P
phil_alton
Guest
Humm… one thought comes to mind: have you considered that he might be in purgatory? I hear it’s pretty painful in there too! And, if he was apologising, that implies repentance?
- Status
P
phil_alton
Guest
This is the way I see it:
You say that they try to do God’s will - if this is the case, and they followed their conscience in rejecting church teaching, then they were not acting will full free will, and their sin was not mortal
However, if this person knew what the church teaches, and, not only rejected that, but also rejected the urgings of their conscience, then they are surly not even trying to do God’s will (as our conscience helps us to discern God’s will)!
Someone who really love God, tries to do His will. Even if they get it wrong, they’re not guilty of mortal sin, as they did not act with full freedom of their own will. If they are in a state of mortal sin, then they do not want to do the will of God, nor do they Love God! If they committed mortal sin, but love God, then they will be perfectly contrite, and thus not damned!
Hopefully these thoughts make some sense, and are of some benefit!
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
I think anybody who is standing at the judgment seat sees themselves in the light of divine holiness. That is, we judge ourselves.
Matthew 12:37 NIV
My father said things like "I can’t believe how cruel and stupid I’ve been!’; “I’ve been an absolute mongrel to you!”; “All I was expected to do was to look after my own family, and I didn’t even do that!”; “There’s no hope for me…”; “I did it deliberately (ie. destroyed my confidence)…”
Yet five minutes before he died, he wouldn’t have admitted those things in a million years.
So he was judging himself. I think even someone like Adolf Hitler sees himself as he is, and would have judged himself in “…his (own) words…”. The difference between him, most of the high ranking Nazis, and Albert Speer (almost alone admitting guilt) was that Speer admitted, “in his (own) words”, during the Nuremburg trials “My life is a desert…”. He at least was condemning himself prior to death, and therefore might have had a chance at salvation.
As for apologising, I think he was sent to apologise. I don’t think it was his idea. He’d made his decision about God years before - he thought He didn’t exist. He was wrong.
And I still remember the departing scream, and it was sheer terror. He even seemed to be brought closer so I’d get the message, as I was an atheist in those days, and not living a particularly great life.
I think Catholics pin a bit too much hope on Purgatory. I believe it exists, but I also think those who are there are still in the minority.
J
John_Martin
Guest
It might be good here to see what a Doctor of the Church (my friend Thomas) says here, and then proceed from that.
He writes that “it is manifest that he who adheres to the teaching of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches. Otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold, and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will. Hence it is evident that a heretic, who obstinately disbelieves one article of faith, is not prepared to follow the teaching of the Church in all things; but if he is not obstinate, he is no longer in heresy but only in error. Therefore it is clear that such a heretic with regard to one article has no faith in the other articles, but only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will” [his own will being the ruler of what is true or untrue teaching is greater than the Church sent and empowered by Jesus, his own will being the truth decider rather than Jesus - he will not listen to the one’s Jesus sent, but only listens to his own will and reason]. [Summa Theologica: Part 2; Question 5, Article 3 - St Thomas Aquinas]
Some (perhaps many) in the Church do not understand the “infallibility of the teaching of the Church” - do not understand that the Holy Spirit is indeed inspiring the Magisterium infallibly, and view the many rulings about life (such as contraception) to be somewhat personal convictions of various church leaders. They view these rulings more as “personal decisions of the personal reason”. And, in this society based upon self-governance, we vote for our laws, vote for right and wrong. So, American popular “opinion”, popular “conviction”, currently approves of birth control and abortion. In our association with this society (being Catholics who live in the American culture) we have been raised by this American culture to consider “Catholic Culture” as “foreign” - we are as Catholics in a “Kingdom”, not in a democracy. If this is the case, Catholics practicing contraception are doing so unwittingly, thus not being in “heresy but only in error”, and they would be in purgatory. But this does show that we all need to learn and understand our Identity as Catholics. We need to understand we are a People that is different than the society in which we live - we are “in the world, but not of the world”, we are aliens in the lands where we live with a different government than the culture surrounding us (1Peter).
Our King and his Magisterium is our government and our rule. We are His, we are not our own. Our lives are His, not our own. When we say, “Thy will be done”, we are saying, “I am with you, Father, as your Son was with you; You are my Father and I will to be a son of my Father doing and believing all the same things I see Your Son doing and believing”. The Church is Jesus speaking when it rules against contraception. If we know that, but still choose contraception, et.al, in spite of knowing, then we are committing and promoting mortal or grave sin. This person is not yearning for the true God in this life, this person is yearning for the god of his personal will and personal opinion, not for the God found in being one with the Church.
John Martin
He writes that “it is manifest that he who adheres to the teaching of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches. Otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold, and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will. Hence it is evident that a heretic, who obstinately disbelieves one article of faith, is not prepared to follow the teaching of the Church in all things; but if he is not obstinate, he is no longer in heresy but only in error. Therefore it is clear that such a heretic with regard to one article has no faith in the other articles, but only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will” [his own will being the ruler of what is true or untrue teaching is greater than the Church sent and empowered by Jesus, his own will being the truth decider rather than Jesus - he will not listen to the one’s Jesus sent, but only listens to his own will and reason]. [Summa Theologica: Part 2; Question 5, Article 3 - St Thomas Aquinas]
Some (perhaps many) in the Church do not understand the “infallibility of the teaching of the Church” - do not understand that the Holy Spirit is indeed inspiring the Magisterium infallibly, and view the many rulings about life (such as contraception) to be somewhat personal convictions of various church leaders. They view these rulings more as “personal decisions of the personal reason”. And, in this society based upon self-governance, we vote for our laws, vote for right and wrong. So, American popular “opinion”, popular “conviction”, currently approves of birth control and abortion. In our association with this society (being Catholics who live in the American culture) we have been raised by this American culture to consider “Catholic Culture” as “foreign” - we are as Catholics in a “Kingdom”, not in a democracy. If this is the case, Catholics practicing contraception are doing so unwittingly, thus not being in “heresy but only in error”, and they would be in purgatory. But this does show that we all need to learn and understand our Identity as Catholics. We need to understand we are a People that is different than the society in which we live - we are “in the world, but not of the world”, we are aliens in the lands where we live with a different government than the culture surrounding us (1Peter).
Our King and his Magisterium is our government and our rule. We are His, we are not our own. Our lives are His, not our own. When we say, “Thy will be done”, we are saying, “I am with you, Father, as your Son was with you; You are my Father and I will to be a son of my Father doing and believing all the same things I see Your Son doing and believing”. The Church is Jesus speaking when it rules against contraception. If we know that, but still choose contraception, et.al, in spite of knowing, then we are committing and promoting mortal or grave sin. This person is not yearning for the true God in this life, this person is yearning for the god of his personal will and personal opinion, not for the God found in being one with the Church.
John Martin
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
The church used to condone burning at the stake.
I take it that was God speaking through the Church.
I take it that was God speaking through the Church.
J
John_Martin
Guest
Burning at the Stake - hmmm, but would you be able to show this as a ruling of the Magesterium, or was it an opinion of those holding official positions, yet having an inappropriate association in their own culture with the secular world (they using brute force to govern the Kingdom of God while in America we want democractic opinion to rule the Kingdom of God). They were in an unholy union with the culture of the world just as we are here in an unholy union with the culture of the world.
Burning at the stake is not and was never a teaching of the Church, and neither will democratically voted morality be the teaching of the Church.
With all the unholy people that have been and are in the Church, yet look at your Catechism and see if any of their teaching or morality have made it into the “teaching / ruling of the Church”. The Holy Spirit has not failed and will not fail, as promised by Jesus.
I encourage you to consider: do you believe that Jesus by his Spirit kept Peter, John, Paul, etc., from teaching error and inspired them to rule only in truth, in spite of “unofficial error” (such as Peter being two-faced with the Gentiles). Jesus by his Spirit has kept this apostolic promise to them and to their successors down to you and me today. We are with Him in this Church - the teaching will remain good and true because he is here, even if we or priests or bishops, like Peter, do things in error yet turn from them.
John Martin
Burning at the stake is not and was never a teaching of the Church, and neither will democratically voted morality be the teaching of the Church.
With all the unholy people that have been and are in the Church, yet look at your Catechism and see if any of their teaching or morality have made it into the “teaching / ruling of the Church”. The Holy Spirit has not failed and will not fail, as promised by Jesus.
I encourage you to consider: do you believe that Jesus by his Spirit kept Peter, John, Paul, etc., from teaching error and inspired them to rule only in truth, in spite of “unofficial error” (such as Peter being two-faced with the Gentiles). Jesus by his Spirit has kept this apostolic promise to them and to their successors down to you and me today. We are with Him in this Church - the teaching will remain good and true because he is here, even if we or priests or bishops, like Peter, do things in error yet turn from them.
John Martin
H
Heuchler
Guest
Depends what you believe on the matter. If you actually believe that the Church is God’s institution put on Earth and that it is the Body of Christ, then punishment for refusal might be more severe. For if you look at the church’s contraception teachings and disagree, you can do one of two things. The first is to submit to the church and trust that they have it right and that this is the will of God. The second is to deny the church and to put your own will above the church’s. But really, I think if someone is going to defy the church to begin with on this matter, it would show a general sense of rebellion. One would have to say in their hearts that I want it my way, forget what anyone else says; I have it right, there is no other say in the matter. And is this not what get’s people into Hell? Isn’t Hell caused by rebelling against God? Even if you disagree on something like this, shouldn’t you have the humility to realize that there is a possibility that you might be wrong.
Essentially, this is the same as what is going to happen at the end of our own lives. We will either look up to God and say “Thy will be done” or God will look down at us and say “Thy will be done”.
Essentially, this is the same as what is going to happen at the end of our own lives. We will either look up to God and say “Thy will be done” or God will look down at us and say “Thy will be done”.
P
Philip_Peters
Guest
You do NOT accidently go to hell.
Your heart’s own yearning after God is its own assurance of your salvation. You cannot love God through your own merits, it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” John 6:44.
If you long after God then you are in the state of Santifying Grace, because the Holy Spirit is active, working in your heart.
Mind you, sin is still significant. You are still responsible for your actions, and you need to be working out your salvation in fear and trembling.
Your heart’s own yearning after God is its own assurance of your salvation. You cannot love God through your own merits, it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” John 6:44.
If you long after God then you are in the state of Santifying Grace, because the Holy Spirit is active, working in your heart.
Mind you, sin is still significant. You are still responsible for your actions, and you need to be working out your salvation in fear and trembling.
J
Joe_Corn
Guest
Congratulations, you just elected yourself pope! And by the way, if the entire 7 billion lived in Texas, it would be less crowded than Brooklyn. Do the math. Gods very first command to man: “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it”. The worlds reply: be sterile, contracept and don’t fill and subdue the earth, worship it. That committee you referenced was commissioned to study how to take the Church’s teaching and apply it today, not to change it. They were so arrogant to call themselves, “The second magisterium” - They were dismissed as they should have been. Moral teaching does not change and the principles of Humanae Vitae are not subject to change.
I’m one of those who think the contraceptive pill was God’s gift given to the human race just as the population pressures were becoming a real problem in some parts of the world. The IUD is obviously a different method, but the ethical principle is the same.
A committtee was set up by John XXIII and enlarged by Paul VI. Tt recommended usage of the pill for married couples, and it was largely developed by Catholic researchers, if my understanding is correct. Yet Pope Paul VI overruled and banned it.
The following is a graph of population growth in a historical context. You can see it’s almost vertical in our era. Yet right in the middel of that vertical upswing comes the contraceptive pill. Coincidence?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fileopulation_curve.svg
From Wikipedia also -
If this is correct, the population of the world was 7 billion on the 31st March. From a blog, so I’m not sure how accurate it is, but “somewhere around 250,000 babies are born daily, and about According to the World Health Organization, some 56 Million deaths occur per year, at the current global average. That works out to about 153,400 (deaths) per day, or a little more than 100 per minute. For every death, there are a little over 2.25 births, or a something just over 350,000 per day.”
If that’s correct, the population increases by 200,000 per day. It’s all very well quoting the church fathers, but they didn’t have this problem. It’s our problem - not theirs. In their time, the entire population of the world was about 200 to 300million. We increase by that number every three or four years.
Wikipedia again -
If that’s correct, and it’s a mortal sin, then 98% of US Catholic women are on their way to hell. For using contraception? I don’t think so.
The promise Christ made to Peter was -
Matthew 16:19 NIV
The term “loose” implies the church can change previously binding rulings. And frankly, I think the church is going to be forced to change it’s ruling, and realise it’s made a mistake, by virtue of the simple pressure of population pressure.
As for people going to hell, I have no problem with that. I had the peculiar experience of my own father appearing in my room the night he died. He started with an apology, we argued and conversed, and at the end he gave this absolutely terrifying scream and disappeared. As far as I’m concerned he’s in hell.
But during the conversation, he made one comment when I asked him “…then what is important?!”
His reply was “How you treat people”. Simple as that.
Or as Christ put it -
Matthew 25:40 NIV -
That’s what’s important.
opulation_curve.svg
D
Dale_M
Guest
Whew! This thread reminds me of the Mississippi River. It has some depth, but a lot of back channels and lagoons, too. 
I am going to go all the way back to the first post.
Based upon my own conversations with “cafeteria Catholics,” I think most persons who reject Church teachings do so because they consider those teachings to be of human origin, created by fallible men. In others words, they have an imperfect faith. They are oriented towards God, but truly to not understand (or accept) that the Church teachings are divinely inspired and infallible.
Speculating about the judgment we will face upon death is… I dunno… sort of like speculating what life looks like on other planets. We have little to go by.
Upon death, I suspect that persons of imperfect faith will be given the fullness of knowledge and allowed to make a choice, just as non-Christians will be given such knowledge and allowed to choose. In other words, the desire of a person to follow God’s will, even if imperfectly understood and practiced, will count.
I can’t imagine being condemned to hell for what an individual truly did not understand. Perhaps they will spend time in Purgatory, where the suffering of separation from God will be be felt. But I am just speculating.
I am going to go all the way back to the first post.
I find it hard to comprehend how someone could truly believe that the Church speaks as a conduit for God, and yet reject any Church teaching. I am sure it is possible, but I just can’t imagine such Lucifer-like pride.
Based upon my own conversations with “cafeteria Catholics,” I think most persons who reject Church teachings do so because they consider those teachings to be of human origin, created by fallible men. In others words, they have an imperfect faith. They are oriented towards God, but truly to not understand (or accept) that the Church teachings are divinely inspired and infallible.
Speculating about the judgment we will face upon death is… I dunno… sort of like speculating what life looks like on other planets. We have little to go by.
Upon death, I suspect that persons of imperfect faith will be given the fullness of knowledge and allowed to make a choice, just as non-Christians will be given such knowledge and allowed to choose. In other words, the desire of a person to follow God’s will, even if imperfectly understood and practiced, will count.
I can’t imagine being condemned to hell for what an individual truly did not understand. Perhaps they will spend time in Purgatory, where the suffering of separation from God will be be felt. But I am just speculating.
Q
quilisma
Guest
When we stand before God at the last judgment, He will see EVERYTHING – everything we ever thought or did in our lives – and each of us will see our lives totally objectively in the light of His perfect justice. (And every day I thank God that He’s the one who’s going to judge me, not the people around me!)
As each soul stands before Him and everything is open to His gaze, the person who dies in mortal sin (deliberately and intentionally doing something gravely wrong, in the knowledge that it is gravely wrong) will be unable to stand being in the light of His presence. That soul flees into hell trying to escape from the light, not because God *sent *it there, but because it can’t stand to be near Him.
The soul who dies with the stain of sin that has not been expiated in this world, but still in God’s friendship, trembles in the presence of God’s Justice but chooses to throw itself into His fatherly arms in childlike confidence, trusting in His love and mercy. Acutely aware, however, of its blemishes and the knowledge that nothing bearing any stain of sin may enter heaven, the soul accepts His invitation to “take a shower” in Purgatory and clean off the “dirt”. Cleansed and purified, the soul is now ready to enter heaven.
So… getting back to the OP’s original question, long answer short… only God knows. Every soul is unique in His eyes, and only He knows exactly how much we really love Him and His will, and how much we really love ourselves and our own will.
I for one, though, would want to give the Church the benefit of the doubt when it comes to teaching what is right and wrong. The Church has the Holy Spirit Himself guiding her in matters of faith and morals, and she’s been around a LOT longer than I have. Why go to all the trouble of reinventing the wheel when the Church is standing there offering us a ride?
As each soul stands before Him and everything is open to His gaze, the person who dies in mortal sin (deliberately and intentionally doing something gravely wrong, in the knowledge that it is gravely wrong) will be unable to stand being in the light of His presence. That soul flees into hell trying to escape from the light, not because God *sent *it there, but because it can’t stand to be near Him.
The soul who dies with the stain of sin that has not been expiated in this world, but still in God’s friendship, trembles in the presence of God’s Justice but chooses to throw itself into His fatherly arms in childlike confidence, trusting in His love and mercy. Acutely aware, however, of its blemishes and the knowledge that nothing bearing any stain of sin may enter heaven, the soul accepts His invitation to “take a shower” in Purgatory and clean off the “dirt”. Cleansed and purified, the soul is now ready to enter heaven.
So… getting back to the OP’s original question, long answer short… only God knows. Every soul is unique in His eyes, and only He knows exactly how much we really love Him and His will, and how much we really love ourselves and our own will.
I for one, though, would want to give the Church the benefit of the doubt when it comes to teaching what is right and wrong. The Church has the Holy Spirit Himself guiding her in matters of faith and morals, and she’s been around a LOT longer than I have. Why go to all the trouble of reinventing the wheel when the Church is standing there offering us a ride?
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
I dooon’t think so sorry.
W
Waiting
Guest
We all have our hangups during life, and are too stubborn to try to change. However, I take comfort in the words of Jesus to St. Gertrude. “When I behold any soul in agony, who has thought of me with pleasure, or who has performed any works deserving of reward, I appear to that soul at the moment of death, with a countenance so full of love and mercy, that the soul repents from its inmost depths for having offended Me, and that soul is saved by this repentence.” If seeing the loving face of Jesus at the moment of death doesn’t affect a change in a dying person’s stubbornness, then that person will not yearn for God in hell.
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
Lifted from Wikipedia - on Jan Hus (I’m not making a case for Hus, or anybody else, but I am pointing out that a church had no scruples about burning a “heretic”.
As far as I’m concerned, saying that the secular powers executed him is nit-picking - the Church knew very well what would happen. It’s almost a mirror image of Christ’s crucifixion in a way - instead of the Jewish religious authorities handing over Christ to the Romans, here we have the church handing over Hus to the secular executioners.
The reason - “We don’t have the authority to put someone to death”. I get tired of hearing this sophistry that the church was and is always right. It’s made a lot of mistakes, as well as having done a great deal of good.
J
John_Martin
Guest
As I said, it was an unholy union between the Church and State, where in many cases it was the State who was appointing bishops, and even Popes at times, because the kingdoms of this world only know how to use force, power, money, to make reality to be what they decide reality should be. It is by no means nit-picking to recognize where problems enter the Church through joining with humanly devised government - instead it is a necessity, so that we are on guard not to put our faith in a human country to guarantee us “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.
The Holy Spirit does not fail - the teachings of the church do not support the burning of John Hus nor do they support placing our trust for good in anyone but our King and our God. John Hus was burned. The leaders in the Church encouraged it. But they were not listening to doctrine - an example we must not repeat.
John Martin
R
RedDuke50
Guest
Now, I am scrupulous so I can’t help with any sins of denying or anything. But I can try to help with what Hell is like.
Hell is being eternally seperated from God. You do not recieve anything but existance from Him and we need so much more than that. So it is quite agonizing with flames that are able to burn a spirit and such. There is no light except enough to see what is torturing you. That is what I have read (put together from diferent places).
People is Purgatory’s greatest suffering is their yearning for God (according to St Faustina). So, maybe it would be despair for those in Hell since they know they will never get to Heaven, I am not fully sure.
Hell is being eternally seperated from God. You do not recieve anything but existance from Him and we need so much more than that. So it is quite agonizing with flames that are able to burn a spirit and such. There is no light except enough to see what is torturing you. That is what I have read (put together from diferent places).
People is Purgatory’s greatest suffering is their yearning for God (according to St Faustina). So, maybe it would be despair for those in Hell since they know they will never get to Heaven, I am not fully sure.
H
Herenio
Guest
J
JDaniel
Guest
UB:
That’s not my theory; it is the theory of many who don’t think the conditions are right for the production of a powerful intellect in an underdeveloped country, where nourishment is inadequate, schooling is inadequate, leisure is inadequate, etc., etc.
It would take monumental effort. But, that’s not to say it couldn’t happen.
Nothing racialistic about that, IMHO.
God bless,
jd
J
JDaniel
Guest
Bob:
To conclude “that [the Church] had no scruples about burning a “heretic”,” from a noticeable deficiency of examples of heretic burning is like saying that “because the Church - at gun point - instantiated the first Inquisitors, she had no qualms about the use of any and all inquisitorial practices.” (One has to wonder why you permitted yourself the non-luxury of aligning yourself with such an evil Church??) Then you go on to say, “As far as I’m concerned, saying that the secular powers executed him is nit-picking - the Church knew very well what would happen.” Are you trying to assert that it could have somehow prevented each and every relatively rare case of excess, back then, a posteriori? Do you really want to assert this? Do you see what you are saying? You are asserting that the Church, by malice aforethought, sought to eliminate certain people, in that most heinous of ways. Aren’t you!
Has it ever dawned on you that: (1) those were very different times than our time? (2) The Church was not - in those days - the Borg-like high-tech structure one attributes to it now, where, by mere phone call, radio signal, or email, controls could be exercised with an essentially immediate force of action. (3) The Church was (and still is) the most important and influential exigency on earth for constaining and controlling the excesses of incipient primitives, from time to time at Her own potential peril.
The fact is, the Church did not effect or condone such barbarous practices - except by fiat of distance. By the time the Pope found out about most secular “atrocities” it was too late to do anything about them. This is an argument often used by those wishing to tarnish the Church at any cost, and is known as the attribution of “guilt by insufficient opposition.” Rather, it should be “guilt by the lack of capability of physically providing sufficient opposition.” What could the Pope have done? Perhaps convictedly say, “Stop that”? It’s easy to think that we possess perfect 20-20 retrospection, isn’t it?
This is a most insidious remark, aside from its absurdity. May I ask a question? I notice that your profile lists you as “Catholic - ex-Protestant” What was your reasoning for making that conversion? (I have no intent to disparage you; I really would like to know why you would have left Protestantism - given the many disappointments you apparently have with the Catholic Church. You seem well versed in the dogma of our brethren Christians, and more than willing to extol Protestant ideology. Don’t get me wrong: If you are now Catholic, I am very happy for your decision, however, I would recommend that you should continue your Catholic education at least long enough to disabuse yourself of many of your transparent anti-Catholic notions.)
What other “mistakes” has the evil Catholic Church made, in your humble opinion? Also, could you cite some of the “good” she has done?
Besides, how else would you interpret Christ’s words to Peter?
God bless,
jd
- Status