Original sin or Personal sin

[simpleas]

Not got anything to post, just wanna follow the thread

 

[javid]

The Catholic Church does not teach **penal **substitution.

The atonement of Jesus Christ is offered as a substitute for

• our works of atonement and
• sufferings of the poor souls

The teaching of atonement (developed by St. Thomas Aquinas):

1. • punishment is a kind of medicine for sin, to restore friendship
   • it is possible to substitute as long as the offender wills to join himself to the substitute,
   • “Christ bore a satisfactory punishment, not for His, but for our sins,”
   • the debt is not one of honor but of a moral injustice

1. 
   ِDear Vico
   
   1.Please Give refrence for your claims.
   
   2.So You accept that Lord Jesus paid the price instead of us and His heavenly father, accepted it.
   
   Best Regards

 

[javid]

You are welcome.

My point is not concerned with improving the relationship between humanity and Divinity because according to Catholic teaching, the original unique relationship, consisting of Sanctifying Grace aka Original Holiness, was destroyed by Adam’s Original Sin.

The universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 301 teaches that God at every moment upholds and sustains us as His creatures. Thus, He enables us to act. The way we can act is explained in CCC 1730-1732.

Links to the Catechism

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Personally, I can see that the basic relationship between human creatures and their Creator can be improved by the gift of Sanctifying Grace in the Sacrament of Baptism.
In real time/history, it is Jesus Christ Who restores our relationship with God by erasing our contracted State of Original Sin. (Information source. CCC 404-406)

So that my old brain does not become confused, would you kindly decide which avenue we should discuss first. The avenue coming from “improving the relationship” or the avenue coming from “restoring the relationship”. Then we can go on the other avenue.

Dear Grannymh

We need prove that the only way to prove the relation was sacrifice of Lord Jesus. Do you have any reason of it?

On the other hand, don’t you accept that Lord Jesus paid price for our personal sins?

 

[Vico]

ِDear Vico

1.Please Give reference for your claims.

2.So You accept that Lord Jesus paid the price instead of us and His heavenly father, accepted it.

Best Regards

I agree with the Catechism:

Catechism:**613 **Christ’s death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the definitive redemption of men, through “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”,439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the “blood of the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins”.440

**614 **This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other sacrifices.441 First, it is a gift from God the Father himself, for the Father handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with himself. At the same time it is the offering of the Son of God made man, who in freedom and love offered his life to his Father through the Holy Spirit in reparation for our disobedience.442

**615 **"For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous."443 By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who “makes himself an offering for sin”, when “he bore the sin of many”, and who “shall make many to be accounted righteous”, for “he shall bear their iniquities”.444 Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.445
616 It is love "to the end"446 that confers on Christ’s sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and satisfaction. He knew and loved us all when he offered his life.447 Now "the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died."448 No man, not even the holiest, was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all. The existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as the Head of all mankind, makes possible his redemptive sacrifice for all.

**617 **The Council of Trent emphasizes the unique character of Christ’s sacrifice as "the source of eternal salvation"449 and teaches that "his most holy Passion on the wood of the cross merited justification for us."450 and the Church venerates his cross as she sings: "Hail, O Cross, our only hope."451

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1O.HTM

Helping us (Catechism):1989 The first work of the grace of the Holy Spirit is conversion, effecting justification in accordance with Jesus’ proclamation at the beginning of the Gospel: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."38 Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin, thus accepting forgiveness and righteousness from on high. "Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man.39

 

[javid]

Dear Vico

That’s O.K.

Now, I ask you answer my main Question: Is it fair to accept that a sinless one atone for faults of others? I do not a sinless one can’t try it, but Can The Just God accept this? Is it justly!?

 

[fhansen]

Dear Vico

That’s O.K.

Now, I ask you answer my main Question: Is it fair to accept that a sinless one atone for faults of others? I do not a sinless one can’t try it, but Can The Just God accept this? Is it justly!?

He didn’t just accept it-He did it. He made the offering, He satisfied Himself. He placed Himself in the hands of sinful man and turned the other cheek while they crucified Him, reconciling man with Himself by that act of mercy and forgiveness. God isn’t violent, while man is.

Was it fair for man to ever scorn and disobey God? No! Was it fair for man to mistrust God? No! Was it fair for man to hate, humiliate, torture, and crucify God? No! But God has been working patiently with his sinful creation since the beginning, to turn us from injustice to justice, so fairness will ultimately once again reign in His universe.

‘The light came into the world but man perceived it not.’ As we come to recognize just Who was nailed to the cross, then we begin to realize just who God is, and we begin to perceive and accept the light, and be changed ourselves, by it.

 

[grannymh]

Dear Grannymh

We need prove that the only way to prove the relation was sacrifice of Lord Jesus. Do you have any reason of it?

On the other hand, don’t you accept that Lord Jesus paid price for our personal sins?

The basic reason for the necessity of Jesus Christ is that God is a totally Divine transcendent super-natural Pure Spirit Creator and Adam was not.

In my humble opinion, I avoid one sentence references for our personal sins because there is so much involved especially in the case of personal mortal sins. Therefore, I yield to other posters.

 

[Vico]

Dear Vico

That’s O.K.

Now, I ask you answer my main Question: Is it fair to accept that a sinless one atone for faults of others? I do not a sinless one can’t try it, but Can The Just God accept this? Is it justly!?

Definitions*

just (adjective)
Based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair:

fair (adverb):

1. In accordance with the rules or standards; legitimate
   1.1 Just or appropriate in the circumstances:

God established Divine Law and is Good, so what God does is just and fair.

Remember this parable of the workers from the Gospel:

Matthew 20:1-16 (NABRE)

The Workers in the Vineyard.[a]

1 “The kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out at dawn to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 After agreeing with them for the usual daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 Going out about nine o’clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace, 4 **and he said to them, ‘You too go into my vineyard, and I will give you what is just.’ 5 So they went off. [And] he went out again around noon, and around three o’clock, and did likewise. 6 Going out about five o’clock, he found others standing around, and said to them, ‘Why do you stand here idle all day?’ 7 They answered, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You too go into my vineyard.’ 8 [c]When it was evening the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Summon the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and ending with the first.’ 9 When those who had started about five o’clock came, each received the usual daily wage. 10 So when the first came, they thought that they would receive more, but each of them also got the usual wage. 11 And on receiving it they grumbled against the landowner, 12 saying, ‘These last ones worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who bore the day’s burden and the heat.’ 13 He said to one of them in reply, ‘My friend, I am not cheating you.[d] Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? 14 [e]Take what is yours and go. What if I wish to give this last one the same as you? 15 [Or] am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?’ 16 [f]Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last.”
**

 

[javid]

Definitions*

just (adjective)
Based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair:

fair (adverb):

1. In accordance with the rules or standards; legitimate
   1.1 Just or appropriate in the circumstances:

God established Divine Law and is Good, so what God does is just and fair.

Dear Vico

Thanks, So if a judge let a volunteer sinless one be punished instead of a Criminal, it is just and fair because God did it before?

In addition, I know sacrifice is morally right and fair, but I want to know how it can be so,

 

[Vico]

Dear Vico

Thanks, So if a judge let a volunteer sinless one be punished instead of a Criminal, it is just and fair because God did it before?

In addition, I know sacrifice is morally right and fair, but I want to know how it can be so,

Catholic teaching is not penal substitution, so the volunteer is a substitute. The offender wills to join himself to the substitute.

 

[javid]

Catholic teaching is not penal substitution, so the volunteer is a substitute. The offender wills to join himself to the substitute.

Dear Vico

Anyway the substitute suffered and died for us. His Job is nice to us! So we love him. But my problem is “Why God let a sinless one suffer and die to save his people?” Didn’t God can forgive us with no suffering and death for the volunteer?

 

[Vico]

Dear Vico

Anyway the substitute suffered and died for us. His Job is nice to us! So we love him. But my problem is “Why God let a sinless one suffer and die to save his people?” Didn’t God can forgive us with no suffering and death for the volunteer?

Because of free will it must be this way. Without free will there is no expression of love.

Christ is God and Man. The incarnation makes him able to act for mankind, as a man. Because of his divinity He is sinless. Living the Christlike life, is our joining with that sacrifice; full of charity. Our contrition allows us to receive that gift of forgiveness. If a person does not repent then that person does not live a Christlike life, so the gift of forgiveness is rejected.

 

[javid]

Because of free will it must be this way. Without free will there is no expression of love.

Christ is God and Man. The incarnation makes him able to act for mankind, as a man. Because of his divinity He is sinless. Living the Christlike life, is our joining with that sacrifice; full of charity. Our contrition allows us to receive that gift of forgiveness. If a person does not repent then that person does not live a Christlike life, so the gift of forgiveness is rejected.

Dear Vico

My problem is not on love and free will; it is on justice.

 

[Vico]

Dear Vico

My problem is not on love and free will; it is on justice.

God determines what is just. It is just that the Only Begotton Son of God was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, suffered, was crucified *for us *under Pontius Pilate, and rose again, and ascended into heaven.

 

[javid]

God determines what is just. It is just that the Only Begotton Son of God was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, suffered, was crucified *for us *under Pontius Pilate, and rose again, and ascended into heaven.

Dear Vico

If you accept that a Just Judge can let a sinless one be suffered and crucified for another one, just because God did it before, then it will be possible to accept your view.

 

[jacobaer]

Hi all,

Are we allowed as Catholics to believe that Jesus willingly bore our personal on the Cross and made atonement for our personal sins? Did He atone for all the personal sins of all humanity, for every person who ever lived and will live?

I was told that this is not the Catholic view, that He did not atone for personal sins? We have to atone for our personal sins.

Something doesn’t sound right with that view.

Peace,
Jacobaer

 

[javid]

Hi all,

Are we allowed as Catholics to believe that Jesus willingly bore our personal on the Cross and made atonement for our personal sins? Did He atone for all the personal sins of all humanity, for every person who ever lived and will live?

I was told that this is not the Catholic view, that He did not atone for personal sins? We have to atone for our personal sins.

Something doesn’t sound right with that view.

Peace,
Jacobaer

Hi Jacobaer

Bible says it! Have a look at first page of this thread.

 

[grannymh]

Hi all,

Are we allowed as Catholics to believe that Jesus willingly bore our personal on the Cross and made atonement for our personal sins? Did He atone for all the personal sins of all humanity, for every person who ever lived and will live?

I was told that this is not the Catholic view, that He did not atone for personal sins? We have to atone for our personal sins.

Something doesn’t sound right with that view.

Peace,
Jacobaer

The reality is that each one of us is a true individual person responsible for our free, deliberate choices. (Information source. *CCC *1730-1734) We can commit sin or avoid sin in a personal manner.

Jesus’ free act of atonement makes it possible for us to personally enter heaven.

At the same time, atonement did not take away our natural free will. Therefore, we can sin mortally against God. Mortally means that we are no longer personally in the State of Sanctifying Grace. Though Jesus atoned for all; not all automatically enter heaven. When we are in the State of Mortal Sin, we personally have to seek God’s forgiveness and mercy. In doing that, we also need to repair the damage we did to our personal soul, that is, we do penance as a pledge of our return to God.

We, sinners like Adam, do not have the divine power to atone or make amends on God’s level. We need Jesus Christ! “For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life,” (1Corinthians 15: 22) Jesus’ atonement brings to us the first gift of Sanctifying Grace, Sacrament of Baptism, so that our sorrow and repentance is efficacious. (Information source:* CCC* 405)

 

[jacobaer]

Thanks javid.

I know what the Bible says. We have to be careful when we try and say what the Bible means. We have to be careful about interpretations, especially on just a single verse. It could mean something different from what we think it means.

That is why I am asking about the teaching of the Catholic Church, the Church that Christ founded.

Peace,
jacobaer

 

[jacobaer]

Thank, grannmh,

Yes, I am familiar with that Church teaching, and assent to it.

But I have discovered that there is a wide latitude within the Church on the meaning of the atonement of Christ on the Cross.

So my question to you is, does the Church teach that our Lord made atonement on the Cross for our personal sins?

Did He die for our personal sins, or for a general principle of sin, without it being personal, our personal sins?

Peace,
jacobaer