Sure for sure?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sum_Fidelis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sum_Fidelis

Guest
To avoid any personal harassment I start by telling that I do obey the Church and live as I think is OK. My question,however,is:how do we know for sure that certain things are sin? We know the Commandments,we know what Jesus told us to do,but how can we be absolutely sure that the Church has got it right? Smoking was a big sin when I was young,but when a priest tell you that with a pipe in his mouth it kind of look a bit strange. But I use as a example the good old masturbation. That seems to pop up now and then on this forum. OK,it is a sin,but if we read the Catechism,and I hope as much catholics as possible do so,we have close to each other two views. 2352 says that it is “almost” acceptable considering circumstances,2396 says it is a mortal sin! Can’t the church make up their mind. (I am born in Ireland,so I do know what it is to be catholic,we moved to Finland when I was young.) I am a lawyer and that means that I must use what I can,and do my best,and from time time,be a bit “creative” meaning that I of course never lie,but I choose the questions I need to ask. I read my Bible every day,and yet I have not found one single line forbidding masturbation. All that I know is in the Bible is what Ona did (O.T) but that is about it. So,the Church is Christ earthly body and we as members of the parish are “in” that body,but can anyone for sure,100% sure,and be honest now,that masturbations is wrong. That smoking is wrong,and I can think of many other things that are not forbidden in the Bible but the Church do say it is a sin. A marriage is to get children,(and try not enjoy sex to much?) but where is the true love between a man and a woman? Somewhere in between? I have a health problem that means I need to take medicine that is consider to be a illegal drug if one uses it wrong,how can I be sure I don’t sin? I know I don’t do anything against the law,but still? The law can’t be more important then what the church teaches,yet St.Paul tells us to obey the “earthly” law. So if someone could explain to me how I can be sure for sure what is a sin and what is not. 🤷
 
its better to plant your seed in the belly of a whore than to spill it on the ground.(scriptural)now we know to put seed inwhore is mortal sin doesnt that explain question.There is nothing wrong in enjoying sex.Paul VI use to tutor young married couples to try to get much enjoyment out of sex.(before he was Pope).True love is the sharing in each others joys,sorrows,ect.Also in the giving of oneself to the other totally in the marital act.the church believes the physical act is as much important as any other part of the marital union.Follow the doctors directions.Again illegal drugs arent necessarily sinful.To excel the speed limit is against civil law but not always against moral law.The more you get into the faith the easier it is to discern what is sin and what isnt.
 
So if someone could explain to me how I can be sure for sure what is a sin and what is not. 🤷
The outer limits are set for us in the Decalogue.

From there we can gain a clear understanding from the Pastoral Constitution on The Church in the Modern World:
  1. In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience when necessary speaks to his heart: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law written by God; to obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged.(9) Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths.(10) In a wonderful manner conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by love of God and neighbor.(11) In fidelity to conscience, Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth, and for the genuine solution to the numerous problems which arise in the life of individuals from social relationships. Hence the more right conscience holds sway, the more persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and strive to be guided by the objective norms of morality. Conscience frequently errs from invincible ignorance without losing its dignity. The same cannot be said for a man who cares but little for truth and goodness, or for a conscience which by degrees grows practically sightless as a result of habitual sin.
Remember this is dense language, so you may want to ponder the deeper meanings of what is said here and discuss.

From there I would direct you to* Veritatis Splendor* which constitutes one of the most comprehensive and philosophical teachings of moral theology in the Catholic tradition. It expresses the position of the Catholic Church regarding fundamentals of the Church’s role in moral teaching.
 
but how can we be absolutely sure that the Church has got it right?
The Church is given the charism of infaliibility when teaching faith and morals.
Smoking was a big sin when I was young,but when a priest tell you that with a pipe in his mouth it kind of look a bit strange.
The Church has not defined smoking as a sin, when you or anyone else was young nor now. Perhaps your parents told you it was a sin, the Church certainly did not. While it is not very prudent to smoke, it isn’t actually a sin.
we have close to each other two views. 2352 says that it is “almost” acceptable considering circumstances,
No, the Catechism does not say any such thing.
2396 says it is a mortal sin!
So does 2352. That is what “intrinsically and gravely disordered action” means.
Can’t the church make up their mind.
I think this is simply a misunderstanding on your part. the Church is quite clear.
but can anyone for sure,100% sure,and be honest now,that masturbations is wrong.
Yes
That smoking is wrong,and I can think of many other things that are not forbidden in the Bible but the Church do say it is a sin.
The Church doesn’t say smoking is a sin.
A marriage is to get children,(and try not enjoy sex to much?)
The Church doesn’t teach this either. I think that the problem isn’t the Church’s teaching but rather your distorted understanding of Church teaching.
I have a health problem that means I need to take medicine that is consider to be a illegal drug if one uses it wrong,how can I be sure I don’t sin?
If your country legally prescribes this as medication, you are not sinning.
 
Good answers,but I was using masturbation and sex only as a example. I did maybe not explain good enough. (Thats happen when you try to work at the same time) What I did mean was that how can we be 100% sure that the teachings the church give us are what God want us to receive? I give you an other [bad] example. I tell my children to wear glows because it is cold,but in school the teacher says that it is OK to not wear them because it is not so cold outside. OK,this was a example,but I think you understand what I mean. You may wonder why I am asking this,it has nothing to do with lack of faith or me not following what the church teaches. I was actually inspired to ask this from a question to the apolog’s where a man,recently lost his wife,and now don’t know what to do with his urge to sex/masturbation. The thing is clear,I do feel sorry for him,not only for his loss,but for his situation. But there are so many things the that we are not to do,and so little what we are aloud to do. So,are we following what God want,are we following what the apostles want or are we following what the church want. I mean,things has changed pretty much since the days of St.Paul and the others. (And to be exact,we do call our priests “father” even thoug the Bible clearly indicates that we can only call God “father”.) so are there a marginal possibility that someone,not God,has got i wrong? Lust is a mortal sin,but give me chocolate or ice-cream…And if we can enjoy life as long as we don’t go to far,why is sex a targeted issue that we better don’t mention at all? I know I am like a kid in a candy store right now,but I read law-books every day,and they don’t make much sense unless you know why a certain thing is against the law,and I also read my Bible as often as I can,but lately,I am not young anymore,I have find things that the Bible don’t say a thing about,but the church says no-no,you better don’t do that. Recently I defended a man who for some reason I never really got,took one tire from his car so that his wife could not drive to the shop because he tough that she can walk 400 meters. Well,that is not against the law,he can do to his car what ever he want,but I started to think,and,according to my better half,nothing good comes out of that,and maybe she for once are right,but I see to many things forbidden by the church that are OK in the Bible.:hmmm:
 
Just a little note…sort of a “drive by posting”

Smoking can be a sin…at least where it harms your health…especially where excessive…(and smoking cigarettes is very addictive…so some moral theologians have argued that is sinful to start etc)

And “medications” that are illegal drugs in some places but legal where you are …may be sinful or not to use. Just cause something is legal does not make it not sinful…one must use good judgment…
 
I give you an other [bad] example. I tell my children to wear glows because it is cold,but in school the teacher says that it is OK to not wear them because it is not so cold outside.
Relativism. You say it’s cold, the teacher says it’s not as cold as it was.

the belief that truth is in the eye of the beholder. Relativism insists that morality, cultures, and beliefs are all of equal value, meaning, and worth. It asserts that what is true for one person might not be true for another, and each person can decide for himself what is true, good, and right. Popular expressions of relativism include comments such as, “This is true for me–and so I believe it” and “What’s right for you might not be right for me.”

In his homily at the Mass preceding the conclave that quickly elected him Pope Benedict XVI, then-Cardinal Ratzinger said that “relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and ‘swept along by every wind of teaching,’ looks like the only attitude [acceptable] to today’s standards.” He warned: “We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.”

In Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions, then-Cardinal Ratzinger addresses relativistic assaults on truth and meaning. He is especially critical of the commonly held belief that truth cannot be known–or, if it can, it can only be “true” for certain people, not for everyone-I think this is a philosophy especially prevalent in Scandinavian countries? He writes that “to lay claim to truth for one religion’s particular expressions of faith appears today, not merely presumptuous, but an indication of insufficient enlightenment.” And he adds that this relativism “is the most profound difficulty of our age.”

In a fitting turn of phrase, he describes this as “the dogma of relativism”–a dogma that despises the Judeo-Christian tradition. A dogmatic dislike of orthodox Christianity is, of course, prevalent in Western culture. As Benedict XVI points out at length, it poses many challenges, especially when it comes to proclaiming the Gospel. It’s one thing to argue that Christianity it true when the culture accepts that truth can be known; it’s another matter altogether when many people believe (often absolutely) that absolute truth is about as real as Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

Increasingly, those who proclaim the truth of Jesus Christ and His Church are fitted with tidy labels in an attempt to dismiss them from the public square. The Holy Father observes that “the belief that there is indeed truth, valid and binding truth, within history itself, in the person of Jesus Christ and in the faith of the Church, is referred to as fundamentalism.” He states, “The Christian has to resist this ideology” of false equality, relativism, and bigotry.

Moral relativism is certainly not limited to the non-Catholic realm. Many within the Catholic Church have fallen prey to the seductive call of relativism. This has led to a serious crisis among certain moral theologians who have embraced the separation between will and act, resulting in a morality essentially free of the reality of sin, shot through with “sincerity” and coated in talk of “complexity.”

In turn, some Catholics have concluded that “freedom” involves choosing for oneself what is true or false. Pope John Paul II addressed this misreading of truth and morality in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae (“The Gospel of Life”), where he stated:
This view of freedom leads to a serious distortion of life in society. If the promotion of the self is understood in terms of absolute autonomy, people inevitably reach the point of rejecting one another. Everyone else is considered an enemy from whom one has to defend oneself. . . . In this way, any reference to common values and to a truth absolutely binding on everyone is lost, and social life ventures on to the shifting sands of complete relativism. At that point, everything is negotiable, everything is open to bargaining: even the first of the fundamental rights, the right to life. (par 20)

In Dominus Iesus (“On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church”), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made special mention of the challenge of relativism. It did not provide easy answers, but instead insisted that the only real cure was the clear and unwavering proclamation of the Gospel: “As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ” (par 5).

In a world filled with doubt about the existence of truth, the Church and her members must continually introduce the seeking and the lost to the One who is “the Way, and the Truth, and the Life” (Jn 14:6). And Pope Benedict XVI will undoubtedly be leading the way in confronting the dictatorship of relativism with the freedom of Truth.
 
But there are so many things the that we are not to do,and so little what we are aloud to do.
Not true, Pope John Paul II explains that the Church doesn’t dictate, rather it proposes. The Church doesn’t disallow certain behaviour, it informs us as to the repercussions of certain behaviour, to divorce us from God, to create problems in our lives.

The Church teaches us the best way to act in order to be happy. Much of this truth is known to us (do not steal, do not kill, do not commit adultery etc), but much of it needs explaining.
So,are we following what God want,are we following what the apostles want or are we following what the church want. I mean,things has changed pretty much since the days of St.Paul and the others.
The point being that some truths do not change, they are not relative, they are objective. It’s not about what the Church “wants”, it is about what is best for us.
(And to be exact,we do call our priests “father” even thoug the Bible clearly indicates that we can only call God “father”.)
catholic.com/library/Call_No_Man_Father.asp
so are there a marginal possibility that someone,not God,has got i wrong?
No. It makes so much sense, you just have to understand the reasoning behind it. Society seems to be moving away from it, don’t get caught in the current. Only dead fish can only swim down stream.
Lust is a mortal sin,but give me chocolate or ice-cream…And if we can enjoy life as long as we don’t go to far,why is sex a targeted issue that we better don’t mention at all?
Sex is not an issue that can’t be mentioned, it is positively taught. All our appetites are given us for good, but they must be used for the good and kept in check!
 
  1. The importance of this interior dialogue of man with himself can never be adequately appreciated. But it is also a dialogue of man with God, the author of the law, the primordial image and final end of man. Saint Bonaventure teaches that “conscience is like God’s herald and messenger; it does not command things on its own authority, but commands them as coming from God’s authority, like a herald when he proclaims the edict of the king. This is why conscience has binding force”.103 Thus it can be said that conscience bears witness to man’s own rectitude or iniquity to man himself but, together with this and indeed even beforehand, conscience is the witness of God himself, whose voice and judgment penetrate the depths of man’s soul, calling him fortiter et suaviter to obedience. “Moral conscience does not close man within an insurmountable and impenetrable solitude, but opens him to the call, to the voice of God. In this, and not in anything else, lies the entire mystery and the dignity of the moral conscience: in being the place, the sacred place where God speaks to man”.104
59…The judgment of conscience is a practical judgment, a judgment which makes known what man must do or not do, or which assesses an act already performed by him. It is a judgment which applies to a concrete situation the rational conviction that one must love and do good and avoid evil. This first principle of practical reason is part of the natural law; indeed it constitutes the very foundation of the natural law, inasmuch as it expresses that primordial insight about good and evil, that reflection of God’s creative wisdom which, like an imperishable spark (scintilla animae), shines in the heart of every man. But whereas the natural law discloses the objective and universal demands of the moral good, conscience is the application of the law to a particular case; this application of the law thus becomes an inner dictate for the individual, a summons to do what is good in this particular situation. Conscience thus formulates moral obligation in the light of the natural law: it is the obligation to do what the individual, through the workings of his conscience, knows to be a good he is called to do here and now. The universality of the law and its obligation are acknowledged, not suppressed, once reason has established the law’s application in concrete present circumstances. The judgment of conscience states “in an ultimate way” whether a certain particular kind of behaviour is in conformity with the law; it formulates the proximate norm of the morality of a voluntary act, “applying the objective law to a particular case”.105
  1. Like the natural law itself and all practical knowledge, the judgment of conscience also has an imperative character: man must act in accordance with it. If man acts against this judgment or, in a case where he lacks certainty about the rightness and goodness of a determined act, still performs that act, he stands condemned by his own conscience, the proximate norm of personal morality. The dignity of this rational forum and the authority of its voice and judgments derive from the truth about moral good and evil, which it is called to listen to and to express. This truth is indicated by the “divine law”, the universal and objective norm of morality. The judgment of conscience does not establish the law; rather it bears witness to the authority of the natural law and of the practical reason with reference to the supreme good, whose attractiveness the human person perceives and whose commandments he accepts. “Conscience is not an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what is good and what is evil. Rather there is profoundly imprinted upon it a principle of obedience vis-à-vis the objective norm which establishes and conditions the correspondence of its decisions with the commands and prohibitions which are at the basis of human behaviour”.106
  2. The truth about moral good, as that truth is declared in the law of reason, is practically and concretely recognized by the judgment of conscience, which leads one to take responsibility for the good or the evil one has done. If man does evil, the just judgment of his conscience remains within him as a witness to the universal truth of the good, as well as to the malice of his particular choice. But the verdict of conscience remains in him also as a pledge of hope and mercy: while bearing witness to the evil he has done, it also reminds him of his need, with the help of God’s grace, to ask forgiveness, to do good and to cultivate virtue constantly.
**Consequently in the practical judgment of conscience, which imposes on the person the obligation to perform a given act, the link between freedom and truth is made manifest. **Precisely for this reason conscience expresses itself in acts of “judgment” which reflect the truth about the good, and not in arbitrary “decisions”. The maturity and responsibility of these judgments — and, when all is said and done, of the individual who is their subject — are not measured by the liberation of the conscience from objective truth, in favour of an alleged autonomy in personal decisions, but, on the contrary, by an insistent search for truth and by allowing oneself to be guided by that truth in one’s actions.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor_en.html
 
  1. Called to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, “the true light that enlightens everyone” (Jn 1:9), people become “light in the Lord” and “children of light” (Eph 5:8), and are made holy by “obedience to the truth” (1 Pet 1:22).
This obedience is not always easy. As a result of that mysterious original sin, committed at the prompting of Satan, the one who is “a liar and the father of lies” (Jn 8:44), man is constantly tempted to turn his gaze away from the living and true God in order to direct it towards idols (cf. 1 Thes 1:9), exchanging “the truth about God for a lie” (Rom 1:25). Man’s capacity to know the truth is also darkened, and his will to submit to it is weakened. Thus, giving himself over to relativism and scepticism (cf. Jn 18:38), he goes off in search of an illusory freedom apart from truth itself.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor_en.html
 
Very impressive answers. It is a honor to be around people like you here on CAF. And I do obey the church,I pray my Rosary every day,my Angelus in the morning.at noon and in the evening and end my evening prayer with Our Blessed Virgins Prayer (Luke 1:46-54) and do my best to be a “good catholic” what ever that may mean.
But the thing is that I am getting older,the shadows are lengthen and I know I must stop working soon because I can’t do 18 hour days anymore,and as a old man I am afraid. Like in the song from a musical that I reckon no one here remembers,the main lyrics goes “to tired to live,to afraid to die” and I don’t know if I have lived one single day of my life. But keep answering,somewhere I maybe find what I am looking for,mercy and forgiveness and peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top