|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 4, 2023 18:17:25 GMT
Per the Baltimore Catechism #3:
Q. 1398. Are the rewards in heaven and the punishments in hell the same for all who enter into either of these states?
A. The rewards of heaven and the punishments in hell are not the same for all who enter into either of these states, because each one's reward or punishment is in proportion to the amount of good or evil he has done in this world. But as heaven and hell are everlasting, each one will enjoy his reward or suffer his punishment forever.
|
|
|
|
Post by farronwolf on Sept 4, 2023 18:52:53 GMT
That doesn't necessarily say that sins aren't equal.
"the amount of good or evil he has done in this world"
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 4, 2023 19:29:55 GMT
That doesn't necessarily say that sins aren't equal. "the amount of good or evil he has done in this world" Any traditional moral theology manual clearly explains that some mortal sins, and some venial sins, are worse than other mortal or venial sins respectively. I was just using the Baltimore Catechism as a quick and easily understood reference source. For instance, murder is far worse than fornication, yet both are mortal sins. I seriously doubt that the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church says anything to the effect of "each and every mortal sin is as bad as any other mortal sin, and each and every venial sin is as bad as any other venial sin". The moral theology in the CCC is basically identical to that of previous catechisms. |
|
|
|
Post by farronwolf on Sept 5, 2023 0:56:09 GMT
The quoted portion above can be explained using this type of example.
Serial killer vs. someone who kills someone in a drunk driving incident.
Murder has been committed in both instances, but the serial killer, say who killed 15 or 20 people certainly has done more evil than the drunk driver.
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 5, 2023 2:16:43 GMT
The quoted portion above can be explained using this type of example. Serial killer vs. someone who kills someone in a drunk driving incident. Murder has been committed in both instances, but the serial killer, say who killed 15 or 20 people certainly has done more evil than the drunk driver. I don't disagree with you, first of all, one person has committed one murder, whereas another one has committed 15 or 20 murders. Moreover, all kinds of things could come into play with the drunk driver, first, that he had no intent to kill anyone, and may not have realized that he was as impaired as he was. But in these cases, we are speaking of one species of sin. Fornication versus adultery would be an example of two different species of sin. In fornication, you simply have the misuse of sex by two unmarried people, with no injustice being done to a third party (aside from a child who might be conceived improvidently). In the case of adultery, you have, in addition to that misuse, a transgression against the sacrament of matrimony, and an injustice done to a third party, viz. the spouse or spouses who are being cheated on. Seen that way, adultery can be seen as a worse mortal sin than fornication. Yet there is an idea floating around in Catholic circles that no mortal sin is worse than any other mortal sin, and not just that, but that the punishment for any one mortal sin is the same as the punishment for any other mortal sin. This is at variance with what the Baltimore Catechism says. The Catechism of St Pius X echoes this: 6 Q: Shall the bliss of paradise and the miseries of hell be the same for all men?A: The bliss of heaven in the case of the blessed, and the miseries of hell in the case of the damned, will be the same in substance and in eternal duration; but in measure, or degree, they will be greater or less according to the extent of each one's merits or demerits.Oddly enough, in our permissive age, there is just a hint of neo-Jansenism in some circles, one example being that all sins against any one of the Ten Commandments is "grave". That is not true. Bottom line, moderns don't know how to think about sin, and this leads to error both of laxity and of severity. There is also this from the website of the eminent, and fully orthodox, Catholic philosopher Dr Germain Grisez: twotlj.org/G-1-15-2.html |
|
|
|
Post by katy777 on Sept 6, 2023 18:37:58 GMT
Each sin is a hammer blow onto the nails that went through Jesus's flesh.
Jesus died for all sins..not just serious mortal sin.
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 6, 2023 20:52:44 GMT
Each sin is a hammer blow onto the nails that went through Jesus's flesh. Jesus died for all sins..not just serious mortal sin. No argument, but there is the reality of mortal versus venial sin, as well as some mortal sins being worse than other mortal sins (and, for that matter, some venial sins being worse than other venial sins). Thus homosexual acts are worse than either heterosexual adultery or fornication, and by the same token, adultery is worse than fornication. I think of venial sins as being like the thorns in Our Lord's crown, and mortal sins being like the nails through His hands and feet. |
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Sept 8, 2023 17:31:59 GMT
The problem with ranking mortal sins is that hell is hell, it’s eternal separation from God, so if you get sent to hell there is no such thing as a pleasant level of hell. Ranking mortal sins gives the false impression that it’s okay to commit a little mortal sin once in a while, which it is not. It also leads people into the false thinking that certain grave sins like fornication aren’t a big deal because they’re just driven by our human biology or whatever.
We also do not know exactly how God would respond to particular mortal sins vs others. It’s more important that we simply avoid sinning in general and confess frequently than agonize over the ranking of sins.
The old Baltimore Catechism was also written at a time when the Church took the Jansenistic position that most people other than perhaps saints committed mortal sins on a daily basis. If you read stuff from that time, virtually any sin committed intentionally was considered to be mortal. Venial sin was restricted to small failures that were done unintentionally or out of impulse or habit, for example if someone had a bad temper generally and slipped up and spoke harshly at a frustrating work colleague, it might be venial, or if a child over 7 had a habit of talking out of turn in class and blurted something out without thinking it through, then maybe venial. Maybe. The fact that reasonably moral people were thought to be committing mortal sins daily was the driver for requiring weekly confession before receiving Jesus at Mass. The bad part about this is it did encourage Jansenism, scrupulosity, and being more afraid of Hell than seeing God as loving and building a relationship with him.
Nowadays the Church is much less likely to classify sins as mortal and is more interested in just getting people to confess and grow closer to God than in ranking their sins. I personally do not see much use in ranking my sins or in considering levels of Hell. Even if I was on the topmost least-suffering level of Hell (where the Church used to teach that good unbaptized people went, it doesn’t now) I still don’t want to go there.
People in olden days didn’t have a good handle on this either.
Also, prior to the 20th century we didn’t have the teachings about trusting in God’s mercy that St Therese of Lisieux (raised in a Jansenist environment, suffered from scrupulosity, and somehow went from that to being berated for teaching novice nuns that they could skip Purgatory entirely through trusting and loving God, and now a Doctor of the Church) and St Faustina provided. We cannot ignore these teachings when thinking about our sins.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lost Sheep on Sept 21, 2023 22:27:00 GMT
Murder is a mortal sin. So is eating a ham sandwich on Good Friday.
How anyone can suggest the gravity of these sins are equal in seriousness is beyond me.
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 21, 2023 23:11:28 GMT
Murder is a mortal sin. So is eating a ham sandwich on Good Friday. How anyone can suggest the gravity of these sins are equal in seriousness is beyond me. My point exactly, though murder is malum in se, while breaking abstinence on Good Friday is only malum prohibitorum. If someone had a medical condition requiring the prompt taking of nutrition, and they were stranded in a remote cabin with only meat to eat on Good Friday, then there would be no obligation. |
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Sept 22, 2023 1:34:22 GMT
Any traditional moral theology manual clearly explains that some mortal sins, and some venial sins, are worse than other mortal or venial sins respectively. I was just using the Baltimore Catechism as a quick and easily understood reference source. For instance, murder is far worse than fornication, yet both are mortal sins. I seriously doubt that the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church says anything to the effect of "each and every mortal sin is as bad as any other mortal sin, and each and every venial sin is as bad as any other venial sin". The moral theology in the CCC is basically identical to that of previous catechisms.
Jesus had this to say on the topic:
Luke 18:9-14
New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and regarded others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, was praying thus, ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast and saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted.”
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 22, 2023 1:52:32 GMT
Any traditional moral theology manual clearly explains that some mortal sins, and some venial sins, are worse than other mortal or venial sins respectively. I was just using the Baltimore Catechism as a quick and easily understood reference source. For instance, murder is far worse than fornication, yet both are mortal sins. I seriously doubt that the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church says anything to the effect of "each and every mortal sin is as bad as any other mortal sin, and each and every venial sin is as bad as any other venial sin". The moral theology in the CCC is basically identical to that of previous catechisms.
Jesus had this to say on the topic:
Luke 18:9-14
New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and regarded others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, was praying thus, ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give a tenth of all my income.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even look up to heaven, but was beating his breast and saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his home justified rather than the other; for all who exalt themselves will be humbled, but all who humble themselves will be exalted.”
Very well, but I'm not clear how this relates to comparing, in the objective order, one mortal sin with another, or a mortal sin with a venial sin. The verse you cite is about subjective dispositions. The Pharisee had committed no obvious sin, and the tax collector, by his own admission, had committed some sin of which he was repentant. We are never to exalt ourselves about our own virtue or sinlessness. That's the lesson here. |
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Sept 22, 2023 2:43:41 GMT
The Pharisee had committed no obvious sin. I'm pretty sure Jesus is intimating otherwise. Augustine and Aquinas would say the same.
You're letting your quest for the "objective", the clear cut, black and white simple and simplistic pat and easy answer, get in the way of your search for the Divine. Or the Human, for that matter. If you conceive of the Faith as something like a basketball game, with clear rules and clear winners and losers, or like mathematics with its axioms and operations, I think you are missing the whole point of what Jesus says here and elsewhere in the Gospels.
You're looking for easy answers to very difficult and profound questions. There just aren't any, and the Church isn't Google. Life is incredibly messy and full of contradictions, as are human beings themselves, and God is far beyond our understanding. He did give us brains to ponder the complexity of our existence and that of our fellow beings and His whole creation, and work toward answering the devilish conundrums that arise as best we can, and sent His own Son to guide us. But we will never have the complete definitive answer until we die and are reunited with God in Heaven.
Might be time to put aside the Baltimore Catechism and re-read the Gospels, and meditate intensely upon them, especially the words of Jesus himself. After which you'll be able to understand the Catechism and the Faith with better clarity.
Discomforting? You bet. But that is precisely our cross to bear.
|
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 22, 2023 2:58:39 GMT
The Pharisee had committed no obvious sin. I'm pretty sure Jesus is intimating otherwise. Augustine and Aquinas would say the same.
You're letting your quest for the "objective", the clear cut, black and white simple and simplistic pat and easy answer, get in the way of your search for the Divine. Or the Human, for that matter. If you conceive of the Faith as something like a basketball game, with clear rules and clear winners and losers, or like mathematics with its axioms and operations, I think you are missing the whole point of what Jesus says here and elsewhere in the Gospels.
You're looking for easy answers to very difficult and profound questions. There just aren't any, and the Church isn't Google. Life is incredibly messy and full of contradictions, as are human beings themselves, and God is far beyond our understanding. He did give us brains to ponder the complexity of our existence and that of our fellow beings and His whole creation, and work toward answering the devilish conundrums that arise as best we can, and sent His own Son to guide us. But we will never have the complete definitive answer until we die and are reunited with God in Heaven.
Might be time to put aside the Baltimore Catechism and re-read the Gospels, and meditate intensely upon them, especially the words of Jesus himself. After which you'll be able to understand the Catechism and the Faith with better clarity.
Discomforting? You bet. But that is precisely our cross to bear.
I am quite aware of everything you say. In asking the question "are all mortal sins equal?", I refer solely to the objective matter, e.g., is murder worse than adultery, and is adultery worse than fornication? Mortal sin consists of three components, (a) grave matter, (b) sufficient reflection, and (c) full consent of the will. My question concerns only the first aspect. Various catechisms and other such works treat this, and traditionally, yes, some mortal sins --- it might be better to say "some grave matters" --- have been described as being worse than others, that is, some grave matter is more "grave" than other grave matter. Yet I have noticed, in recent years, the tendency to say "mortal sin is mortal sin", true as far as it goes, you are either eternally estranged from God, or you are not. Yet not everyone is equally punished, just as not all people are equally happy in heaven. The Baltimore Catechism attests to this, and unlike another commentator above, I do not find the BC to be especially "Jansenistic", in fact, where morality is concerned, the BC is not all that severe. At bottom, even the more advanced BC #3 is fairly superficial as to morality, the reader is just given broad brushstrokes. The book is simply not all that deep. It is just intended to give the reader the basics, a framework for knowing and accepting the Catholic Faith. |
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Sept 22, 2023 3:26:16 GMT
And Jesus answered that in the parable I quoted above. As far as you should be concerned, your sins are far, far worse than mine or anyone else's, no matter how "small" they may be "objectively". As far as I should be concerned, my sins are far, far worse than yours or anyone else's. And so for every other person alive. We are not going to be able to absolve ourselves by referring to the sins of others. Indeed, we will not be able to absolve ourselves at all and will have to reply on God's mercy. Jesus had this to say:
Matthew 7
John 8
3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, 4 they said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. 5 Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9 When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.
|
|
