Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul tells us that the exterior action indicates the interior intention and that a mortal sin is always a mortal sin.
2. Problem with mortal sin
The most difficult problem with the rigorist position is their "de facto" denial of one of the central doctrines of the faith: mortal sin. Catholic theology holds that in order for someone to lose their salvation they must have committed a mortal sin-John Pacheco
Lionel:
Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul tells us that the exterior action indicates the interior intention and that a mortal sin is always a mortal sin. This would contradict the liberal interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on mortal sin ( the three conditions).
John Pacheco
The commission of a mortal sin has essentially three criteria:
i) The sin must be serious.
ii) The sin must be committed freely, with the person's consent.
iii) The sin must be known to be a serious sin.
Lionel:
i)The sin must be serious.
John Pacheco assumes that there are defacto, known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. He assumes that Lumen Gentium 16 on invincible ignorance and a good conscience contradicts the rigorist interpretation of the dogma. For cases of persons saved in invincible ignorance to contradict the dogma these persons saved would have to be known to us on earth.However he assumes that a defined dogma has explicit exceptions.This is heresy and a serious sin.
To postulate defacto exceptions to a defined dogma is heresy.
It is also a negation of the Nicene Creed in which we pray ‘I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin.’ This is a serious sin. A priest was excommunicated by Pope John Paul II for denying the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady. He meets the first condition for mortal sin ?
ii) The sin must be committed freely, with the person's consent
John Pacecho has been informed a few years back in reports posted on the internet.These reports were also sent to the Catholic Legate.
iii) The sin must be known to be a serious sin.
Here is the difference. Veritatis Splendor says some sins are intrinsically evil. Some actions are evil whether you are aware of it or not. Many sins today are not considered evil via the media and society but they are mortal sins all the same.Veritatis Splendor has rejected the Fundmental Option Theory and other such arguements on morals.
I do not know if John Pacecho considers the denial of a dogma as a serious sin. So according to his logic if a Catholic does not know that fornication, contraception etc is a serious sin it is not a mortal sin ?
If I do not believe Hell exists, Hell will not exist?
John Pacheco
The commission of mortal sin, therefore, requires the individual to *know* it is a sin. Hence, if a non-Catholic does not *know* it is a serious sin to remain outside of the Catholic Church, then he cannot be guilty of a mortal sin, and therefore, he cannot be unequivocably condemned for being outside of the True Church of Jesus Christ.
Lionel:
This is a contradiction of Veritatis Splendor.
The three conditions apply to Catholics and the conditions are known and judged only by God.
We cannot judge that non Catholics do not know in general. Also the issue is Original Sin.The Church Fathers and the saints have written about this with respect to non Catholics.Tradition has always taught that non Catholics are oriented to Hell. The Church Fathers knew about mortal sin.
John Pacheco
So, if the Rigorists deny any possibility of salvation to non-Catholics, then they must logically deny a central part of Catholic theology.
Lionel:
It was Jesus who said that those who do not believe will be condemned.(Mk:16:16). Rigorist ? It was Jesus who asked us to proclaim the Good News knowing that the baptism of water was necessary for salvation whether a man believed in it or not.(John 3:5).
It was Jesus who held the 'rigorist position' that the Eucharist was his Body and it was needed for salvation. Even if one does not beleive in the Eucharist it still is the Body of Jesus and is needed for salvation.
It’s a law of nature that a woman whether she knows it or not can give birth to a child after sexual intercourse. Whether we know it or not we know that water will always fall downwards and not upwards.Whether they know it or not non Catholics with the stain of Original Sin on their soul and mortal sins committed in that state and without the Sacraments outside of which there is no salvation, are all oriented to Hell.Hence God wants all people to be united in the Catholic Church (CCC 845). One could say, for example, that it is not fair that only women can conceive and not men, but this is the way God chose to make human beings.
John Pacheco:
St. Thomas Aquinas explained it like this: "Now it is evident that whoever neglects to have or do what he ought to have or do, commits a sin of omission. Wherefore through negligence, ignorance of what one is bound to know, is a sin; whereas it is not imputed as a sin to a man, if he fails to know what he is unable to know. Consequently ignorance of such like things is called invincible, because it cannot be overcome by study. For this reason such like ignorance, not being voluntary, since it is not in our power to be rid of it, is not a sin: wherefore it is evident that no invincible ignorance is a sin. On the other hand vincible ignorance is a sin, if it be about things one is bound to know."
Lionel:
Invincible ignorance is not a sin. However we cannot assume that any non Catholic is in invincible ignorance and will be saved or that anyone has already been saved in this condition. We are unable to judge. Only God can judge these cases.They are only a possibility, as says John Pacheco.
John Pacheco:
A word of sober consideration, though: it is dangerous for a Protestant, for instance, to understand that this arrangement is flexible. For, as long as he is not convicted of the truth of the Catholic faith, he may think that all will be well. However, this is not the Catholic teaching on this subject. What is being discussed here is a theoretical and theological possibility only.
Lionel:
Yes it is a theoretical and theological possibility only.
John Pacheco:
The Protestant, or any other non-Catholic, will be judged on their culpability for not accepting the true faith. Obviously, he will be held to a standard consumerate with the opportunities that are presented to him, and the access he had to the Church's teachings. It is not a light matter - in fact, it is a most undesirable position to be in - especially for those in more affluent western countries. And it must be remembered that sloth nullifies pleading ignorant before the Holy Court of Justice.
Now, the rigorists may deny that they are not rejecting the concept of mortal sin in Catholic theology. In order to address the requirement for *knowledge* of the mortal sin, they will repeat their oft mentioned argument: "God will either reveal to him through internal inspiration or through the means of an angel what has to be believed." Yet, this rationale simply will not hold. Under this scenario, why wouldn't God use such means with *everyone*, and not just those formally outside of the Church?
Lionel:
Since God has chosen that the ordinary means of salvation is Catholic Faith and the baptism of water (AG 7,LG 14). The Church is the ordinary means of salvation.(Redemptoris Missio 55).
John Pacheco:
Why wouldn't God just simply whisper the complete truth in everybody's ears? Why, for that matter, is ignorance a possibility at all - why wouldn't God 'clear things up' so there would be no question in regards to the seriousness of a sin?The answer to that question can be found in Sacred Scripture - He instituted His Church to do preach the Gospel and assist people in recognizing mortal sin. And, as discussed above, not all people outside the formal boundaries of the Church have always been able to hear the true Gospel in all places at all times.
Lionel:
If there are any exceptions (in invincible ignorance etc) it would be known only to God. In general millions of people know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter. The dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus tells us that they are on the way to the fires of Hell. Vatican Council II has the same message in Lumen Gentium 14 regarding those who ‘know’ and yet do not enter.
-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment