One Unrepentant Mortal Sin Weighed Against Many Moral Virtues

Status
Not open for further replies.

meltzerboy

New member
I think I already know the Catholic teaching on mortal sin, namely, that if one dies in mortal sin and is intentionally unrepentant, one cannot go to Heaven or Purgatory. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.

My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine? Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement? Does it depend somewhat on the nature of the particular mortal sin? What is your personal view of this situation?
 
It’s hard to further comment, since there is no context.
The question remains quite vague.

Mortal sin is very grave, usually.
How could one not be repentent with mortal sin?

God is very mercifull, but no dummy.

However, Jesus said that prostitutes would go to heaven before some of the Pharases.
(working on the exact scripture passage).

Can you be more specific?

good luck on finding answers.

👍
 
I think I already know the Catholic teaching on mortal sin, namely, that if one dies in mortal sin and is intentionally unrepentant, one cannot go to Heaven or Purgatory. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.
No, that’s correct :yup:
My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life
No ones’ life really is entirely “exemplary” because no one is perfect and as the Bible says “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” and “the wages of sin is death (meaning Eternal Death, Hell)” Suppose you sin just 5 times a day, it would equal to 1,825 sins in whole year And if you live to be 70, you’d have broken God’s law over 127,000 times.

When judgment comes, God keeps your life on a record. Everything you do, is recorded. So let’s say you did a lot of bad things in life like lying and stealing. That stays on your record, but let’s say you did a lot of good things too like donated money or cleaned up trash. That’s good but the bad things you did are still on your record, even if the good things are there with it, the bad things stay.

So that’s why you need something to atone for those sins (Jesus through the sacraments He established.)
Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine?
God is merciful, but God is also just. He has infinite love, and disobeying the love that leads to infinite punishment. And remember Hell isn’t just “the fiery place where bad people go to forever”. Hell by definition is the self-chosen state of eternal separation from God.

And even so, if the pains of Hell did end at some point, at the point, the condition of the person would be free of punishment. All that matters to that person, is that he is free of pain now. (Purgatory however is different because they are purifying punishment meant for God’s friends, not His enemies, as loving discipline, not for pouring of God’s wrath on the person who chose it). It’s very hard to explain.

God bless :byzsoc:

David
 
Yes, it is just. First off, in justice, we owe God everything. We cannot merit Heaven. Therefore, we cannot ever claim that we justly deserve it. We don’t.

The thing is, if we withhold a part of ourselves for our own selfish use, we aren’t fit for Heaven. If you built a home that was spectacular in every way, outstanding in fact, ready to withstand a Level 5 hurricane, but one part of it was rotten or not structurally sound, then that one fault would condemn the whole building. If your whole body is sound except for a vital organ, such as your liver or kidney or heart, you’re going to die. The soundness of the rest of your organs won’t save you. That is what mortal sin is like. It is a fault of such seriousness that it is inconsistent with life. To be unrepentant is to be closed to healing of that fault, as we have the choice to do.

That is why it is right that one mortal sin can stand between us and life. It is not a juridical thing, some arbitrary legal rule of Heaven, but rather it is in the nature of life that one single wound of sufficient seriousness can be more deadly than a whole host of lesser faults, even though added together.

Having said that, keep in mind that if a person withholds out of honest ignorance, rather than willful self-possession, that is a wound of a different nature. It is the willfulness that prevents healing, and the refusal of healing that makes the wound eternally deadly. If the person is fully ready to let go of that which God requires, if the person fully intends to conform himself or herself entirely to the will of God, that person won’t resist the action of the Holy Spirit, and will not die. It is the person who truly prefers and chooses their own foolishness to the wisdom of God who will die. But if the person is stubborn, and says, “This cannot be God’s will, because I cannot accept it”, then that is a different thing. That is a kind of idolatry, which makes God out to be only wise insofar as God agrees with the willful person. This in reality makes one’s own will out to be a god, and gives one’s own will the name of God. That is a deadly attitude that could believe itself righteous, but that comes out of a conscience that is willfully deformed. That is a deadly attitude, and not for arbitrary reasons.
 
Before us is the way of life…and the way of death.

And great is the difference between the two.

If one is killed by one bullet or 1000 …one is still not alive.

Thanks be to God for the Sacrament of Confession and all the other graces etc God seeks to give us.

Let us live in true life…in Christ!
 
I think I already know the Catholic teaching on mortal sin, namely, that if one dies in mortal sin and is intentionally unrepentant, one cannot go to Heaven or Purgatory. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.

My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine? Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement? Does it depend somewhat on the nature of the particular mortal sin? What is your personal view of this situation?
If a person deliberatly is unrepentant about something that he knows is a mortal sin, then he is denying God. Obviously, a person who denies God is not able to go to heaven. However, if the person truely does not know that what he is doing is a mortal sin, then that’s another story. Theoretically, if that was the case, the person may not be purposely denying God. However, we are in no position to judge the state of another person’s soul. The person may claim that they don’t believe what they are doing is a sin, but deep inside they know it is. This is where faith comes in. A person isn’t only saved by their good deeds. One can’t barter good deeds for an unrepentant soul.
 
Having been revealed by G-d, the belief is perfect and just. Man is first to repent, then to believe and follow His Commandments. On a practical level, how are we to expect G-d’s mercy if we willingly and/or persistently fail to repent, reject His Commandments, and fail to seek His mercy? We have been given a divine guideline, and the Church structure to administer it. This is mercy. If we fail to pursue His mercy, we are subject to the fullness of His justice. And, that is the root of the fear of the L-rd.
 
I think I already know the Catholic teaching on mortal sin, namely, that if one dies in mortal sin and is intentionally unrepentant, one cannot go to Heaven or Purgatory. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.

My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine? Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement? Does it depend somewhat on the nature of the particular mortal sin? What is your personal view of this situation?
Would a wife continue to be with a husband if he was unrepentant of cheating on her? Would it matter how much good he had done for the marriage prior to cheating? Not really. As a matter of fact, it makes it all the worse because it makes the offense that much more glaring.

Remember, this is about a relationship between us and God. A single unrepentant grave offense is sufficient to terminate a relationship. No one is going to be friends with someone who hurts them and isn’t even sorry for it. Neither will God. It’s not God being unfair but perfectly just. If someone is unrepentant of mortal sin, then they have chosen themselves over God. God respects this choice.

Hope that helps!
 
I ? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. ?
such a person by definition has not led an otherwise exemplary life, because that life has been governed solely by his own will, relied soley on his own judgement, meaning he as rejected the means God has provided us to discern the truth, namely his revelation and his church to interpret and apply that revelation. At the moment of death when he comes to judgement this individual will come face to face with God, be given all knowledge not only of his sins and attitude but of the consequences of choosing or rejecting God for all eternity. If he stubbornly clings to this sin, it means he stubbornly clings to his own will in all things, and rejects God’s will in all things. That is the choice that IS hell. At that point he his not choosing to cling to his sin because he does not believe the Church teaches the truth, because he has now been given knowledge of the truth, and it is now simply a matter of wills.
 
I always wince a little bit when I see thread titles like this. It generally means a question of legalism. Testing G-d’s Justice and mercy against a 20th century courtroom standard, as if there are law books in heaven filled with loopholes and gotcha’s etc. That is not the spirit in which justice and mercy are given. To begin with, none of us can be deserving of heaven. We just can’t. Jesus told his apostles, “for men, this is impossible”. But he also says, “with God, all things are possible”. If we know the gospel. If G-d has written his law truly on our hearts, then we know when we transgress that law. And he knows whether or not we truly know through a properly formed and catechized conscience what our level of participation in sin truly is. While the judgement, by it’s actual name is juridical, it can only be based on our performance against our conscience which is an indwelling of the Holy Spirit. We are going to be surprised by both who is there, and who is not there. But when we sit here on earth and have conscious justification thoughts, of, well, I can do this, because I balanced it out with that…it seems like a dicey and dangerous game, whether you end up right nor not, and it’s not in the spirit of living in an imitation of Christ. We are called in the gospels to be perfect, as our Father in heaven is perfect. It’s a tall order. We must give G-d credit for knowing it’s a tall order, especially when he tells his flatly that it is impossible. Does that mean we throw up our hands and give up? Doing whatever we will, and then throwing ourselves on the mercy of the court at the end? The gospels don’t read that way to me. And I don’t believe they read that way to the Church. We are, it seems, told to live TOWARD perfection, the the best of our ability, and when we inevitably fall, get up, ask forr mercy and forgiveness right then with a contrite heart, and then go on and live TOWARD perfection again. Repeating this cycle ad infinitum until we die, or Jesus returns, whichever comes first. If you’re always trying to live Christs perfection, but failing, you are His child. If you’re not trying, or if you’re looking for ways around the perfections that He clearly laid out for us, then you’re not likely to be remorseful. Particularily when you’re allowing your pride to keep you from even accepting this "one thing you’'re talking about as not even being valid. The OP didn’t say what this one thing is, but I promise you whatever it is, is a valid teaching if it came from our Church. We can let our personal opinions, fear of losing a comfort, or pleasure, or treasure, etc. get in the way of us actually taking some truth into our hearts, but that doesn’t change the truth. Better to accept it as the truth. Try to comply with it the very best you can, and when you fail, show a real and honest sorrow for your failure, which G-d can judge as genuine. Then try to live again within the disciplines, even after forgiveness. When you fail again, you need to go back to Him again. Every single time you throw a baseball through Mrs. Johnson’s window, you need to tell dad, so he can pay Mrs. Johnson, and scold or spank you. After a while, the idea is, you’ll stop throwing baseballs through Mrs Johnson’s window eventually, AND through discipline, and love, you’ll understand why. Unless that is, that you disagree with dad that it’s wrong to throw baseballs through windows. You would be wrong. You wouldn’t be contrite in apologizing when it happens. Your punishment will be meaningless, and eventually you’ll end up in reform school, or jail, because you go out of your way to rebel against the natural laws of G-d.

We should be good, and do what the Church teaches us, because we WANT to be like Christ. Because we believe what He, His apostles, and His Church pass along to us, and don’t wish to offend them. Because we truly DO understand what right and wrong are, if we don’t lie to ourselves with prideful justifications and reasoning based on false axioms.

Jesus distilled it into two commandments which are the most powerful commandments of all, and entail all others. If what you want to do doesn’t make this test in every way, you should really work at not doing it, and being truly sorry and repentent when you DO mess up.

Love the Lord your G-d, with all your heart, with all your soul, and all your mind.
Love your neighbor as yourself.

Add to this, that your neighbor is everybody, and you should be all good to go.

Also helpful to keep in mind that He left this Church to us, and let it be built and carried on by men, who are guided by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit protects her from teaching error. So when you’re disagreeing on a precept in faith and morals, expounded by the Church, you are really disagreeing with Jesus Christ, who left the Holy Spirit with us.

Submission and obedience seem to be the hardest thing for westerners, both American and European, to do. We’re SO individualistic, modern, pagan, and rebellious that it makes obedience and submission sound weak to us. It’s a hard one to overcome. I’d say it’s the westerners heaviest piece of the cross to bear. We can overcome it with prayer and right orientation of will, though. It can be done. And if you can do it, eventually, you’ll find it more liberating than anything you’ve ever done.

There is nothing that feels better than the freedom of submitting ones self in obedience to G-d. Letting go of your “opinions”, and taking His yoke, which really IS much much lighter than the yoke we have on us in prideful disobedience.

God’s Blessings to all,

Steven
 
I’m not, well at least not fully.

I would certainly agree with those who have pointed out that we all get into Heaven through God’s mercy. No one merits such a reward. You cannot earn Heaven. It is a dangerous and false notion.

Still, you have left too much potential wiggle room in your hypothetical. It is true that an unrepented mortal sin will condemn a person.

I might catch flak for this, but I would argue that your hypothetical sinner may not have the full knowledge that is required for a sin to be considered mortal. Even in hypotheticals, we can not have a God’s eye picture of the heart of the sinner. God judges a whole person, as I think you were getting at. If a person, for instance, understands that the Church says X is grave matter, but does not understand the authority of the Church, have they committed a mortal sin if they do X? I’d answer that there simply is not enough information here, and that though we can in most cases establish what is or is not grave matter, it is much more difficult to establish what is or is not a mortal sin.

I say this, not to excuse anyone who ought to confess, but to encourage people fussing about the sins of others to bite their tongues when it comes to judgement. It is one thing to help a person understand that their actions are deeply evil, but quite another to condemn them.
 
I’m not, well at least not fully.

I would certainly agree with those who have pointed out that we all get into Heaven through God’s mercy. No one merits such a reward. You cannot earn Heaven. It is a dangerous and false notion.

Still, you have left too much potential wiggle room in your hypothetical. It is true that an unrepented mortal sin will condemn a person.

I might catch flak for this, but I would argue that your hypothetical sinner may not have the full knowledge that is required for a sin to be considered mortal. Even in hypotheticals, we can not have a God’s eye picture of the heart of the sinner. God judges a whole person, as I think you were getting at. If a person, for instance, understands that the Church says X is grave matter, but does not understand the authority of the Church, have they committed a mortal sin if they do X? I’d answer that there simply is not enough information here, and that though we can in most cases establish what is or is not grave matter, it is much more difficult to establish what is or is not a mortal sin.

I say this, not to excuse anyone who ought to confess, but to encourage people fussing about the sins of others to bite their tongues when it comes to judgement. It is one thing to help a person understand that their actions are deeply evil, but quite another to condemn them.
I don’t see that anyone has condemned anyone else. The question is hypothetical, but it is a concept we all have to deal with in our everyday lives, especially in our secular society. We are constantly bombarded with logic such as, so what if I cheat on my wife? At least I don’t beat her- haven’t left her- use protection- try to be a good dad- buy her a new car…etc This thread doesn’t seem to me to be about “fussing over other people’s sins” but an opportunity to consider if we are unrepentant about something that we know in our heart is wrong.
 
I think I already know the Catholic teaching on mortal sin, namely, that if one dies in mortal sin and is intentionally unrepentant, one cannot go to Heaven or Purgatory. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.

My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine? Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement? Does it depend somewhat on the nature of the particular mortal sin? What is your personal view of this situation?
Just to add to what’s been said already, “honest disagreement” is even less an excuse than ignorance. One can be forgiven for not living in accordance with what one never knew; but to be knowledgeable of a sin and to persist in it anyway compounds the sin with interest.

Even if one doesn’t understand the rational basis (and I will say right now, there is literally not a single teaching, at least regarding how individuals are to live their lives, that is not rigidly rationally defensible – which is why it always irks me when people conflate “I don’t understand” with “this must not make sense”), one owes the Church obedience. If you cannot comprehend it, live it anyway!
 
My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine? Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement? Does it depend somewhat on the nature of the particular mortal sin? What is your personal view of this situation?
Since you need to have full knowledge to commit a mortal sin, this hypothetical case presented, albeit vaguely, does not seem to fit the criteria. If the person does not truly believe it to be a sin, they don’t seem to have the full knowledge required.

Their sin may also be that they do not cede to the teaching authority of the church, but that also needn’t be a mortal sin if their faith is not developed sufficiently to understand the importance of obedience to God’s Church.

So their sin may meet the criteria for objectively grave sin, but it seems to me would not meet the criteria for personal mortal sin.

If we find ourselves in this situation - where we do not believe something to be a sin but the church teaches that it is - we have an obligation to inform our consciences better. Which is to say, understand why the church teaches as such, and fall in line with it. This can be a difficult process, and mortal sin cannot be assumed in another who is struggling with this.
 
Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching.
Allow me to say something dangerous here. Because it is dangerous, if taken the wrong way – and so very, very many Catholics have taken it the wrong way – but it is also true.

A person of good conscience, including a Catholic, is morally compelled to follow his or her own fully informed conscience, after prayer, reasoning, and humble self-examination. As the Catechism states:
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. (CCC 1790)
This is not an excuse to ignore the Church’s moral authority, which is total. It is not a free pass for all the “Spirit of Vatican II” nutters who’ve been running around since the seventies sleeping with their ex-wives’ husbands or whatever. It is not a license for American Catholics to read Humanae Vitae, announce that they “sincerely believe after much prayer and contemplation that the Pope is wrong on this,” and start using condoms.

But this teaching does have consequences. Suppose we have a well-informed, very sincere Catholic, who humbly submitted to Church authority, as deeply as she could, but simply could not tolerate a particular teaching in good conscience. According to CCC 1790, such a person would not only have the moral option of following her conscience – she would have a moral obligation to obey her conscience, even to the point of rejecting Catholic teaching. This would have terrible consequences for such a Catholic, of course, since by rejecting a single infallible teaching she’d also be rejecting the whole authority of the Catholic Church and belief in the Church’s status as teaching with the voice of Christ – she’d basically be exiting the Church until she finds her way back. But it would still be the right thing to do.

This gives us room to hope that those souls who have died after rejecting infallibly true teachings did so honestly, and may therefore yet be saved. Thus, to your original hypothetical, meltzerboy, I must answer that: if the person in question broke away from Catholic teaching because of a sincere conscientious objection, made in full honesty after a completely humble, relentlessly diligent search for the truth in the heart of the Catholic teaching, then he has committed no mortal sin. He is as protected as the invincibly ignorant, and is destined for eternal glory because of his great love for God. This is both just and merciful.

In practice, though, I can’t overstate how rare I think these cases really are. Most people who reject Catholic teachings (especially on sexuality) don’t even bother learning the arguments, and sing “Every Sperm is Sacred” all the way down to the fires of Hell. So don’t do it.

But take heart from the teaching on conscience, and bear a little hope for those who do.
 
I think I already know the Catholic teaching on mortal sin, namely, that if one dies in mortal sin and is intentionally unrepentant, one cannot go to Heaven or Purgatory. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.

My question is not whether you accept this Church doctrine, but whether you personally believe it is just? Suppose one has led an otherwise exemplary life except for this particular mortal sin which one does not atone for because one does not truly believe it is a sin, not based on ignorance of Church teaching, but due to an honest disagreement with Church teaching. Do you believe G-d is unmerciful in such an instance of following one’s own conscience while knowing it is against Church doctrine? Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement? Does it depend somewhat on the nature of the particular mortal sin? What is your personal view of this situation?
Without sanctifying grace the works that are done have no value to them: it would be like putting your best fruit in a dirty dish or your finest wine in a disgusting cup and then handing it to your guest. And yet you don’t stop there but rather continue to insult your guest further by telling them they’re being unreasonable for not being pleased with such actions and that even though you have the available means to wash the dish and the cup you still chose to serve it to them like it is because they should be content with what you give them. Is that love? Would you tolerate your host if you were treated like that?

We are asked to love God will all of our mind, heart, body and soul and when we do not repent our sin(s) we tell God we do not love him at all. As Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen once put it, “It would be like a husband coming home to his wife and saying ‘honey I have a new secretary! She if very beautiful but don’t you worry because I only love her 20% while I love you 80%!” What self-respecting wife would tolerate that? And if a wife shouldn’t be asked to tolerate it then why should God?
 
I’m not, well at least not fully.

I would certainly agree with those who have pointed out that we all get into Heaven through God’s mercy. No one merits such a reward. You cannot earn Heaven. It is a dangerous and false notion.

Still, you have left too much potential wiggle room in your hypothetical. It is true that an unrepented mortal sin will condemn a person.

I might catch flak for this, but I would argue that your hypothetical sinner may not have the full knowledge that is required for a sin to be considered mortal.

**WHOA. Without full knowledge there can be no mortal sin.

Grave matter
Sufficient reflection
Full consent of the will**
Code:
Even in hypotheticals, we can not have a God's eye picture of the heart of the sinner.  God judges a whole person, as I think you were getting at.  If a person, for instance, understands that the Church says X is grave matter, but does not understand the authority of the Church, have they committed a mortal sin if they do X?   I'd answer that there simply is not enough information here, and that though we can in most cases establish what is or is not grave matter, it is much more difficult to establish what is or is not a mortal sin.  

I say this, not to excuse anyone who ought to confess, but to encourage people fussing about the sins of others to bite their tongues when it comes to judgement.  It is one thing to help a person understand that their actions are deeply evil, but quite another to condemn them.
 
Do you think G-d does not take into account all of the other moral virtues one has exhibited throughout one’s life, but instead focuses only on the mortal sin one has committed without atonement?
You’ve raised a very pertinent question here. I’d like to share something that is very thought provoking and very scary too - if you’ll bear with me.

A long time ago, when I was a kid, I asked my Catechism teacher in school - a very learned and wise Jesuit priest - the same question you asked, about whether one can be damned for one unrepented mortal sin at the time of one’s death, despite having lived a good life, to the best of one’s ability, for a long time. (Satan can trip up even the holiest person, agree?)

I have to say I didn’t quite understand the profundity of the priest’s response at the time, but over the years, as I’ve learned more about human nature - starting with my own - I’ve come to understand exactly what he meant.
  1. God is all good. His infinite goodness requires that He give us every opportunity, including at the last instant of our lives to turn away from sin, repent and be united to Him in eternal friendship. If He didn’t do this, His love would be short of perfect - agree?
  2. If you go with the previous proposition, then it stands to reason that we will all have a *final *opportunity to say a definitive “yes” or “no” to God’s grace and offer of Mercy and Salvation.
  3. All our lives we say “yes” and “no” to God, in thousands of little ways.
  4. Now imagine, for the moment, a set of scales, where our “yesses” to God are piling up on one side, with our “no’s” on the other. The scale will eventually, inevitably, tip one way.
  5. I can’t recall the exact words, but there’s a saying that goes something like “Watch your thoughts. For your thoughts become your decisions, your decisions your actions, your actions your character, and your character your destiny”.
  6. Now here’s the scary bit (relax, sometimes it’s good to be scared!): if I’ve made a habit of frequently/constantly saying “yes” to God in the things He has demanded of me throughout my life, what is the likelihood I’ll say “no” to Him when He makes that final offer to me (personally) of His Mercy and Salvation? Conversely - scarily - what are the chances of me changing age old habits and suddenly saying “yes” to His grace at that moment, if all I’ve done is rejected it all my life?
It sounds so incredible that anyone could choose evil (with its consequences) over good (with its rewards) at the last minute of their lives, but the older I’ve grown and watched myself make silly choices so many times in life (despite knowing the consequences), the more convinced I am that it’s absolutely possible! It’s rightly said therefore, that in the final analysis, it isn’t God Who condemns us, but we ourselves!

The road to salvation is straight and narrow - and long! Lifelong! It requires choosing the path of life hour by hour, day by day, month by month and year by year. We need to ensure that at the final moments of our lives our fading mind, heart and senses are all already attuned to saying “yes” to the Word, and not the other way around. If we do this, we have no worries about what will transpire at the end - even if we happen to have a mortal sin on our soul by chance. We will be given the final grace to repent - and we will. Little wonder that St Paul speaks about working out our salvation with fear and trembling - every day of our lives, decision by decsion, habit by habit, instead of leaving it to the very end.

“Be ye perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” He knew few of us can be, yet He demands we try. Always. God forbid any of us end up without sufficient oil in our lamps.

God bless all the readers and contributors of this wonderful forum.

Francis
 
Allow me to say something dangerous here. Because it is dangerous, if taken the wrong way – and so very, very many Catholics have taken it the wrong way – but it is also true.

A person of good conscience, including a Catholic, is morally compelled to follow his or her own fully informed conscience, after prayer, reasoning, and humble self-examination. As the Catechism states:

This is not an excuse to ignore the Church’s moral authority, which is total. It is not a free pass for all the “Spirit of Vatican II” nutters who’ve been running around since the seventies sleeping with their ex-wives’ husbands or whatever. It is not a license for American Catholics to read Humanae Vitae, announce that they “sincerely believe after much prayer and contemplation that the Pope is wrong on this,” and start using condoms.

But this teaching does have consequences. Suppose we have a well-informed, very sincere Catholic, who humbly submitted to Church authority, as deeply as she could, but simply could not tolerate a particular teaching in good conscience. According to CCC 1790, such a person would not only have the moral option of following her conscience – she would have a moral obligation to obey her conscience, even to the point of rejecting Catholic teaching. This would have terrible consequences for such a Catholic, of course, since by rejecting a single infallible teaching she’d also be rejecting the whole authority of the Catholic Church and belief in the Church’s status as teaching with the voice of Christ – she’d basically be exiting the Church until she finds her way back. But it would still be the right thing to do.

This gives us room to hope that those souls who have died after rejecting infallibly true teachings did so honestly, and may therefore yet be saved. Thus, to your original hypothetical, meltzerboy, I must answer that: if the person in question broke away from Catholic teaching because of a sincere conscientious objection, made in full honesty after a completely humble, relentlessly diligent search for the truth in the heart of the Catholic teaching, then he has committed no mortal sin. He is as protected as the invincibly ignorant, and is destined for eternal glory because of his great love for God. This is both just and merciful.

In practice, though, I can’t overstate how rare I think these cases really are. Most people who reject Catholic teachings (especially on sexuality) don’t even bother learning the arguments, and sing “Every Sperm is Sacred” all the way down to the fires of Hell. So don’t do it.

But take heart from the teaching on conscience, and bear a little hope for those who do.
Yes, with one caveat (and I’ve been here). A person of good conscience who finds themselves honestly at odds with the ancient teachings of Christianity has an obligation to make a diligent good-faith effort to ensure that the difference does not arise out of honest misunderstanding. You may not leave the Church because you think by your own sense of things that your beliefs are incompatible with the teachings of the Church. Because ignorance is not invincible until proven otherwise, you are duty-bound to do a really thorough investigation by consultation with worthy teachers of the faith (not just one, either).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top