|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 22, 2023 4:04:12 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.
I'm not referring to the sins of any specific person, nor to their culpability. I refer solely to the objective gravity of the sinful matter. One needs look no further than the four sins that cry to heaven for vengeance. While these might not be the four worst sins (or, to be precise, the four sins that consist of the gravest matter, though willful murder comes very close, and sodomy has traditionally been thought of as one of the most vile of crimes), they are clearly "pretty bad". Jone's Moral Theology clearly lists the sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments (just using this as an example, not riveting on any particular kinds of sins) in order of gravity, with (pardon me) bestiality being the worst. Yet in the eyes of some, such ordering is pointless, again, "mortal sin is mortal sin". There is also the concept of "the lesser of two evils". Sorry I don't have a source on this --- I've been reading moral theology for almost fifty years --- but I once read of how a Jesuit (yes, I know...), when faced with a penitent (if he can be called that) who was determined to deflower a maiden, suggested that he visit a prostitute instead. (This isn't just a "Sixth and Ninth" concept. The same principle would apply if the advice was for a thief to rob a bank instead of stealing a widow's life savings.) I'm going with traditional Catholic moral theology on this.
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Sept 22, 2023 4:44:18 GMT
I'm not referring to the sins of any specific person, nor to their culpability. I refer solely to the objective gravity of the sinful matter. One needs look no further than the four sins that cry to heaven for vengeance. While these might not be the four worst sins (or, to be precise, the four sins that consist of the gravest matter, though willful murder comes very close, and sodomy has traditionally been thought of as one of the most vile of crimes), they are clearly "pretty bad". Jone's Moral Theology clearly lists the sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments (just using this as an example, not riveting on any particular kinds of sins) in order of gravity, with (pardon me) bestiality being the worst. Yet in the eyes of some, such ordering is pointless, again, "mortal sin is mortal sin". There is also the concept of "the lesser of two evils". Sorry I don't have a source on this --- I've been reading moral theology for almost fifty years --- but I once read of how a Jesuit (yes, I know...), when faced with a penitent (if he can be called that) who was determined to deflower a maiden, suggested that he visit a prostitute instead. (This isn't just a "Sixth and Ninth" concept. The same principle would apply if the advice was for a thief to rob a bank instead of stealing a widow's life savings.) I'm going with traditional Catholic moral theology on this. Sorry, but to me it appears that you seem to be looking for an excuse to either condemn the sins of others and to minimize the gravity of your own, and take comfort in being reassured that, though you might not deserve the highest place in Heaven, at least you will not be consigned to the lowest circle of Hell. I'm sure you are not engaging in willful murder or bestiality, but you, like me and everyone else, are abject sinners that have no right to object to being consigned to that lowest circle, and where we end up depends not on our own deeds, but solely on God's infinite and unfathomable mercy.
There's no point in arguing about who is "more abject" when it will make absolutely no difference to you, or God, on Judgement Day. It seems to me that you have entered "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" territory and got lost in the weeds there looking for dragons and unicorns. There comes a point where you just have to trust in God, and let Him worry about the salvation or damnation of others who are beyond your responsibility. Pray that God is as merciful with them as you hope He will be with you.
Putting matters in God's hands brings a great peace, joy and perspective. And frees you up to do the work He put you here to do.
Here's a question to think about: If, by some chance and, of course, God's infinite mercy, you were to end up in the highest place in heaven, and discovered that, in His infinite mercy, for His own unfathomable reasons, God had judged Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson and King Henry VIII and Fr. James Martin to be worthy of His indulgent forgiveness and had admitted them there, too, would you be disappointed? Would you feel that it was unjust?
Jesus had something to say about this precisely in the parable about the prodigal son, in which the faithful son complains to his father about how joyously he received back his lost child. And in the parable about the lost sheep.
Only God knows the heart, mind and soul of each man. Only God can judge them.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 22, 2023 6:11:09 GMT
I'm not referring to the sins of any specific person, nor to their culpability. I refer solely to the objective gravity of the sinful matter. One needs look no further than the four sins that cry to heaven for vengeance. While these might not be the four worst sins (or, to be precise, the four sins that consist of the gravest matter, though willful murder comes very close, and sodomy has traditionally been thought of as one of the most vile of crimes), they are clearly "pretty bad". Jone's Moral Theology clearly lists the sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments (just using this as an example, not riveting on any particular kinds of sins) in order of gravity, with (pardon me) bestiality being the worst. Yet in the eyes of some, such ordering is pointless, again, "mortal sin is mortal sin". There is also the concept of "the lesser of two evils". Sorry I don't have a source on this --- I've been reading moral theology for almost fifty years --- but I once read of how a Jesuit (yes, I know...), when faced with a penitent (if he can be called that) who was determined to deflower a maiden, suggested that he visit a prostitute instead. (This isn't just a "Sixth and Ninth" concept. The same principle would apply if the advice was for a thief to rob a bank instead of stealing a widow's life savings.) I'm going with traditional Catholic moral theology on this. Sorry, but to me it appears that you seem to be looking for an excuse to either condemn the sins of others and to minimize the gravity of your own, and take comfort in being reassured that, though you might not deserve the highest place in Heaven, at least you will not be consigned to the lowest circle of Hell. I'm sure you are not engaging in willful murder or bestiality, but you, like me and everyone else, are abject sinners that have no right to object to being consigned to that lowest circle, and where we end up depends not on our own deeds, but solely on God's infinite and unfathomable mercy.
There's no point in arguing about who is "more abject" when it will make absolutely no difference to you, or God, on Judgement Day. It seems to me that you have entered "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" territory and got lost in the weeds there looking for dragons and unicorns. There comes a point where you just have to trust in God, and let Him worry about the salvation or damnation of others who are beyond your responsibility. Pray that God is as merciful with them as you hope He will be with you.
Putting matters in God's hands brings a great peace, joy and perspective. And frees you up to do the work He put you here to do.
Here's a question to think about: If, by some chance and, of course, God's infinite mercy, you were to end up in the highest place in heaven, and discovered that, in His infinite mercy, for His own unfathomable reasons, God had judged Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson and King Henry VIII and Fr. James Martin to be worthy of His indulgent forgiveness and had admitted them there, too, would you be disappointed? Would you feel that it was unjust?
Jesus had something to say about this precisely in the parable about the prodigal son, in which the faithful son complains to his father about how joyously he received back his lost child. And in the parable about the lost sheep.
Only God knows the heart, mind and soul of each man. Only God can judge them.
I shall repeat verbatim what I said in the last post: I'm not referring to the sins of any specific person, nor to their culpability. I refer solely to the objective gravity of the sinful matter. If you come away from this with the kind of interpretation you describe above, as to what you see as my mindset, there is nothing I can do about that. I hope all of the people you list do end up in the highest place in heaven. I hope everyone does. As you rightly note, only God can judge. But in the objective order --- in the objective order --- some sins are worse than others. Pretty sure Aquinas, and many other divines too numerous to mention, would back me up on that. On that note, I'm going to let the Angelic Doctor address this: www.newadvent.org/summa/2073.htmI can't add anything else here. Pax tecum.
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Sept 22, 2023 18:02:38 GMT
I took two semesters on Aquinas in University, taught by a gung-ho Thomistic Dominican, so I'm quite familiar with his theology and philosophy. And courses on Augustine, Bonaventure, Anselm and several others, and a pretty comprehensive series of courses on philosophy from the pre-Socratics to the 20th century, including Plato and Aristotle. I had 21 years of Catholic education, first with the Franciscans, and then 13 years with the Jesuits. Back in the day when Jesuit education was still intellectually rigorous and demanding. I also have a doctorate in sciences, and undergrad degrees in Classical languages and German.
One of the things the Jesuits taught me is that you are looking for a clear and simple answer to a complex and difficult question, you are barking up the wrong tree. And if anyone every gives you a clear and simple answer to a complex and difficult question, then they are probably wrong. And still I consider myself very, very far from being anything like an expert in Theology. The more I learn, the more I learn that there is a whole lot more to learn, far more that I can ever learn in my lifetime.
One lesson that has stuck with me was when a theology teacher asked us if we could solve a three hundred piece jigsaw puzzle. All of us said we could. A three thousand piece one? Yes, though it would take a bit longer. A three million piece one? Possibly, but it would take a whole lot of time. A three billion piece one? Three trillion? Three gazillion? No, not in our lifetimes
Well, in giving you life on this Earth, God has given each of you a puzzle with an infinite number of pieces. You have to do the best you can in the time you have. You might get some parts solved, but never the whole. Someone else might get different parts right, and a third completely other parts right. Nobody every gets it all right. You can look as much as you want at other peoples work to help you along, but even then, you will never know the whole solution while you are on this side of the grass over the graveyard.
Aquinas would wholeheartedly agree, and toward the end of his life lamented that, with all his work, he had only completed a small part of the infinite puzzle. I'm pretty sure he would be very uncomfortable with being considered an "authority", as he never claimed any for himself.
I know you're frustrated by me not giving a simple answer to your simple question. Or by Pope Francis's Jesuitical "lack of clarity". But then, Jesus was famous for not answering the simple questions of the Scribes and Pharisees in the way they expected or would have liked them to be answered. A key part of Faith is realizing that, while you cannot know the solution to the whole puzzle, you can rely on the fact that God does, and that he will reveal it to you when you are reunited with him.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Oct 2, 2023 15:49:18 GMT
www.newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm#:~:text=While%20every%20mortal%20sin%20averts,)%2C%20and%20also%20from%20reason. While every mortal sin averts us from our true last end, all mortal sins are not equally grave, as is clear from Scripture (John 19:11; Matthew 11:22; Luke 6), and also from reason. Sins are specifically distinguished by their objects, which do not all equally avert man from his last end. Then again, since sin is not a pure privation, but a mixed one, all sins do not equally destroy the order of reason. Spiritual sins, other things being equal, are graver than carnal sins. (St. Thomas, "De malo", Q. ii, a. 9; I-II.73.5).
|
|