think that hell exists? It keeps priests in business. Jesus would be appalled. If the “business” of religion did not exist, the truth could spread quickly. Consider reading Christopher Martin Bache’s book. If you dare, it will change your mind.

Wow. I’ve been away from this thread for some time. It started out Ok, got slightly interesting, but now it appears it’s filled with GARBAGE.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Wow. I’ve been away from this thread for some time. It started out Ok, got slightly interesting, but now it appears it’s filled with GARBAGE.

I would call this a definite objective assessment.

 

[FanChan]

Paul Folbrecht:

Wow. I’ve been away from this thread for some time. It started out Ok, got slightly interesting, but now it appears it’s filled with GARBAGE.

I would call this a definite objective assessment.

Which was precisely my motivation in asking them to take it somewhere else.

 

[Methodi]

You don’t believe what the Church believes; in fact, the beliefs being spoken of here are contrary to beliefs stated by the Church, therefor they are dissenting. Whether or not your beliefs are correct and the church is wrong is irrelevant; take it somewhere else, please.

What do U mean I dont believe what the church believes show me in one of my post, I never doubted the existence of hell , just find it hard to believe that a just & loving God would cast people who suffered so much in their life into hell

 

[FanChan]

I think You probably have something there, a lot of people say there is no hell, hell is here on earth, & by the looks of some of the things I have seen, they may be right

Forgive me, I seem to have mistook your not saying very much of anything at all in any of your posts for agreeing with the people who’s opinions you seemed to be praising.

 

[Methodi]

Forgive me, I seem to have mistook your not saying very much of anything at all in any of your posts for agreeing with the people who’s opinions you seemed to be praising.

I forgive You, I just couldnt understand why I was being called down

 

[thistle]

Thistle my old friend, you are starting to sound like a rabid traditionalist.

:bigyikes: :bigyikes: PURGATORY:bigyikes: :bigyikes:

It wouldn’t surprise me that more than a few of our posters here thouroughly reject the concept of Purgatory in its’ entirity as being incompatible with modern man and new ideas in theology.

I do hope that you are doing well and that all is OK down there in my home country.

I’m getting there. I’m even learning prayers in Latin! Notice I don’t jump into threads on Latin anymore??
All’s well here in your home country and my family and I are fine. I pray you and your family are too.

 

[Celebration44]

To Palmas 85:
You asked the name of a Catholic scholar who teaches about reincarnation. Christopher Martin Bache, PhD is a University of Notre Dame graduate (as well as Cambridge U. and Brown U.grad) who wrote an amazing and widely praised scholarly book titled “Lifecycles — Reincarnation and the Web of Life.” He teaches in the Department of Philosophy and Religion at Youngstown State University. Within that book, he describes how reincarnation is not in conflict with the teachings of Jesus or Catholicism (in his opinion). He shows how, in fact, reincarnation was originally in the bible — but got removed due to Constantine’s wife. Jesus knew about reincarnation, and taught about it. “The Church” bowed to political pressure, and removed it. The bible, good book that it is, was changed, and changed, and changed by men who sometimes had a less-than-holy reason for those changes. *

P.S. I do not want to add addition posts. I simply needed to answer the request of Palmas 85. So, if no one makes another unChristian statement toward me, I will kindly bow out.*

 

[D_M]

Hi,

I’ve been thinking about this story lately:

2 Maccabees 12:39-45 On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. Then under the tunic of every one of the dead the found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honourably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.

I’ve seen catholic apologists (and I’ve used this argument myself in the past) make the case on the basis of this passage as scriptural proof for purgatory… but then a few days ago I re-thought it when I realized something that stuck out at me:

• these men had not committed a venial sin. Worshipping idols is a mortal sin, and God doesn’t punish venial sins with death as He (so they perceived) had punished these men with death.
• And yet Judas ordered sacrifices on their behalf so that they might be delivered from this sin, so that they might find the splendid reward that is laid up for the saints.

Is this suggestive that a person can be delivered from mortal sin after their death or is there another interpretation?

God Bless,

 

[mattkubes]

Within that book, he describes how reincarnation is not in conflict with the teachings of Jesus or Catholicism (in his opinion). He shows how, in fact, reincarnation was originally in the bible — but got removed due to Constantine’s wife. Jesus knew about reincarnation, and taught about it. “The Church” bowed to political pressure, and removed it.

And this is why you shouldn’t trust conspiracy theories. The writings of the Early Church Fathers give us enough scripture references to cover almost the entire New Testament…and there’s nothing in their writings about a missing book teaching reincarnation. I’m sorry, but this is pure garbage that this scholar is professing.

There’s a vast body of real evidence working against this position, and nothing but bold claims and speculation working for it. How on earth could someone give intellectual assent to these ideas?

 

[mattkubes]

Is this suggestive that a person can be delivered from mortal sin after their death or is there another interpretation?

Remember, we can never know when someone else has actually committed a mortal sin, so we should always pray for the deceased. Also, this passage doesn’t refer to Purgatory per se, but it shows that the Jews had an understanding that prayers could be meritorious for those who had died. We simply don’t know if these men were in a state of mortal sin, and a prayer is never wasted.

Besides, the Church has the protection of infallibility on this teaching, so we know that actual mortal sins cannot be forgiven after death.

 

[D_M]

Remember, we can never know when someone else has actually committed a mortal sin, so we should always pray for the deceased. Also, this passage doesn’t refer to Purgatory per se, but it shows that the Jews had an understanding that prayers could be meritorious for those who had died. We simply don’t know if these men were in a state of mortal sin, and a prayer is never wasted.

Besides, the Church has the protection of infallibility on this teaching, so we know that actual mortal sins cannot be forgiven after death.

Hi Matt,

When/where did the church infallibly define or declare that actual mortal sins cannot be forgiven after death?

What I’m familiar with is the narrative in Luke’s gospel wherein it goes:

Luke 16:22-26 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried; and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus in his bosom. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things, but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’

The great impassable chasm is what I’m familiar with, and we know from this scripture that no one is able to cross over from eternal damnation to eternal life or vice-versa… however, I would have thought that this chasm was an unrevealed mystery of the faith, and not that we understood the reason why no one could pass (ie. as though it was because sin could not be forgiven after death).

Perhaps you know more than I do, and if you do, I would be very interested if you could provide the reference when/where the church made that infallible definition.

God Bless,

 

[mattkubes]

When/where did the church infallibly define or declare that actual mortal sins cannot be forgiven after death?

By definition, a mortal sin is one that kills all grace in the soul. Without sanctifying grace restored through a perfect act of contrition or through the sacrament of Confession, we cannot enter Heaven. I’d be happy to look for this teaching stated in a Church document, but I guess I’m wondering if you were looking for something defining the radical nature of a mortal sin, or the fact that a person who dies in this state will not enter heaven?

I don’t think there is one statement that will say “mortal sins cannot be forgiven after death.” There are, however, statements that say a person who dies in the state of mortal sin will not enter into heaven, and other statements which say that our wills (for or against God) are fixed when we die. Just one step in logic leads us to the point that I made originally.

Perhaps you know more than I do, and if you do, I would be very interested if you could provide the reference when/where the church made that infallible definition.

Haha that’s a nice thought, but I’m no expert. Although, like I said, I’d be happy to pull up a reference for you if I knew exactly what you were looking for.

 

[mattkubes]

Now, outside of official Church teaching, there are some who believe that all people are offered the grace to make a final act of repentance before we die. This only makes sense to me, since God is offering us His grace constantly throughout our lives, it’s just that we often choose to reject it. But we know that is this does happen, it would be in the last moments of our lives since our wills become fixed at the point of death (and only God knows when death has finally occurred).

You’d have to wonder why a hardened sinner would choose to accept God’s grace at the last moment, and it seems like it would be unlikely…but I’m still hopeful that it does happen. God wants us to be zealous for souls just like Him, so there’s no reason not to pray for the souls of people who we think might not have died in God’s friendship. God is not bound by time, and He does not have to dispense grace through the sacraments.

Having said all that, it’s all still speculation - but from what I can see, official Church teaching leaves us the room to hope for all of this to be true.

 

[D_M]

By definition, a mortal sin is one that kills all grace in the soul. Without sanctifying grace restored through a perfect act of contrition or through the sacrament of Confession, we cannot enter Heaven. I’d be happy to look for this teaching stated in a Church document, but I guess I’m wondering if you were looking for something defining the radical nature of a mortal sin, or the fact that a person who dies in this state will not enter heaven?

I don’t think there is one statement that will say “mortal sins cannot be forgiven after death.” There are, however, statements that say a person who dies in the state of mortal sin will not enter into heaven, and other statements which say that our wills (for or against God) are fixed when we die. Just one step in logic leads us to the point that I made originally.

Haha that’s a nice thought, but I’m no expert. Although, like I said, I’d be happy to pull up a reference for you if I knew exactly what you were looking for.

Hi Matt,

I’m actually already aware of infallible statements made by the church which say that those who die in mortal sin, go straightaway to hell, but I’m not aware of any statements that say ‘our wills are fixed when we die’.

Here is an infallible definition from an ecumenical council presided over by the Holy Father that says those in mortal sin go straightaway to hell:

(from: ewtn.com/library/councils/Florence.htm)

Council of Florence, Session 6 (1439): "Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. "

I know you’re not an expert, but if you know that an infallible statement exists that states ‘our wills are fixed when we did’, would it be possible if you could reference to when/where it was stated, as I would be very interested to see it… (you don’t have to if it’s too much work or anything, but if you know it offhand I would be very curious see it.)

God Bless,

 

[FanChan]

Hi Matt,

I’m actually already aware of infallible statements made by the church which say that those who die in mortal sin, go straightaway to hell, but I’m not aware of any statements that say ‘our wills are fixed when we die’.

Here is an infallible definition from an ecumenical council presided over by the Holy Father that says those in mortal sin go straightaway to hell:

(from: ewtn.com/library/councils/Florence.htm)

Council of Florence, Session 6 (1439): "Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. "

I know you’re not an expert, but if you know that an infallible statement exists that states ‘our wills are fixed when we did’, would it be possible if you could reference to when/where it was stated, as I would be very interested to see it… (you don’t have to if it’s too much work or anything, but if you know it offhand I would be very curious see it.)

God Bless,

Watching from the sidelines, I’m trying to understand where this question is coming from, in all seriousness. Are you trying to find out if it’s possible for our will to change while we’re in Hell? As in, when we die, if we go to Hell, might we some day desire to confess our sins and take our place in Heaven?