Mortal Sin no longer

[Stephen_C]

No, I think we are bound to obey the civil law, assuming that the law does not contradict God’s law.

What I don’t buy is that the Pope, or the Church, can mandate something that is not mandated by scripture and, in fact, scripture states is within the realm of Christian liberty, and then teach that it is sin if you willfully disobey the mandate. Such as no meat on Fridays. Who cares whether you eat meat on Fridays or not? Is there a biblical prohibition against eating meat on Fridays? Of course not, indeed we are told by Christ himself that it is not what goes into a man which makes him unclean. Nonetheless, the Church presume to take upon itself the authority to decree something that is outside of the mandate of scripture and, then, tells you that if you knowingly and willfully disobey you commit mortal sin which, of course, sends you to hell if you are unrepentent. No wonder Martin Luther fought against this mindset.

Since you do not believe the Catholic Church is the one true Church then I can see your point. But I truly believe the Catholic Church is the one Church founded by Jesus. The one Peter got the keys to, and the authority to bind and loose. Since it appears you do not believe that apostolic succession thing either, then again I can see your point. But I do believe it all, therefore I believe it is all biblical as well.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Fix said : My question is why are we so quick to disregard a just law simply because we do not like it? Legalisms are not a problem these days, but laxism and relativism are.

Yes why are we so quick to disregard a just law simply because we don’t like it? Good Godly Question Fix!

Speeding laws and other traffic laws such as “Running a STOP indicator” are JUST laws. We speed and run stop indicators because we believe they are not just? Or do we believe we are above these laws and by being above them we are not subject to them?

As I said before the breaking of these JUST laws are venial for the most part. But some Enlightened Common Sense says at some point they become Mortal.

A. When the breaking of these Just Laws become Habitual or down right Arrogant or Prideful in it’s execution.

B. The Severity of breaking these Just Laws reaches a point where it severely effects your and others relationship with God. Or the Severity brings dishonor to your local Church.

C. And any other Conditional that I have not addressed.

 

[rr1213]

“This exercise of authority is seen in Acts 15, where the Church, in its first major council, bound all Christians to the discipline of abstaining from meat that had been sacrificed to idols or that had come from strangled animals (19-29). When the Church promulgated its teaching about not abstaining from meat (Acts 15:28-29), no Christian was free to disregard the discipline without committing sin. But since Paul explained that meat in itself is not unclean and the eating of meat is not inherently sinful (Rom. 14:1-23, 1 Cor. 8:1-13, 10:23-32), a Christian who violated the apostolic teaching in Acts 15 sinned not because the eating of meat was wrong but because he disobeyed a commandment of the Church. When the Catholic Church imposes a discipline such as not eating meat on Fridays, the same principle holds.”

But where is the support for the statement highlighted above? If Scripture, through Paul, taught that the position taken by the Church was invalid then it could not be a sin. My point is that there are areas where the Church has the authority to legislate and areas that it does not. In those areas where it does not have authority, it cannot be a sin to violate a mandate which was illegitimately promulgated by the Church.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Giovanna said :Sorry, but I’m not buying. The speed-limit example is so far-flung that it boggles the mind.

I used the speed limit because it is the one JUST LAW that is most visual to everyone that gets onto a street. And I will answer that charge with Fix’s quote.

Fix said : My question is why are we so quick to disregard a just law simply because we do not like it? Legalisms are not a problem these days, but laxism and relativism are.

Joey Warren, I’m not being even slightly sarcastic or mocking when I say, in total, honest sincerity, that you might want to look into treatment for OCD, if this is truly the way your thinking rules your life. And I mean that genuinely, again, not as a cheap shot.

No offense taken.

Things like this leave me wondering if anyone here has ever heard of the concept of spirit of the law, as oppsed to letter. Do you really think that common sense, reason and moral decision-making is really such rigid stuff? Do you really presume God to be so legalistic as to…never mind. Don’t answer that. I don’t think I want to know.

I’ll let the “Word of God:” as written in Levicticus and Dueteronomy answer that question. Those two books are full of legalism. Is God a legalist? Yes if you take those two books to heart. The Pharisees are only guilty of creating more legalism to prevent that written legalism from being broken. When they created their own Legalism, they failed to utilize “Enlightened Common Sense”. This is evident when Jesus told them that their "Traditions(Legalism) caused them to actually break some of God’s written Legalism.

I stand by my previous comment- this is the stuff that leaves potential converts running from Catholicism like there’s no tomorrow; and this is half the reason you have so many lapsed and/or “cafeteria” members among your flock. Because of the way you and your authorities approach things like reverence and righteous living- reminding many of us of the Jewish legalism of the Gospel era. And that’s just sad. I cannot accept that a merciful God wants anyone to live in a constant state of self-imposed neurosis. Sorry.

I am doing a Bible study group with Protestants here a work led by a Protestant. The term “Sin Management” comes up as being a major problem in their churches because it is part of the “American Christian Culture”

My Protestant co-workers have created their own Phariseeic system of legalism by the institution of this “Sin Manangement” idealogoy.

I would like to say that the RCC does not have sin manangement. Do other Catholics concur?

Righteous Living? Such as:

Feeding the Hungry
Clothing the Naked
Quenching the Thirsty
Visiting the Sick
Visiting the Imprisoned
Loving your enemies as yourself.
Do this in rememberance of me.
God detests divorce.
The Sin of Onan was the Act of Contraception.

The New Testament is full of Directives which are ignored. When the Directivie is not feasible or plausible within one’s own mind, then the Directive becomes a symbolic or figurative gesture.

Yes some Catholics are just as guilty of cafeterism as Individual Protestant churches are and as some Individual Protestant Christians are. Jesus said there would tares within the wheat. It’s an inescapable part of God’s word.

 

[Mayo-man]

Things like this leave me wondering if anyone here has ever heard of the concept of spirit of the law, as oppsed to letter. Do you really think that common sense, reason and moral decision-making is really such rigid stuff? Do you really presume God to be so legalistic as to…never mind. Don’t answer that. I don’t think I want to know.

Giovanna…Kudos, you have nailed the crux of the matter. With full respect for the teaching authority of the Church, it seems to me we have pretty good instruction regarding our understanding of the proper balance between faithful “assent” and OCD in answer to your question.

“But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father seeks such to worship Him.” [Jn.4:24]

I would be most grateful if any here could direct me to a definative teaching regarding a requirement to replace the “fish on Fridays” discipline in the US with another form of penance as suggested herein. My web searches have not been fruitful.

JB

 

[Philthy]

With all due respect I find that mostly when folks charge the Church with legalism they simply want to do what they ought not do and not feel guilty for it.

No one worships the law. We worship Christ. We obey Him. Keeping just laws are not legalistic. If one stops at all red lights, does not rob stores and obeys traffic laws are they legalistic? The spirit of the law does not mean we are free to disregard what we want because we diasgree.

My question is why are we so quick to disregard a just law simply because we do not like it? Legalisms are not a problem these days, but laxism and relativism are.

The issue - which you appear to have overlooked - is whether speeding is a MORTAL sin. Not whether it is wrong, not whether it is a just law, etc etc. “All wrongdoing is sin, but not all sin is deadly”

 

[fix]

The issue - which you appear to have overlooked - is whether speeding is a MORTAL sin. Not whether it is wrong, not whether it is a just law, etc etc. “All wrongdoing is sin, but not all sin is deadly”

I said in one of the other posts speeding was not always a mortal sin, it could be depending on circumstances.

 

[Philthy]

No, I think we are bound to obey the civil law, assuming that the law does not contradict God’s law.

Agreed.

rr1213:

What I don’t buy is that the Pope, or the Church, can mandate something that is not mandated by scripture

Understood. The first problem with your reasoning, though, is that Scripture doesnt even say that we must obey Scripture.
The second problem with your reasoning is that Scripture speaks of orally transmitted traditions which Christians are to “hold” to (2 Thess) and provides no insight as to what they are or when those traditions no longer apply. Such realities point to the obvious necessity of some entity - in addition to Scripture - to relay those traditions. In Catholicism (and Orthodox Churches) it is the Church guided by the holy Spirit which fufills that role. In the rest of Christianity these verses of Scripture are ignored at the whim of the believer.

rr1213:

Who cares whether you eat meat on Fridays or not? Is there a biblical prohibition against eating meat on Fridays? Of course not, indeed we are told by Christ himself that it is not what goes into a man which makes him unclean.

Your last statement there reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of fasting: it is to draw you closer to God by separating yourself from the world in recognition of the significance of Friday as being the day Christ died for your sins. It is not the food, per se, which is sinful - it is the attitude that being “forced” to fast by the Church is unnecessary and that you get to unilaterally make that decision.

rr1213:

Nonetheless, the Church presume to take upon itself the authority to decree something that is outside of the mandate of scripture and, then, tells you that if you knowingly and willfully disobey you commit mortal sin which, of course, sends you to hell if you are unrepentent. No wonder Martin Luther fought against this mindset.

Is it really so outrageous for the Church to ask that you draw closer to Christ through fasting on Friday - the day He suffered for you? Why wouldn’t anyone saved want to do that? Are we all perfectly close to Christ just the way we are without the Church gently tapping us on the shoulder to say, “Separate from the world and draw closer to Christ”? Is fasting on Friday too much of a burden for you? How do you interpret Christs words to the Apostles, “That which you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven”? Where in Scripture is it clearly spelled out what was meant by that statement?

 

[happygal]

Well probably one have to understand what Fasting is about. Abstinence Meat on Friday is a small part of a sacrifices. When i look at my church fasting and CC fasting…although not much difference, but we do not have partial fast with exceptional to those who have health problem. When we fast we go for tradition normal fast which is 12hrs fast without food, only water (plain water), or full fast for three days without food and water.

Fasting is a sacrifices that one can offer, but sacrifices cannot be force else it is not longer a pure sacrifices

 

[Philthy]

JoeyWarren;

Col 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God;

Tit 3:1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work

Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

I dont derive from any of these that speeding is a mortal sin. Sorry, but it aint there.

As for the theft example. Who decides whether the committed sin is venial or mortal? That decision will always be of personal opinion.

Here’s the difference Joey - all theft carries with it the potential to be mortal sin. Why? Because theft is specifically mentioned as one of the 10 commandments handed down by God. Theft is included in the grave sins of the Catechism. Normal speeding simply doesnt rise to that level of gravity.

Only God knows whether it is venial or mortal.

Of course. But you were claiming - apart from any authority that speeding was a mortal sin.

Are the directives in the above scripture any less than the 10 commandments?

The “directives” you speak of are vague and make no mention of the fact that breaking them is a mortal sin. Again, I have no problem with respecting authority and the speed limit. I simply question whether going 5 MPH over the speed limit is a mortal sin.

The entire Trinity concept is based on speculation. A lot of speculation went on to even develop this doctrine. Prior to its formal declaration, the issue was opposed to in part by the argument that it was speculation.

It was not speculation, it was Revelation.

My speculation about venial and when that venial sin becomes a Mortal sin is based on “Enlightened Common Sense”.

You are right to treat all wrongdoing as sin and to seek to avoid it. I would be a little careful the next time the subject comes up to not be so bold in declaring speeding as a mortal sin. Thats my point Joey - I’m not trying to give you a hard time.

The occasional breaking of any law or ordinance is venial. but at some point the venial becomes mortal. Only God knows that point.

Correct only God knows - it may become mortal but it may not. This sounds like a more reasonable application of “enlightened common sense”.

To say that a venial sin never becomes mortal at all regardless of conditionals then that would fall into the cafeteria mode IMHO
I agree.