Non-Catholics, Mortal Sins, and Heaven

[joshua_b]

So, we’re still in the same boat. A non-Catholic would never resolve to have “recourse to sacramental confession,” and would therefore (under this definition) still be in a state of mortal sin.

I know in the case of baptism, when a person dies without having been validly baptized, the Church believes in “baptism of desire”, which states that it is sufficient that an individual would have been validly baptized with water had they known that God required it of them. I can not state equivocably that this is the stance the Church takes on “recourse to sacramental confession”, but I believe the same principle pretty much applies.

 

[joshua_b]

I’m aware, for instance, of the Catholic teaching that using any type of birth control (outside NFP, and that only for good reasons), is guilty of a mortal sin. I don’t believe it, though (with the exception of abortifactants). Disbelief doesn’t typically excuse people from sin (although ignorance sometimes does). Unless we give that disbelief is a form of ignorance based on an incorrect understanding, etc.

This contention is not entirely inconsistent with the Church’s teachings on sin, as I have provided according to the catechism. I am hesitant to say “yes” because that would be an inaccurate blanket disclaimer and invitation to simply rationalize away behavior as not sinful under the pretense that an individual’s disbelief is simply a lack of understanding, and God will not hold them accountable in any way.

 

[ckempston]

Rather than rely on my inferior intellect and verbal prowess, I opt to let the Church make her own point…vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm

This section in particular articulates what I have been trying (and repeatedly failing) to say…1859 Mortal sin requires **full knowledge **and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

This is helpful information, and does clarify a little. Thanks. I’m starting to get the point that you keep reiterating: Only God knows.

 

[joshua_b]

To fully understand the teachings of the Sacrament of Reconciliation and get any kind of grasp on our accountability before God, specifically as it relates to sacramental absolution, requires a full understanding of the Church’s teachings on sin. They are pretty much part and parcel to one another.

 

[ckempston]

This contention is not entirely inconsistent with the Church’s teachings on sin, as I have provided according to the catechism. I am hesitant to say “yes” because that would be an inaccurate blanket disclaimer and invitation to simply rationalize away behavior as not sinful under the pretense that an individual’s disbelief is simply a lack of understanding, and God will not hold them accountable in any way.

I would have a hard time with that position myself, I was just putting it forward as a possible, though unlikely, explanation. There is definitely a difference between ignorance/misunderstanding and plain old stubborn hard-heartedness.

 

[cfrancis]

ckempston,
I’m assuming you believe in both mortal and venial sin (1 Jn 5: 16-17).
How do you define what sin is mortal?
How do you determine if you’ve committed mortal sin?

 

[joshua_b]

I’m surprised I haven’t learned my lesson now. The Catholic church rarely leaves wiggle room.

I have to say, this comment cracked me up. And I’ll tell you why…

When I was first moved by the H.S. back to the Catholic Church, I got a Catechism and started to read it. I was overwhelmed with this type of feeling. No matter what I thought to look for in the way of subject matter, and no matter how many “what-ifs” seemed to come to mind, I ALWAYS saw it was addressed in there.

 

[ckempston]

ckempston,
I’m assuming you believe in both mortal and venial sin (1 Jn 5: 16-17).
How do you define what sin is mortal?
How do you determine if you’ve committed mortal sin?

I’d say the general Catholic definition pretty well fits what I would say is mortal and venial, though that leaves some gray areas and an uncertainty as Joshua has been pointing out.

Of course, I happen to believe that any sin can be forgiven by asking God directly, in opposition to the Catholic position that forgiveness only comes through the Sacrament of Penance. Although I would agree with the parts about being truly penitent and having a desire to please God by no longer committing that sin. I’m certainly not of the opinion of some who think you can sin all you want and God just keeps piling on the Grace.

 

[ckempston]

I have to say, this comment cracked me up. And I’ll tell you why…

When I was first moved by the H.S. back to the Catholic Church, I got a Catechism and started to read it. I was overwhelmed with this type of feeling. No matter what I thought to look for in the way of subject matter, and no matter how many “what-ifs” seemed to come to mind, I ALWAYS saw it was addressed in there.

After a couple thousand years, I guess the answer to every criticism could be, “Gee, we haven’t heard that one before.”

 

[joshua_b]

Of course, I happen to believe that any sin can be forgiven by asking God directly, in opposition to the Catholic position that forgiveness only comes through the Sacrament of Penance. .

Correction… forgiveness NORMATIVELY and CERTAINLY comes through the Sacrament. It may seem like a small distinction to you, but it is a very important nuance that I feel can not be misrepresented.

 

[joshua_b]

After a couple thousand years, I guess the answer to every criticism could be, “Gee, we haven’t heard that one before.”

HAHAHA…that is exactly the feeling I got. It’s almost like God was telling me “You know, you are NOT the first person to think of that in the whole of salvation history”; it’s the same feeling that one gets when they are sitting through a homily (or sermon…whichever you prefer) and they feel like the priest/minister is speaking directly at them…almost as if they formulated everything they were going to say based on firsthand knowledge of one of your “secrets” or something. Anyway, I digress…

I’ve enjoyed this thread. Anything left to go over? By the way, I almost miss your signature…

 

[adrift]

.
Catechism 1451-54 Now before you say that it requires individual confession remember that this is written for Catholics and what they are obligated too. Non-Catholics are not obligated to Church Law and as such are not obligated to go to confession. Non-Catholic sins can be forgiven with Perfect Contrition.

 

[adrift]

After reading the Catechism regarding the necessity of auricular confession in the sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation, and the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on Penance, I am no closer to an answer on this.

Although adrift’s answer on Perfect Contrition would be a nice solution, I didn’t see it mentioned in the Catechism, so if anyone can point me to that (or another source that would be considered “official”) that would be helpful.

Catechism 1451-54 Now before you say that it requires individual confession remember that this is written for Catholics and what they are obligated too. Non-Catholics are not obligated to Church Law and as such are not obligated to go to confession. Non-Catholic sins can be forgiven with Perfect Contrition.

 

[ckempston]

Correction… forgiveness NORMATIVELY and CERTAINLY comes through the Sacrament. It may seem like a small distinction to you, but it is a very important nuance that I feel can not be misrepresented.

Funny, when I re-read my post, before I even got to this response of yours, I realized I had neglected this small distinction. Thanks for the correction.

 

[ckempston]

HAHAHA…that is exactly the feeling I got. It’s almost like God was telling me “You know, you are NOT the first person to think of that in the whole of salvation history”; it’s the same feeling that one gets when they are sitting through a homily (or sermon…whichever you prefer) and they feel like the priest/minister is speaking directly at them…almost as if they formulated everything they were going to say based on firsthand knowledge of one of your “secrets” or something. Anyway, I digress…

I’ve enjoyed this thread. Anything left to go over? By the way, I almost miss your signature…

I know what you mean. God’s Word does not go out without accomplishing His purpose. I actually got this feeling at church last night during the sermon, which was about God’s Righteous Judgment and that we have to live as the early Christians did, expecting Jesus’ imminent return. A little unorthodox for the day before Christmas Eve, but hey, if the shoe fits.

LOL, yeah, that signature had its uses and seemed necessary at the time, but I figured it was time to put it to bed.

EDIT to add: I don’t think there’s anything further to discuss on this. The answer seems sufficiently clear: God knows.

No, but really, the explanations and clarifications have helped a lot. There was one Catholic who seemed pretty disturbed by my comments early on; I hope his concerns have been addressed here as well.

 

[joshua_b]

I know what you mean. God’s Word does not go out without accomplishing His purpose. I actually got this feeling at church last night during the sermon, which was about God’s Righteous Judgment and that we have to live as the early Christians did, expecting Jesus’ imminent return. A little unorthodox for the day before Christmas Eve, but hey, if the shoe fits.

LOL, yeah, that signature had its uses and seemed necessary at the time, but I figured it was time to put it to bed.

EDIT to add: I don’t think there’s anything further to discuss on this. The answer seems sufficiently clear: God knows.

No, but really, the explanations and clarifications have helped a lot. There was one Catholic who seemed pretty disturbed by my comments early on; I hope his concerns have been addressed here as well.

I am glad that you (and hopefully others) can leave this thread with something of value. Hopefully, I have presented the point well enough that you understand (as I feel you do), that the promise of Sacramental absolution is CERTAINTY that sin has been forgiven. Anything forgiveness that would happen outside of sacramental absolution, as we stand before God, is completely out of the realm of knowledge or discernment of the Church.