Pope: God sent his son to show mercy to sinners, not punish them

[Withburga]

So you are saying this teaching is from God, and given to us through the Catholic Church, and is non-negotiable, ?

No, the Church has said that, through a defining act in the form of a dogmatic constitution.

I know what my friend tells me about the Muslim faith and their God and it does not sound like our Creators are the same God.?

What your friend says does not add or detract from what the Church teaches.

For one thing their God does not include the Son of God. ?

Naturally, because if it did they would be Christian.

So when did this teaching arrive, after Vatican II or before?

What difference would that make? Do you believe that, contrary to Jesus’s promise, the gates of hell did prevail against the Church, and that we can safely ignore definitive teaching after some point in our history? (Effectively, the sedevacantist position).

Given that this thread is about God sending his Son to show mercy to sinners, can you explain why it is such a significant problem for you that not all sinners are Christian? Remember the Church’s teachings on baptism by blood and baptism by desire, which clearly articulate that one does not have to be a Christian by affiliation or by theological insight to be able to receive the fruits of the incarnation. That particular doctrine was recorded as normative in the annotations to the first edition of the Douay-Rheims Bible in 1582, so is hardly a new idea. See the Catholic Encyclopedia for an analysis of the apostolic and patristic origins of the doctrine of baptism by desire and by blood:

newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm#x

I note that you make most of your points by proof texting a verse of scripture. The way that you do this - not the fact of it, since Catholics should use scripture in their apologetics, obviously enough, but the way you do it, which is to ignore the broader context of 2000 years of magisterial teaching - is problematic, and has a Protestant quality to it. I admire the knowledge of scripture possessed by many Protestants, but it is precisely because the whole of scripture represents challenges and insights - which cannot always be easily understood by surface reading or limited quotation - that we need a magisterium to establish Catholic truth for us. Instead of wasting energy on trying to find ways to ignore magisterial teaching, we are better served by submitting our wills to that teaching and praying for the insight to understand it.

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Those who object to Jesus’ mercy toward sinners often create an “image of God that impedes them from enjoying his real presence,” the pope said Sept. 7 at his weekly general audience.

“Some carve out a ‘do-it-yourself’ faith that reduces God to the limited space of their own desires and their own convictions,” the pope said.

cnstopstories.com/2016/09/07…t-punish-them/

Instead of placing limits on God’s mercy that the Church does not impose, why not rejoice in the fact that the incarnation has brought the possibility of salvation to all peoples?

In Christ,
Withburga

 

[JimR-OCDS]

JosieN

So you are talking about any sin committed that could be mortal but is not because they did not commit it with full knowledge and consent.

The Church teaches what conditions must be present for a sin to be mortal.

Note, its a guideline and not infallible.

.

I believe only God can know if it was committed without full knowledge and consent so we should be very careful to not assume it is not mortal. To die with this type of sin could be very dangerous for the soul.

The person will know if they had full knowledge when they committed the sin and with free will and consent.

A priest can also help a person discern this.

Full knowledge requires more than just being told, that what they’re doing is grave sin.

Full knowledge requires understanding the nature of the sin and how it offends God.

Jim

 

[JimG]

see my signature. that says all that is truly necessary to say about mercy.

regarding the Muslims and their denial of the divinity of Jesus, recall the great heresy of the 4th century that was Arianism … the heart of which was the denial of Jesus’ divinity. While it was overcome within the Church, it is clear there were those pockets of Arianism that never went away and at least one of those must have been a substantial influence on Mohammed.

I think you are right about the Arian influence on Mohammed. What it means is that Islam is essentially a Christian heresy.

 

[JosieN]

No, the Church has said that, through a defining act in the form of a dogmatic constitution.

What your friend says does not add or detract from what the Church teaches.

Naturally, because if it did they would be Christian.

What difference would that make? Do you believe that, contrary to Jesus’s promise, the gates of hell did prevail against the Church, and that we can safely ignore definitive teaching after some point in our history? (Effectively, the sedevacantist position).

Given that this thread is about God sending his Son to show mercy to sinners, can you explain why it is such a significant problem for you that not all sinners are Christian? Remember the Church’s teachings on baptism by blood and baptism by desire, which clearly articulate that one does not have to be a Christian by affiliation or by theological insight to be able to receive the fruits of the incarnation. That particular doctrine was recorded as normative in the annotations to the first edition of the Douay-Rheims Bible in 1582, so is hardly a new idea. See the Catholic Encyclopedia for an analysis of the apostolic and patristic origins of the doctrine of baptism by desire and by blood:

newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm#x

I note that you make most of your points by proof texting a verse of scripture. The way that you do this - not the fact of it, since Catholics should use scripture in their apologetics, obviously enough, but the way you do it, which is to ignore the broader context of 2000 years of magisterial teaching - is problematic, and has a Protestant quality to it. I admire the knowledge of scripture possessed by many Protestants, but it is precisely because the whole of scripture represents challenges and insights - which cannot always be easily understood by surface reading or limited quotation - that we need a magisterium to establish Catholic truth for us. Instead of wasting energy on trying to find ways to ignore magisterial teaching, we are better served by submitting our wills to that teaching and praying for the insight to understand it.

Instead of placing limits on God’s mercy that the Church does not impose, why not rejoice in the fact that the incarnation has brought the possibility of salvation to all peoples?

In Christ,
Withburga

Of course I believe there is the possibility of salvation for all peoples, that is why I pray for their conversion to the one true faith, which is Christianity. This is why the Son of God came into to world, to bring salvation to all. But I do not think we can leave out the part that says we must believe in Jesus Christ and be baptized, as this is an important part and is necessary for conversion.

Baptism in the Church CCC

1226 From the very day of Pentecost the Church has celebrated and administered holy Baptism. Indeed St. Peter declares to the crowd astounded by his preaching: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."26 The apostles and their collaborators offer Baptism to anyone who believed in Jesus: Jews, the God-fearing, pagans.27 Always, Baptism is seen as connected with faith: “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household,” St. Paul declared to his jailer in Philippi. And the narrative continues, the jailer "was baptized at once, with all his family."28

1227 According to the Apostle Paul, the believer enters through Baptism into communion with Christ’s death, is buried with him, and rises with him:

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.29
The baptized have "put on Christ."30 Through the Holy Spirit, Baptism is a bath that purifies, justifies, and sanctifies.31

The Church’s teachings on baptism by blood and baptism by desire are often mentioned as ways non Christians can enter heaven. I do not think it is a reliable way to enter heaven, do you? How many Muslims, atheists, Jews, etc. desire to be baptized? If they did I am sure they could find a Church and a priest who would guide them in that direction. They could do it today if they wanted to.

I use the teachings of the Catholic Catechism in most of my replies but I also like to use Bible teachings, The reason I use them is because if I state my opinion on something I like to back it up so it does not appear I made it up. Also, those two books are on my bookshelf and I read them often. Do you think I should not read the Bible and CCC, and only focus on the magisterial? Since I do not have that on my shelf, that would be difficult for me to do, and the learning of my Christian faith would suffer.

I want all Muslims saved from their false beliefs, and that is why I am concerned and pray for their conversion. I believe Jesus Christ is the way to heaven. All those who wish to be saved and enter heaven must believe He is the Son of God and be baptized. Do you believe this also? There may be a few who desire baptism but can’t, or die for the faith, and become baptized by blood, but realistically, how many? Telling everyone they will get to heaven no matter what they do or believe is nice, but is it true? How do we really know there is no limit on God’s mercy? If this is true, then why bother with conversion, everyone is already saved.

 

[Withburga]

But I do not think we can leave out the part that says we must believe in Jesus Christ and be baptized, as this is an important part and is necessary for conversion.

Who left that out?

And what I think - or what you think - is not the issue here. The issue is, what does the Church teach?

Do you fully appreciate the relationship between scripture, tradition and magisterial teaching, and the fact that the meaning that the Church has given them is not changed or added to by our desire or ability to easily understand them?

The the Church’s teachings on baptism by blood and baptism by desire are often mentioned as ways non Christians can enter heaven. I do not think it is a reliable way to enter heaven, do you?

How many Muslims, atheists, Jews, etc. desire to be baptized? If they did I am sure they could find a Church and a priest who would guide them in that direction. They could do it today if they wanted to.

And here’s a case in point. Respectfully, the above demonstrates that you don’t understand what baptism of desire and baptism by blood mean. You should do a little research, especially if you are engaged in interreligious dialogue as you state.

Do you think I should not read the Bible and CCC, and only focus on the magisterial?

The CCC is a summary of magisterial teaching - necessarily brief, but it cites many magisterial documents that help to explain the complexities of the faith in more detail. The broader teaching of the Church is not an optional extra which we can use only when we please.

Since I do not have that on my shelf, that would be difficult for me to do, and the learning of my Christian faith would suffer.

Use the CCC online at the Vatican website, and follow up its references to magisterial documents using a web search. Nearly everything of note is available online. And the idea that your Christian faith might suffer by referring to magisterial teaching is truly bizarre. As I said before, it sounds very Protestant.

The whole point of Christ’s Church is that it provides for us a central authority that can give us definitive answers, and it is not swayed by what we happen to think, or find easy to believe, nor is it merely an optional source of information that can be avoided on our personal faith journey.

Telling everyone they will get to heaven no matter what they do or believe is nice, but is it true?

Since nobody said this - certainly not me - why have you suggested it? I’m a seminarian. Do you think I’m at seminary because I’m indifferent to evangelisation, and that I’m perversely going through the demands of priestly formation because I believe that my efforts as a priest will be wasted and unnecessary?

Josie, your entire post is non-responsive to the point I was making, namely that contrary to your earlier comments the Church has definitively and infallibly taught that Jews and Muslims worship the same God as we do, however limited their understanding of Trinitology may be, and however different their broader theology is.

Rather than address that - and perhaps admit that you were mistaken in saying otherwise - you have summoned an army of straw men for me to fight so as to deflect from that single point. I don’t know why this is such a problem for you. Let me try and bring this back on topic once again by repeating what I said in my previous post, with a little bolding to make my point:

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Those who object to Jesus’ mercy toward sinners often create an “image of God that impedes them from enjoying his real presence,” the pope said Sept. 7 at his weekly general audience.

“Some carve out a ‘do-it-yourself’ faith that reduces God to the limited space of their own desires and their own convictions,” the pope said.

cnstopstories.com/2016/09/07…t-punish-them/

We all struggle with Catholic truth at times. But we can’t limit it just because it makes things easier for us. And we can’t place a limit on either God’s mercy or God’s justice, nor should we wish to.

I may or may not respond again, but I certainly won’t if you insist on irrelevant arguments or excursions on board the tangent express.

Sincere best wishes to you.

In Christ,
Withburga

 

[JosieN]

Who left that out?

And what I think - or what you think - is not the issue here. The issue is, what does the Church teach?

Do you fully appreciate the relationship between scripture, tradition and magisterial teaching, and the fact that the meaning that the Church has given them is not changed or added to by our desire or ability to easily understand them?

And here’s a case in point. Respectfully, the above demonstrates that you don’t understand what baptism of desire and baptism by blood mean. You should do a little research, especially if you are engaged in interreligious dialogue as you state.

The CCC is a summary of magisterial teaching - necessarily brief, but it cites many magisterial documents that help to explain the complexities of the faith in more detail. The broader teaching of the Church is not an optional extra which we can use only when we please.

Use the CCC online at the Vatican website, and follow up its references to magisterial documents using a web search. Nearly everything of note is available online. And the idea that your Christian faith might suffer by referring to magisterial teaching is truly bizarre. As I said before, it sounds very Protestant.

The whole point of Christ’s Church is that it provides for us a central authority that can give us definitive answers, and it is not swayed by what we happen to think, or find easy to believe, nor is it merely an optional source of information that can be avoided on our personal faith journey.

Since nobody said this - certainly not me - why have you suggested it? I’m a seminarian. Do you think I’m at seminary because I’m indifferent to evangelisation, and that I’m perversely going through the demands of priestly formation because I believe that my efforts as a priest will be wasted and unnecessary?

Josie, your entire post is non-responsive to the point I was making, namely that contrary to your earlier comments the Church has definitively and infallibly taught that Jews and Muslims worship the same God as we do, however limited their understanding of Trinitology may be, and however different their broader theology is.

Rather than address that - and perhaps admit that you were mistaken in saying otherwise - you have summoned an army of straw men for me to fight so as to deflect from that single point. I don’t know why this is such a problem for you. Let me try and bring this back on topic once again by repeating what I said in my previous post, with a little bolding to make my point:

We all struggle with Catholic truth at times. But we can’t limit it just because it makes things easier for us. And we can’t place a limit on either God’s mercy or God’s justice, nor should we wish to.

I may or may not respond again, but I certainly won’t if you insist on irrelevant arguments or excursions on board the tangent express.

Sincere best wishes to you.

In Christ,
Withburga

I think we have a misunderstanding here. I will agree my understanding on baptism by blood and desire may not be accurate, but then why not explain it to mean your terms, if my terms are not sufficient. I would appreciate it as I am learning.

I did not say we should place a limit on God’s mercy, I said how do we really know there is no limit on God’s mercy?

So you are saying the Church teaches us Muslims worship the same God, but their understanding of the Trinity is limited, and that is why they do not believe that Jesus is God, and is part of the Trinity. I assume this means that when they reject this teaching it is all just a misunderstanding? I just do not get it. You either believe in the Trinity as taught or you reject it, how can it be both? I do not mean to make you angry, I would like an explanation, as it does confuse me.

To defend this teaching they worship the same God is difficult for me, and not for others, so I apologize if I have too many concerns that do not agree it. I often wonder how Jesus Christ feels when we exclude Him from the Trinity or say that He did not die on the cross for our sins, Muslims do not believe that either. How would God the Father react to those who continue to preach this and defend it?

I do not know what you are learning at your seminary, and my understanding may not be what yours is, but I wish you all the best, and may God Bless you and give you the knowledge He desires for you.

 

[Robert_Bay]

MODERATOR NOTICE

This thread is wandering. Please return to the topic of:
God sent his son to show mercy to sinners, not punish them

 

[philipl]

Of course this his rationalization to try an appease himself for the act of adultery which he commits.

It suggests, and I can’t know for sure, that he has belief in God, but does not have faith.

Jim

But if Jesus came here to show God’s mercy instead of punishment doesnt my friend have a good argument?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

But if Jesus came here to show God’s mercy instead of punishment doesnt my friend have a good argument?

His passion and death is the sign of what Jesus saved us from.

When we sin, we separate ourselves from God and without God, we will suffer.

One can not just say I believe in Jesus, but not follow His commandments.

If we go ahead and freely commit sin, thinking that we’ll be saved anyway, we commit the sin of presumption.

Jesus commandment to love God with our entire being, means following His commandments.

You can not commit adultery and believe you are without sin.

Jim

 

[philipl]

His passion and death is the sign of what Jesus saved us from.

When we sin, we separate ourselves from God and without God, we will suffer.

One can not just say I believe in Jesus, but not follow His commandments.

If we go ahead and freely commit sin, thinking that we’ll be saved anyway, we commit the sin of presumption.

Jesus commandment to love God with our entire being, means following His commandments.

You can not commit adultery and believe you are without sin.

Jim

If I said he doesn’t believe he hasn’t sinned then I wrote that wrong. He clearly believe’s he is a sinner and that we are all sinners. But since he is “saved” those sins are forgiven. And it does seem to me that Catholics are starting to think the same way. Sex outside of marriage, that’s ok as long as you’re in love. Had an abortion, well are we to judge?

 

[philipl]

As I would imagine that Muslims are not ‘feeling the forgiveness’ when horrendous things have been done to them in the name of Christ. Regardless, both of our faiths must hold us to peace and forgiveness. And we are created by and are loved by the same God, I would expect that the standards are the same for both of us.

I havent been reading in the papers where christians are cuttting off muslims heads. Nor are they burning the alive or throwing off the tops of building. Havent read Chrisitan skyjacking planes and flying them into buildings.

 

[irishpatrick]

I believe it would do us all well to remember that we are living in a Year of Mercy, as declared by Pope Francis, which ends in 67 days. This is a time to avail ourselves of such a great gift.

The end of the Year of Mercy does not mean it is the end of our ability to seek God’s Mercy, yet we do KNOW that at some point God’s Mercy changes to God’s Justice, and we are always wise to assume that can happen at any time. It could easily be that the time of God’s Justice begins as soon as the Year of Mercy ends, or the day of God’s Justice might be a 1,000 years from now–we do not know, yet we do know that we are to live as though the day of God’s Justice is quite near.

Rather than arguing about ancillary topics, perhaps we should all focus more on accepting God’s Mercy?

If my memory serves me well, in the 2,000+ years of Church history, there has never been a Jubilee Year of Mercy, until now. Such things are not accidents.

 

[JosieN]

I believe it would do us all well to remember that we are living in a Year of Mercy, as declared by Pope Francis, which ends in 67 days. This is a time to avail ourselves of such a great gift.

The end of the Year of Mercy does not mean it is the end of our ability to seek God’s Mercy, yet we do KNOW that at some point God’s Mercy changes to God’s Justice, and we are always wise to assume that can happen at any time. It could easily be that the time of God’s Justice begins as soon as the Year of Mercy ends, or the day of God’s Justice might be a 1,000 years from now–we do not know, yet we do know that we are to live as though the day of God’s Justice is quite near.

Rather than arguing about ancillary topics, perhaps we should all focus more on accepting God’s Mercy?

If my memory serves me well, in the 2,000+ years of Church history, there has never been a Jubilee Year of Mercy, until now. Such things are not accidents.

I agree, but let’s first ask God for forgiveness for our sins and then ask for Jesus to have mercy on us. We will then be worthy to receive and accept God’s mercy, too many assume mercy is given without asking for forgiveness or being sorry for their sins, and they do not even know they should stop sinning.

 

[irishpatrick]

I agree, but let’s first ask God for forgiveness for our sins and then ask for Jesus to have mercy on us. We will then be worthy to receive and accept God’s mercy, too many assume mercy is given without asking for forgiveness or being sorry for their sins, and they do not even know they should stop sinning.

Well said–

I must say, I am surprised at the lack of talk the Year of Mercy has received. It is as if it isn’t happening.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I agree, but let’s first ask God for forgiveness for our sins and then ask for Jesus to have mercy on us. We will then be worthy to receive and accept God’s mercy, too many assume mercy is given without asking for forgiveness or being sorry for their sins, and they do not even know they should stop sinning.

Keep in mind that God had mercy on us when He became man in Jesus Christ, yet while we were unrepentant sinners.

God’s mercy is beyond our understanding.

Jim

 

[irishpatrick]

Keep in mind that God had mercy on us when He became man in Jesus Christ, yet while we were unrepentant sinners.

God’s mercy is beyond our understanding.

Jim

God helps us understand.

Also, do not forget that Jesus (God)) told the woman to go and sin no more. If sin did not matter, there’d be no reason to avoid it.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

God helps us understand.

True, but not everything has been revealed.

Jim

 

[irishpatrick]

True, but not everything has been revealed.

Jim

All that we need has been revealed. We don’t need to know everything there is to know.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

All that we need has been revealed. We don’t need to know everything there is to know.

Then why does God continue to reveal himself to us ?

Believe it or not, we know more today than they knew in the early centuries of the Church.

The Church evolves spiritually and continues to do so.

Jim

 

[JosieN]

Keep in mind that God had mercy on us when He became man in Jesus Christ, yet while we were unrepentant sinners.

God’s mercy is beyond our understanding.

Jim

If the merits of the sacrifice on the cross are not needed for the grace of mercy to be given to us, then why would God send His Son into the world to die on the cross for us?
Jesus Christ came to die on the cross for our sins and if we repent and are forgiven, then His mercy is given to us. Isn’t that the Christian belief?