Non-fallible teachings: any examples?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheAdvocate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did you notice “slip-ups” cannot fulfill the requirement for “unrepentant mortal sin”?
No. I did not notice that. A slip up is a colloquial or slang term that can have more than one meaning depending on the context.
 
This is where you erred. See paragraph 848 of the Catechism. Just because you think you “know the deal” doesn’t mean you are not ignorant of the gospel. You clearly are.

But hypothetically, let’s say you’re right. Let’s say that the false image of God that you have is accurate. Do you think by “hiding”, you will make God not exist? Do you think because He irritates you, you can just ignore Him and He will become as fictional as Santa Claus? Am I misunderstanding you, or are you saying that you accept the teachings of the Catholic Church as all true, and based on them you’ve accepted that you are going to spend eternity in hell? If you’ve accepted this, do you not have any sense of alarm about your destiny? Or do you actually think it is not really going to happen simply because you find it irritating? I’m genuinely curious.
Paragraph 848 is very easy to take care of. Two elements: ‘‘can’’ and ‘‘through no fault of their own’’. ‘‘Can’’ means he has the ability, the power to do it, it’s not an indication or an assurance or a guarantee that he will. As for the 2nd element, define it in clear terms that leave no room for doubt. Simply put, how does one know for certain that it’s ‘‘through no fault of his own’’?. What if the person has a malformed conscience, feigns ignorance or has a hardened heart? What fool-proof method do you suggest someone uses to find out if any of those conditions apply to him/her?

I’ve been told that there is a God ever since I could understand language. The complexity and the sheer magnitude of the universe seem to tell me there is a God. We humans don’t treat everyone exactly the same. You won’t treat your sworn enemy the way you would your sweetheart. My experience of God is that of a callous, insensitive, absent, aloof entity. Like in the case of a father to whom you have given multiple opportunities to be a decent dad, at some point you understand and you give up on daddy. I gave up on God.

Life has made me despondent to a certain extent, I know that apart from a fatal condition that would give me time to repent, i’m probably doomed. Which comforts me in my initial idea that God is a callous tyrant to me. I know for a fact he’s very generous, liberal and gracious with some. But to balance things out others need to have stagnant tormented lives that go nowhere.

Things, life, the afterlife are all dramatic because God wanted them that way. I mean is it too much to ask to be able to be rid of the yolk of living when this life is over? God is ok with others’ pain, ok with damned souls suffering endlessly, but I like to say half- jokingly that the only moment he gets nervous, concerned and loses his serenity is when I get, if I ever do, too close to a big life-changing break in my life. I think my being happy and content in life would be very difficult for God to come to terms with. He’d lament: Where did i go wrong?! His will is dead set against my prosperity, happiness and fulfillment in life. Like a bully in high school who preys on you for no reason, you think to yourself, ‘‘Why is this idiot so adamant on making my life miserable?’’ So, in a nutshell, such has been my experience of God and of what people call his love. The only real problem, cause for concern is eternity. Not satisfied giving me a tormenting, stagnant life, he had to make me eternally miserable. It’s near impossible to reconcile with someone you just hope could vanish and die, and never be heard of ever again.
 
With all due respect to CAF, CAF is not authoritative, though the answer to the particular question is well given by CAF, referencing an authoritative source (CCC).

Did you read the full answer Tom? Did you notice “slip-ups” cannot fulfill the requirement for “unrepentant mortal sin”?

Do you believe some fail to reach heaven Tom?
Of all the Catholics in the world, how many of those who are in actual mortal sin actually know that they are? Feigned ignorance, a hardened heart, willful blindness all make things even more complicated. Since mortal sin unrepented is where God’s mercy stops (at the moment of death), and hell begins (after death), and since God loves us so much, we’re his cherished children, it must be extremely difficult for anybody to be oblivious to the fact that they indeed are in mortal sin. The ticket to an eternal Auschwitch is a ticket you may not even be aware you’re carrying with you. Thing is, though, if you, Rau, miss heaven, God goes his merry way, happy and content, invincibly serene, it’s inconsequential to him. You on the other hand wil have to bear the horror, terror, pain and despair of hell eternally.

On paper, God is just, merciful, a loving daddy and whatnot. In reality, what is he? What if you bank on him being your faithful ally, and when you die you hear the ‘‘Away from me ye accursed’’?
 
Paragraph 848 is very easy to take care of. Two elements: ‘‘can’’ and ‘‘through no fault of their own’’. ‘‘Can’’ means he has the ability, the power to do it, it’s not an indication or an assurance or a guarantee that he will. As for the 2nd element, define it in clear terms that leave no room for doubt. Simply put, how does one know for certain that it’s ‘‘through no fault of his own’’?. What if the person has a malformed conscience, feigns ignorance or has a hardened heart? What fool-proof method do you suggest someone uses to find out if any of those conditions apply to him/her?

I’ve been told that there is a God ever since I could understand language. The complexity and the sheer magnitude of the universe seem to tell me there is a God. We humans don’t treat everyone exactly the same. You won’t treat your sworn enemy the way you would your sweetheart. My experience of God is that of a callous, insensitive, absent, aloof entity. Like in the case of a father to whom you have given multiple opportunities to be a decent dad, at some point you understand and you give up on daddy. I gave up on God.

Life has made me despondent to a certain extent, I know that apart from a fatal condition that would give me time to repent, i’m probably doomed. Which comforts me in my initial idea that God is a callous tyrant to me. I know for a fact he’s very generous, liberal and gracious with some. But to balance things out others need to have stagnant tormented lives that go nowhere.

Things, life, the afterlife are all dramatic because God wanted them that way. I mean is it too much to ask to be able to be rid of the yolk of living when this life is over? God is ok with others’ pain, ok with damned souls suffering endlessly, but I like to say half- jokingly that the only moment he gets nervous, concerned and loses his serenity is when I get, if I ever do, too close to a big life-changing break in my life. I think my being happy and content in life would be very difficult for God to come to terms with. He’d lament: Where did i go wrong?! His will is dead set against my prosperity, happiness and fulfillment in life. Like a bully in high school who preys on you for no reason, you think to yourself, ‘‘Why is this idiot so adamant on making my life miserable?’’ So, in a nutshell, such has been my experience of God and of what people call his love. The only real problem, cause for concern is eternity. Not satisfied giving me a tormenting, stagnant life, he had to make me eternally miserable. It’s near impossible to reconcile with someone you just hope could vanish and die, and never be heard of ever again.
This is quite something. On one hand, it’s profoundly sad. But it still makes me smile, because you sound like a Catholic Woody Allen. I wish we could hang out.
 
Without full knowledge, one cannot be holding that ticket. Such would be contrary to justice.
So nobody in the whole wide world who has ever lived from Christ’s time on can/could commit a mortal sin without knowing it? So every single Catholic who has been damned knew exactly where they were going seconds before dying? They all, with no single exception, knew exactly what they were doing and where it would lead them? If so, that’s quite a statement. Human beings are very good at lying to themselves. How many times have we seen people who are visibly upset try to tell us otherwise with a clenched jaw? I understand you need to believe dubious stuff to maintain your worldview intact. You start from the principle that God is just, and you proceed to interpret everything with that paradigm, that bias. What you get is not reality but what you wish it was.
 
You start from the principle that God is just, and you proceed to interpret everything with that paradigm, that bias. What you get is not reality but what you wish it was.
How is that any different than you starting from the principle that God is a jerk?
 
How is that any different than you starting from the principle that God is a jerk?
I have arrived at that conclusion after many, many years of deep, deep questions. You can’t fathom any one could have thought things through and not be thrilled with God, right?

Listen, 1/3 of angels (translation: a whole bunch of them) , who have far and away better intellects than any of us, decided to go against God. Perhaps they saw something not so glorious about him that you are missing, or that you refuse to see? Or you had a reasonably good life, in which case it’s certainly easier to be on friendly terms with him. It’s the ones who were not carefully and wonderfully made who probably see more readily God’s ugly sides.
 
I have arrived at that conclusion after many, many years of deep, deep questions. you can’t fathom any one could have thought things through and not be thrilled with God, right?
Wrong. I can absolutely fathom it. Any chance you would consider sharing more specific and personal aspects of your questions and conclusions? Maybe in a new thread? It would be far more interesting than a lot of the drivel that is discussed around these parts. And who knows? Maybe you’ll even convince me that you’re right. 😃
 
Wrong. I can absolutely fathom it. Any chance you would consider sharing more specific and personal aspects of your questions and conclusions? Maybe in a new thread? It would be far more interesting than a lot of the drivel that is discussed around these parts. And who knows? Maybe you’ll even convince me that you’re right. 😃
If I succeeded, I’d have a lost soul to account for in addition to my misotheism and scorn for God. My crucial problem with God is Romans 9:20. if you and I are brothers, that dad hates my guts, treats me like dirt, doesn’t help me when i’m in need, generally neglects me, belittles me in front of his friends, keeps saying that I’m an accident, that I’,ll never amount to much etc. As for you, he treats you like gold, cherishes you, goes out of his way to help you, says that you are the apple of his eyes, you will love your dad. I will resent and hate him. Nothing I say about dad will resonate with you because your experience of dad has been stellar. .if a dad treats a son like the prodigal son’s father but treats his other son like dirt, is he a good dad? God is good with some, a stingy meanie with others. He is not monolith. Hopefully, i haven’t convinced you!😛 I don’t need the good Lord to be any more hostile than he already is. As for me and my household, we will see God for the callous, indifferent miser that he has proved himself to be.

Got a headache. Time to hit the sack. God sure isn’t great but talking about him and his binary system is a lot of fun. He’s a fascinating topic,
 
If I succeeded, I’d have a lost soul to account for in addition to my misotheism and scorn for God. My crucial problem with God is Romans 9:20. if you and I are brothers, that dad hates my guts, treats me like dirt, doesn’t help me when i’m in need, generally neglects me, belittles me in front of his friends, keeps saying that I’m an accident, that I’,ll never amount to much etc. As for you, he treats you like gold, cherishes you, goes out of his way to help you, says that you are the apple of his eyes, you will love your dad. I will resent and hate him. Nothing I say about dad will resonate with you because your experience of dad has been stellar. .if a dad treats a son like the prodigal son’s father but treats his other son like dirt, is he a good dad? God is good with some, a stingy meaniie with others. He is not monolith. Hopefully, i haven’t convinced you!😛 I don’t need the good Lord to be any more hostile than he already is.
The problem is that no matter how many years you’ve thought deeply about this, you still cannot fathom the reality of what is really going on. You may have a very long list of what you think are legitimate grievances, but concluding that God is a stingy meanie is the equivalent of an 8 year old coming to the same conclusion about his dad because his dad won’t let him eat ice cream for every meal. I don’t say that to be dismissive about whatever suffering you’ve endured in your life, or minimize whatever pain you’ve experienced, but the fact is that Christianity is not based on a scorecard that tallies up good deeds and sins and calculates whether or not you deserve heaven or hell. It is based on the Paschal Mystery. Not just the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, but our participation and sharing in that process. And it is just that; a mystery. Beyond our understanding. You correctly inferred that it’s easy for me to believe God is good, because my own life has been marked by one undeserved blessing after another. I can understand that it might not be that easy for everyone. But whether your perspective is correct or mine is correct, we are still living in a mystery. Where you’re expecting to face final judgement from a sadistic God eager to barbecue you, it is very possible (and I would guess even likely) that all of your earthly suffering will be currency in the afterlife, no matter how many Sunday masses you’ve missed, and I will be a destitute beggar with pockets full of worthless consolations that I collected on earth.

Anyway, you’re not very good at hiding. It is abundantly clear that you have far more hope than you’re willing to admit. Sleep well. 🙂
 
Certainly not one for which they are culpable - that’s right.
This is always thought provoking, from the Catechism

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.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.”[59] In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
 
This is always thought provoking, from the Catechism

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.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.”[59] In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
True enough, though for mortal sin, “full knowledge” remains required.
 
The problem is that no matter how many years you’ve thought deeply about this, you still cannot fathom the reality of what is really going on. You may have a very long list of what you think are legitimate grievances, but concluding that God is a stingy meanie is the equivalent of an 8 year old coming to the same conclusion about his dad because his dad won’t let him eat ice cream for every meal. I don’t say that to be dismissive about whatever suffering you’ve endured in your life, or minimize whatever pain you’ve experienced, but the fact is that Christianity is not based on a scorecard that tallies up good deeds and sins and calculates whether or not you deserve heaven or hell. It is based on the Paschal Mystery. Not just the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, but our participation and sharing in that process. And it is just that; a mystery. Beyond our understanding. You correctly inferred that it’s easy for me to believe God is good, because my own life has been marked by one undeserved blessing after another. I can understand that it might not be that easy for everyone. But whether your perspective is correct or mine is correct, we are still living in a mystery. Where you’re expecting to face final judgement from a sadistic God eager to barbecue you, it is very possible (and I would guess even likely) that all of your earthly suffering will be currency in the afterlife, no matter how many Sunday masses you’ve missed, and I will be a destitute beggar with pockets full of worthless consolations that I collected on earth.

Anyway, you’re not very good at hiding. It is abundantly clear that you have far more hope than you’re willing to admit. Sleep well. 🙂
, each time the boy looks at dad in the bleachers, dad is either looking away, chatting with someone or reading his breviary.
 
True enough, though for mortal sin, “full knowledge” remains required.
Yes, note that going against the certain conscience is to “condemn himself.” so is mortal.

Catholic Encylopedia

From the condemnation of the errors of Baius and Jansenius (Denz.-Bann., 1046, 1066, 1094, 1291-2) it is clear that for an actual personal sin a knowledge of the law and a personal voluntary act, free from coercion and necessity, are required. No mortal sin is committed in a state of invincible ignorance or in a half-conscious state. Actual advertence to the sinfulness of the act is not required, virtual advertence suffices. It is not necessary that the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present, the full and free consent of the will to an evil act suffices.

O’Neil, A.C. (1912). Sin. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm
 
Yes, note that going against the certain conscience is to “condemn himself.” so is mortal.

Catholic Encylopedia

From the condemnation of the errors of Baius and Jansenius (Denz.-Bann., 1046, 1066, 1094, 1291-2) it is clear that for an actual personal sin a knowledge of the law and a personal voluntary act, free from coercion and necessity, are required. No mortal sin is committed in a state of invincible ignorance or in a half-conscious state. Actual advertence to the sinfulness of the act is not required, virtual advertence suffices. It is not necessary that the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present, the full and free consent of the will to an evil act suffices.

O’Neil, A.C. (1912). Sin. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm
I think rejecting one’s conscience (on a grave matter) is not the matter of concern to the other poster, but rather the idea that one could somehow accidentally and innocently condemn oneself to hell. God does not set no win tests!
 
I think rejecting one’s conscience (on a grave matter) is not the matter of concern to the other poster, but rather the idea that one could somehow accidentally and innocently condemn oneself to hell. God does not set no win tests!
Really it depends upon what someone means by knowing that an act or omission is a mortal sin. Does fladreamer mean by conscience or by awareness of Church teaching?

fladreamer asked “So nobody in the whole wide world who has ever lived from Christ’s time on can/could commit a mortal sin without knowing it?”
 
Really it depends upon what someone means by knowing that an act or omission is a mortal sin. Does fladreamer mean by conscience or by awareness of Church teaching?

fladreamer asked “So nobody in the whole wide world who has ever lived from Christ’s time on can/could commit a mortal sin without knowing it?”
It’s a fair question. And it relates directly to the original question of this thread. Catholic teaching says that a young teenage boy who masturbates is committing a mortal sin with the same gravity as a grown married father who has an affair with a woman other than his wife. Now, if the teenager comes from a devoted Protestant family, he may never have heard of Theology of the Body, and may never have been taught that masturbation is a serious sin. A properly cathechized Catholic teenager would be well aware that it is a serious sin. So if two teenagers tragically die with this unconfessed sin on both of their souls, and are facing final judgment, would the Catholic boy go straight to hell because he was better informed, while the Protestant boy would merely have to spend a few centuries in Purgatory because of his ignorance? I suspect this is the sort of question that led fladreamer to form his opinion of God and the Church.

Of course, in the case of the married adulterous grown man, he would be well aware of the seriousness of his sin regardless of his religious formation or lack thereof. His wife would be more than capable of educating him on this point, regardless of her religious formation.

Edit: Another interesting question… Would the Protestant boy age during his centuries-long stay in Purgatory? Or would he remain a teenager for the entire time?
 
…Catholic teaching says that a young teenage boy who masturbates is committing a mortal sin with the same gravity as a grown married father who has an affair with a woman other than his wife.
As per ccc1861: “However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.” Why would that be so? Your statement made it sound as though “doing (objectively) the crime” implies one will “do the time”, but we are told that can’t be concluded. And further insight is found here (in the masturbation context):
Ccc2352: “To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.”

As you see, Catholic teaching is rather more subtle than your statement might suggest. But if God is just, should that be surprising?
So if two teenagers tragically die with this unconfessed sin on both of their souls, and are facing final judgment, would the Catholic boy go straight to hell because he was better informed, while the Protestant boy would merely have to spend a few centuries in Purgatory because of his ignorance?
Only God can answer this, because only he can know all the factors that bear on moral culpability, including knowledge, degree of consent, the voice of conscience, one’s change of heart and resolve to turn to God, and so on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top