Ask a Catholic

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Combine 017

So kinda like that guy who cut off another guys head while riding a bus then cut off the heads ears and ate them, but said it was the voice of god that told him to do it and repented or whatever. So that fucking insane guy gets to go to heaven?

If that individual realizes his sin, is truly sorry (fully regrets the act and wishes he hadn't done it), and intends never to do it again, then God will forgive. Does this mean he will end up in heaven? We don't know. The only ones we claim to know the destination of are the saints. That's why we proclaim them saints because we know they are in heaven.

Notice I did not say that God forgets. Even if we are forgiven, God cannot coexist with sin. We must be cleansed in purgatory before entering heaven. If this man was forgiven for his sins, he would likely have to spend a significant amount of time in purgatory.

Also, it would seem to me based on your description of the act that this individual likely had mental issues. I'm unsure of how that would factor, but I assume it would have some effect on the outcome.

Also keep in mind that someone claiming to hear God is not sufficient evidence that God is speaking to them.

Basically, it is as I said before. When it comes to the afterlife, only God knows our hearts. It is His decision to make. No one is barred from heaven if they take the necessary steps to get there. Keep in mind, those steps are not easy. Jesus mentions over and over in the Bible that getting to heaven is hard and that few will accomplish it, but as is the case with all of us, you can sin and be forgiven and make it to heaven.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

Oh! The whole confession thing! It rubs me the wrong way that you could do horrible things, tell a priest, say a couple prayers a bunch of times, and be forgiven like nothing ever happened.

Feels like without that clause you'd be less likely to do bad things if you had to live with your bad choices.

Not really a question I guess. Just what are your thoughts on that?

Take a look at my responses to Combine's questions on forgiveness. I think those should answer your questions.

Forgiveness is a central theme of Christianity. All Christian denominations teach that God forgives. He must, otherwise no human (aside from Mary and Jesus) would make it to heaven because we all sin. Catholics are unique in that we teach the act of confession with a priest, but it is still the same teaching that God will forgive.

As I mentioned in my response to Combine though, God does not forget. Being forgiven is not the same as the act having never happened. The stain of sin still exists, but God forgives the act.

P.S. I'll get to the rest of your questions later this week.

[The Germanator]

What is your take on this news? http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...atholic-church

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by The Germanator

What is your take on this news? http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...atholic-church

Like most other reports in the main stream media, they've managed to completely miss the point of what the pope was trying to say. Heck, it's gotten so bad that there is even a meme about it.

Post by Catholic Memes.

[Combine 017]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

Notice I did not say that God forgets. Even if we are forgiven, God cannot coexist with sin. We must be cleansed in purgatory before entering heaven. If this man was forgiven for his sins, he would likely have to spend a significant amount of time in purgatory.

Didnt know about that. And what exactly is purgatory. I hear it used around on tv but dont actually know what it is. Some sort of "my soul is in limbo" kind of place?

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

What about workarounds to rules? Like I assume you stand by no sex before marriage, and that goes with the no condom thing, but then there are folks who engage in anal before marriage because it "doesn't count."

Contraception as a safety method just makes far more sense than half doing part of some rule few will follow.

Reminded of another related video... NSFW

Sorry, it's taken me so long to respond.

Anyway, that video is pretty funny! However, there really are no workarounds to the rules. Anal sex would be considered a perversion of sex and would not be allowed in any circumstance, married or not. This once again goes back to my earlier posts where I mention that sex is incomplete without its procreative aspects. Sexual activities that are not open to children are sinful. Why? Because to do otherwise essentially treats the other person as a sex toy for your own sexual gratification rather than as the unique and unrepeatable likeness of God.

God created sex for unitive and procreative reasons. Sexual activity that ignores the procreative aspects is sinful. Likewise, sexual activity that is purely procreative in intent and ignores the unitive aspects is also sinful.

Sex is intended between a married man and woman through penal-vaginal intercourse.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

Thanks for the response. Makes sense. Although the whole notion of the Holy Spirit guiding so much seems to remove free will to an certain extent. I actually don't know the Church's stance on that. Free will? Yea or nay?

If the old testament rules are mostly void, then why follow so many of them? The whole anti-homosexual thing is from that portion correct?

Quick wikipedia search led me to:



So yeah, what's the deal with being anti-gay?

Sorry I'm asking questions quicker than you can answer. I do find this stuff fascinating though.

The Holy Spirit does offer a lot of guidance, but it's up to us whether we listen or not.

The church teaches that free will is necessary and essential. For instance, God desires that we love him. How can love be love however if it is not freely given? If love is not freely given, then it becomes obligation and loses all its meaning. In order to truly love God, we must be free to choose whether to do so or not.

First of all, the church is not anti-gay. I aware that this seems unusual to people considering the recent reaction to the Pope's statements on homosexuality, but the church is not anti-gay and futhermore has never been anti-gay.

The church has always been accepting of gay people. The issue is homosexual acts are sinful. In other words, having attraction to someone of the same sex is part of who you are and cannot be controlled. We are all tempted to sin. This manifests itself differently for all of us. However, to give into that temptation and engage in homosexual acts, that is where the trouble lies.

As far as what the bible says about this, no, the condemnation of homosexual acts is not confined to the old testament. The new testament makes several references as well. I will give two examples:

This quote comes from Jesus directly:

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”. Matthew 19:4

Secondly, from Paul's letter to the Romans:

26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.. Romans 1:26-27

There are many other areas where marriage is discused and homosexual acts are regarded as sinful, but I will limit it to these two.

As far as the laws of the bible, there are multiple types. The ceremonial law is the law that was fulfilled by Jesus. These laws mostly concerned ritual cleanliness and the like. (E.g. Don't eat pork, don't touch a woman who is menstrating, etc.). The natural law however remains. It is called the the natural law because it is naturally available to all without the revalation of God. An example of the natural law would include don't murder people. The condemnation of homosexual acts is considered a part of the natural law.

[The Germanator]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

The issue is homosexual acts are sinful. In other words, having attraction to someone of the same sex is part of who you are and cannot be controlled. We are all tempted to sin. This manifests itself differently for all of us. However, to give into that temptation and engage in homosexual acts, that is where the trouble lies.

This is the kind of thing I find offensive as a non-religious person. You're basically asking people to repress their natural feelings and live a lie because those feelings or acts would be "sinful." How that isn't construed as "anti-gay" is beyond me. "I'm not anti-you, per-se, but you're a sinner and you're going to Hell." Very accepting...

I feel like this point is always made the most clear when you ask yourself, as a straight person, "when did I decide to be straight?" There was no decision, it's just who you are, and you're not a sinner for it, so why should other people?

You'll never be able to convince me that the logic of that is anyway morally acceptable...but I guess you don't have to, I'll never be a Catholic.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Combine 017

Didnt know about that. And what exactly is purgatory. I hear it used around on tv but dont actually know what it is. Some sort of "my soul is in limbo" kind of place?

Purgatory is where the soul is cleansed of sin and the attachment to sin before entering heaven. I haven't been able to clearly determine whether it is still possible to enter hell from Purgatory, therefore, limbo may not be the correct term. The info I've read so far seems to indicate that those wh reach purgatory will eventually reach heaven.

Purgatory itself is a cleansing process. The bible teaches us that nothing unclean can enter heaven. Since we would be lying to ourselves if we said that at the time of death we are free of sin and then attachment to sin, then there must be a cleansing process so that our imperfect souls are able to enter the perfection of heaven. By all accounts, the suffering in purgatory is almost as great if not as great as the suffering in hell. The one difference however, is that the suffering in purgatory is redemptive. We know there is no redemption in hell.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by The Germanator

This is the kind of thing I find offensive as a non-religious person. You're basically asking people to repress their natural feelings and live a lie because those feelings or acts would be "sinful." How that isn't construed as "anti-gay" is beyond me. "I'm not anti-you, per-se, but you're a sinner and you're going to Hell." Very accepting...

I feel like this point is always made the most clear when you ask yourself, as a straight person, "when did I decide to be straight?" There was no decision, it's just who you are, and you're not a sinner for it, so why should other people?

You'll never be able to convince me that the logic of that is anyway morally acceptable...but I guess you don't have to, I'll never be a Catholic.

First, a clarification: i never said anyone was going to hell. You won't hear me say that and you won't hear the Catholic Church proclaim that anyone is going to hell. Only God knows our hearts and therefore, only God can know if our sins merit eternal damnation.

Secondly, I'm sorry you find my religious beliefs offensive. However, if you are a non-believer, i don't see why it should matter. If my God doesn't exist, then surely it won't matter if he considers homosexual acts to be sinful, right?

You seem to ask how we can say we are not against the person if we are against the act? There is an old saying: "Love the sinner, hate the sin." We all sin. Does that mean we are not desearving of love? No. You can love someone without approving of their actions.

If I understand your argument correctly, then you are saying that because people with homosexual attractions did not decide to be that way, their actions cannot be sinful. However, this is true for all sinners and all sin. Non of us chose to be predisposed to sin, but the actions are sinful regardless and we are still responsible for them.

Let me give a few examples. If it is in someone's nature to lie, they are still sinning by lying even though they may be tempted to do so more than another person. Another example would be that of a pedophile or someone who is incestuous. Not all of us have an attraction to underage individuals or to our relatives, does that mean it is any less of a sin for those that do? We are all given crosses to bear.

The only difference here is that society has decided that homosexual acts are no longer sinful. However, God doesn't change with the world. The Belief that homosexual acts are sinful stretches all the way to the Jews in the Old Testament and has been held continuously since. The Church's teaching on this will not change. If you don't believe it, that's up to you, but the teaching doesn't change.

Finally, I'd like to propose a question to you. You state quite clearly that you are not a believer. Would you mind elaborating as to why you are not? Keep in mind that I will of course want to challenge your beliefs, so if you don't want to respond for that reason, I understand. However, I believe it is good that we have our beliefs challenged once in a while. Thank you for challenging my beliefs.

[Vampyr]

What's the Catholic/Christian view on doubt? Do you need 100% faith in God and the Bible to go to Heaven? What if you're only 80% sure, but there's a nagging thought that you could be wrong?

I've always wondered how people of any religion, not just Christianity, could have 100% faith, given that you are probably Catholic just because of the geographical region in which you were born and what religion the rest of your family has.

[Teuthida]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

However, if you are a non-believer, i don't see why it should matter. If my God doesn't exist, then surely it won't matter if he considers homosexual acts to be sinful, right?

Not to speak for Germy, but it matters to me because people like you believe such things are sinful.

The only difference here is that society has decided that homosexual acts are no longer sinful. However, God doesn't change with the world. The Belief that homosexual acts are sinful stretches all the way to the Jews in the Old Testament and has been held continuously since. The Church's teaching on this will not change. If you don't believe it, that's up to you, but the teaching doesn't change.

You probably just summed up most of the problems I have with religion. It doesn't change with the times. You're following rules from over a thousand years ago.

It's like believing in cooties when you're a kid. Then you grow up and mature and realize there's no such thing. You don't continue to avoid girls for fear of cooties because of the rules your five year old self followed.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

What's the Catholic/Christian view on doubt? Do you need 100% faith in God and the Bible to go to Heaven? What if you're only 80% sure, but there's a nagging thought that you could be wrong?

I've always wondered how people of any religion, not just Christianity, could have 100% faith, given that you are probably Catholic just because of the geographical region in which you were born and what religion the rest of your family has.

I would say that the percentage of faith is not important, just that you have faith enough to believe. We all have doubts, even the most faithful of us. That's part of being human and I would think it would be impossible not to have doubt when you are dealing with something as important as the afterlife. Doubt that is involuntary such as a hesitation in believing is not sinful. Doubt that is voluntary and is a willing denial of what God has revealed is a grave matter.

Faith is holding on to your beliefs despite these involuntary doubts. Our doubts arrise from changing moods. There are some days when faith is easy and there are other days when it is hard but when shouldn't change our beliefs every time our feelings fluctuate.

As to your second statement, I've wondered that myself. It has been especially relavent to my mind because I was adopted. I wonder sometimes what religion I would have been raised in if I was raised by my biological parents. Since I don't know them, I don't have the answer.

I'd like to think that I would have found Catholicism even if I wasn't raised in it. We all search for truth and I believe that the Catholic Church has the fullness of that truth. That's why I pprofess the faith I do. I have examined it and continue to do so on a daily basis and each day reaffirm my belief.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

Not to speak for Germy, but it matters to me because people like you believe such things are sinful.

Why does it bother you? Is it that you believe that sin = hate? That has never been the teaching of the Church. We are all sinners and we are all created in the image and likeness of God. We have no more right to hate others for their sin than we do to hate ourselves for our own sin.

Furthermore, why this sin in particular? Does is bother you that any other acts are considered sins or just homosexual acts?

Originally Posted by Teuthida

You probably just summed up most of the problems I have with religion. It doesn't change with the times. You're following rules from over a thousand years ago.

It's like believing in cooties when you're a kid. Then you grow up and mature and realize there's no such thing. You don't continue to avoid girls for fear of cooties because of the rules your five year old self followed.

Do you still believe that you should look both ways before crossing the street? If something is true, it doesn't change with the times.

Or are you proposing a religion in which truth is relative and changes with the opinions of its believers? A religion whose God is shaped by those who believe in him? I would find such a religion to be very difficult to believe in.

[Combine 017]

A religion whose God is shaped by those who believe in him? I would find such a religion to be very difficult to believe in.

I think Buddhism does that. They seem to be doing alright.