HOME  Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations

 

Venial Sin Doctrine is Hypocrisy

ABOUT SIN
 
Sin is an offence against God in thought, word, deed or omission. It is a crime against God.

In the Roman Catholic Church you will be instructed that there are two kinds of sin: mortal sin and venial sin.

Mortal sin is sin that cuts you away from Godís friendship leaving you his enemy. Christianity asserts that its just punishment is everlasting punishment. An example is drunkenness or adultery (1 Corinthians 6:9,10). Grace is Godís power that works inside you to make you pleasing to him. Mortal sin kills it why is why it is called mortal. It kills the soulís relationship with God and also kills you by making you deserve death for the Bible says the wages of sin is death and that because of sin all die. So sinning mortally is not just a bad thing to do but it is also murderous. It is an attempt to kill yourself out of spite towards God.

Venial sin is sin that does not terminate the fellowship. Venial is just a weakening of your friendship with God and is not as bad as mortal.

The Church claims that all sins are grave for they offend such a good God but that all sins are not mortal. Incidentally, the Koran asserts that only certain kinds of sin, the allegedly graver sins, put you in Hell (Sura 53:32).

To commit a mortal sin you have to have full knowledge of what you are doing and its seriousness and to do it freely.
 
Is venial sin really mortal sin in disguise?
 
FIRST GREATEST COMMANDMENT MORTALISES ALL SIN

Christianity claims to agree with God that we have to love him with all our power and love others just for his sake (Matthew 22:37). Strictly speaking, we are to love him alone. The first commandment forbade anybody to adore anything in Heaven or earth apart from God himself. This excludes both adoring something in Godís place or adoring a god as a lesser god than God which would imply that any god is a servant of God who uses his influence with God for you. Even if that god is an angel who really exists it is a sin. This tells us that God alone wants to be loved for he will not even tolerate one loving an angel but wants all the love and wants the love for the angel to be an expression of love for himself so it is not love for the angel.

Notice too that to say you must love God with all your powers is to automatically make this the main rule and the greatest commandment for you are being told to sacrifice all to God so that is very serious and heavy stuff and also a rule concerning the love due to such a supremely good being would have to be the greatest for that being is the greatest. Since loving God alone is the greatest commandment according to Jesus, the Son of God (Mark 12:29,30) to undermine and fail to teach this commandment is the greatest sin.
 
The Jews were right to make sure that reminders containing the text of the commandment were stuck up everywhere so the Christians not following suit shows that nearly all of them are under divine wrath for the commandment is so serious and so difficult that one cannot be allowed to forget it even for an hour. The commandment is part of what Jews call the Shema. The failure of the apostles to make sure the Shema was exalted to a prime place in the symbolism and literature and worship of the Church indicates that they were nothing but a bunch of vagabond heretics. If the apparitions of Jesus and Mary were real they would recite the Shema first thing every time they appear so they are either empty spaces or demons.
 
The Shema implies you must have an appropriate view of God - a God who is worthy of that devotion. The god of the Mormons then would have to be out for being only an exalted man, he would not be entitled to all that devotion. So the Shema requires you to be an expert on the nature of God both intellectually and spiritually. Those who are not experts will not be saved. Deathbed conversions are no good unless the dying person is an expert. Believers with little faith and Atheists and Agnostics are committing the greatest evil possible, not preaching and living out the Shema. It would be madness to execute murderers and not kill them or at least dump them in dungeons and persecute them. The Law of the Land needs credibility to have authority and if we undermine that we should be destroyed or persecuted for we are opposing the Law and bringing trouble on it. Every sin is against the greatest commandment. It is declaring yourself independent of this commandment despite its greatness. Therefore every sin is grievously wrong. Every sin no matter how slight we think it is, has only the eternal punishment of Hell as itís due.
 
ALL SIN IS MORTAL

The Roman doctrines of the difference between mortal and venial sin are unbelievable for it is plainer than the skin on oneís hands that one disagrees with the other.
 
People might buy the lies out of short sightedness and forgetfulness of what Godís unlimited love implies about sin.

If God is really infinitely good then he must be infinitely offended when any sin is committed so all sins are infinite offences or mortal. All sins would be unlimited ingratitude for the unlimited good God would do for you. He gave you your existence and that is infinitely valuable in itself.

Suppose some sins are not infinitely evil. If I commit a venial sin then though the sin would not be seem to be very evil the contempt expressed by doing something so small against such a good God would be a mortal sin. The smaller the requirement that I wonít keep, the worse is the insult I offer. This does not and cannot mean that it is preferable to commit a mortal sin for it is a mortal sin.
 
Suppose all sin is mortal. Suppose not all mortal sin is equally bad. Suppose for example that to rob a bank, a mortal sin in Catholicism, is not as bad as murdering somebody, another mortal sin. In committing these acts, I choose to reject God, all my friends and family, all the blessings I have, to rot in Hell forever. I would be total evil in my heart if not in my actions. That is a mortal sin by itself. The robbery or murder is one thing but the rejection of all love is another. Its an additional sin. That means that every time I rob a bank I commit this additional sin. That means every time I murder I commit this additional sin as well. In both cases the additional sin is equal.

If a sin could be mortal but you are not sure, then you are saying to God, "If I am heading for Hell doing this then so be it!". That is a mortal sin in itself. The way the Church makes the slightest sexual thought to be a mortal sin shows that you don't need to be doing much harm to be a mortal sinner. Most Catholics cannot tell or are not sure if an act they are considering is a mortal sin. They do such acts every day. Who then can be saved? Even a theologian wouldn't be exempt for the matter is so complicated.
 
Every sin you commit is a sin that cannot be undone Ė you cannot go back in time to make it not have happened. The sin will be perceived by God forever for he sees all things and is outside time. To sin is to blight Godís creation forever for it is bringing about an evil that is permanent in the sense that it still happened. Thus all sin must be infinitely bad.

If every sin is infinitely offensive then no sin can be any worse so all sin is equally bad. Sins can be worse or better only in the sense that they do greater or lesser damage. The sin is mortal not because of the harm it does but because it is intended to tell God to get stuffed. Why? Because if God is infinite good then we are to love him for his own sake and to love ourselves and others for his sake. You cannot commit an infinite offence unless you intend to mock God.
 
The harm sin does to others is nothing compared to what sin in its contempt says to God.

Rome is sort of patting the person who commits a so-called venial sin on the back by refusing to look on it as mortal. To do that is to commit a mortal sin for it is ignoring its seriousness. The Roman God half-rewards mortal sin and forces himself on those who donít want him, the so-called venial sinners, despite Romeís insistence on his respect for free will. Rome informs us that God is all-evil if he does not respect human free choice for then he has no excuse for allowing evil and suffering. When you praise God for this gospel you are praising Satan for he would have to be the originator of that doctrine. Once you attribute evil to God he will not accept your worship so it goes to Lucifer.
 
If God won't treat mortal sins as they deserve even though the person is not sorry for them that shows he cannot have any real regard for forgiveness. Neither can those who act in his name, his collaborators.

How can Catholics who know that all sin is total opposition to God love their enemies when they are flippant towards true forgiveness in the ways we have discovered? Christ told us that we would know the false prophets by their fruits!

Observations like this have led many to argue that the Catholic Church is not a religion that knows what true love is. And that the Church is putting souls in danger of falling into satanic devotion. They would add that this devilish system seems to want to damn the soul with its fake forgiveness. How can it forgive in the name of God when its doctrine is evil and its morality is bogus? 

FURTHER PROOF THAT ALL IS MORTAL
 
We have seen the proof that all sin is mortal and seen that it is so clear that anybody who says that mortal sin is infinitely malign because God hates evil infinitely is forcing his or her listeners to hold the same to be true of venial sin.

But there are other proofs.

Looking at sin from another angle provides another way of proving all sin to be quenching all love for God. Rome says that blasphemy is always a mortal sin for it is ingratitude measured by the degree of the love that it throws back in the loving oneís face which is Godís in this case and his love has no end or limit. Now, every sin insults God like blasphemy does so all sin must be mortal. For example, when you sin you are telling God that you are more important than him and if works not words are used you are blaspheming him as much as you would be with sign-language. The Catholic Church is showing a shocking deceitful and self-righteous side when she declines to recognises all sin as blasphemy in its own way.

Letís try another angle again. If I get forgiven for five murders by God and do not forgive others I am ungrateful for the forgiveness I got for God wants me to forgive like he has forgiven me. To be ungrateful for my pardoning is to declare that I have ceased to be sorry for the offence I offered God. It is to offer the same insult to God all over again. Though God will not un-forgive my murders and make me guilty of them again I am as bad as before for I have tried to get my pardon cancelled and am putting new sins in the pardoned ones place. It is the same if I refuse to forgive myself even for an instant for I am just as valuable as anyone else. Being unforgiving makes all the pardons you got count for nothing. For example, if God forgives you for murder and you do not forgive others then you insult that forgiveness and became as bad as a murderer again. You are saying that you are glad you killed and are reversing the repentance that gave you mercy. Jesus utilized this logic in Matthew 18. By not forgiving he warned that you end up as bad as you were before God forgave you. It follows that pardoned mortal sinners cannot refuse any forgiveness to another without committing a mortal sin. It would be evil to get forgiveness for a serious sin and fail to forgive others for less. The lesser the sin you wonít pardon the worse your ingratitude is. Nearly everybody is a mortal sinner at that rate. If you didnít believe in God this problem wouldnít exist which would be proof that the Devil is behind all God religion if he really wants all people damned in Hell. Now you know the real depths of Jesusí compassion Ė shallow.
 
What if all sin is equally bad before God in intent even though the outward damage of the sin may differ? It remains a fact that you must instantly forgive any sin committed against you or another person for all are as bad as each other.

If I am pardoned for small sins and I canít forgive a murderer or a rapist I must remember that all my sins many of which were to do with the fact that every moment I stay in sin is a fresh sin add up to grave harm. I cannot judge a person on one act and say I am better. I cannot say that I am entitled to be unmerciful to him for he did worse than I did.

If I think I should not forgive those who are ďworseĒ then me then that logic would tell me to forgive only those people who are as good as me. So, if anybody commits one small sin more than I have I should not forgive them.

If I sin I do not forgive myself as long as I am unrepentant so it is the mortal sin of being ungrateful for the gift of pardon.

The gravity of ingratitude is measured by the value of the thing one is ungrateful for. Godís pardon for any sin is infinitely valuable for it enables us to be one with him and to have infinite happiness so the slightest wilful ingratitude is an infinite insult. You cannot want God or Heaven if you are not grateful. When you sin, you canít be anything other than a mortal sinner when all sin is infinite ingratitude.

What we have learned so far contradicts the Catholic doctrine that unforgiveness is not always mortally sinful and that you can be pardoned while adhering to venial sin. Catholics teach that if you reject God by serious sin your repenting of some of your sins while you adhere to the rest is hypocrisy and an insult to God. So if you repent some serious sins and not others it is no good if you want God's pardon. There is no forgiveness until you turn to God and shed all the serious sins. Catholics only imagine that they are forgiven.
 
As a religion that say that sins have different levels of gravity as regards responsibility, Catholicism should say that it is a far bigger offence to God to refuse to forgive a small sin than a big one. But so low is its morality that it does not. So-called venial sinners are welcomed to communion!

Every sin in the universe contains and element of being unforgiving. Even when the victim has done you no harm there is something that you can have against her or him and you are giving her or him a reason to withhold forgiveness from you which is as bad as being unforgiving yourself. Even the most secret sin adversely affects others in some supernatural way (1 Corinthians 12:26- its saying that when one suffers all suffer does not mean that all suffer because of their sympathy for not all would be that caring. Every sin brings down on you the infinite consequences of being unforgiving for it is being unforgiving. Not forgiving somebody is bad because it is wishing to harm somebody or see them harmed when they should not be. To harm the innocent is wrong for the same reason so harming an innocent has the same effect as being unforgiving and so one is as harmful as the other.

Like St Paul, the Catholic Church teaches that we must forgive all who have injured us as an indication of gratitude for God having so graciously pardoned us in Christ. These days the Catholic Church is obsessed with telling people to forgive one another and why they should. And it is said that sinners doing good deeds and feeling content about risking their souls is one of Satanís evil fruits that look good.

The Church accepts Catholics who make little effort to learn what sins are mortal and what are not. But when these people sin the sin may not be mortal in itself but the fact that they committed it and didnít care if it was mortal or not is.

If my good works are done while I have a ďvenialĒ sin on my conscience then they are as fake as the Turin Shroud. I am telling God, ďTake this good but I am not repenting.Ē The good is not really meant to be good in that case. When I sin I cannot do anything good so to sin is to put all love for the Lord out of my heart. It is a mortal sin. I have stolen the heart that belongs to my God. Venial sin does not exist. Those who say it does must ask themselves if they are being hypocritical.

To commit a venial sin would be to take a step closer to committing mortal sin. It is expressing your will that if it leads you to commit a mortal sin then so be it. But that attitude is a mortal sin. To wilfully make yourselves open to mortal sin is willing a mortal sin to take place. The Church teaches that nobody loses their faith except through failing to pray which is a sin or some other sin that is committed too much. So if you are a Catholic and cease to be convinced, you are an evil person. This is an unkind assessment and it is one the Church does not shy from. So sin then reduces your faith and increases the tendency to doubt. Doubt or denial of the faith is the ultimate sin for it is turning your back on what the Church says about sin and God. Therefore all sin must be mortal for it reduces your faith.

Also, to do good and refuse to sanctify that good and make it real good by casting all sin, even if it is only all venial sin, out of your heart would be a mortal sin and casting ridicule on the good when that good is major. The better the good the more I put it up for ridicule by doing it in sin. It is a mortal sin to ridicule a person for saving a life. When you ridicule your own saving a life or something it must be a mortal sin too.
 
Does that mean that we are not allowed to do good while adhering to unrepented sin? The answer is practically speaking we have to do good but hypothetically speaking it is a pity. We are not allowed to see the good as real good but as a counterfeit. You chose the sin so you choose the results and limitations sin causes. If you want to do the good for real, repent the sin first. To do good while being evil is necessary but still you defile the good by doing it. Hypothetically if not in practice, you should not be doing good when you are in a state of sin.
 
The more good you do in a state of sin the more you mock the good. The more you lose sight of what real good is. You must be ready to do immense good such as saving lives at all times. You must have no sin. Not to be ready by repenting of venial sin as soon as it is committed would be a mortal sin. It is like refusing to do something easy and reasonable in order to save others from death or Hell. The more good you do in a state of sin the worse the blasphemy is. This implies that the venial sinner should no do good and the less good done the better. This is hypothetical. God tells us we must never ever sin and that if saving a life would be a sin for us through conscience or circumstance then it should not be done. So God would prefer you refraining from a good action than carrying it out to profane it. It is endlessly worse if it is a mortal sinner and not a venial sinner. Jesus was hostile to hypocrisy like no other sin which suggests that we should refrain from helping others if it would be hypocritical. That means we are never allowed to help others for we are always stained by sin.

Today it is accepted that the person is the absolute value. Life is more important than quality of life for life must be more important than quality when the quality of life matters. From this it follows that murder is the worst thing you could do. This contradicts Christianity as the apostles taught it under the inspiration of Jesus which sees hating God as worse and shows that true Christianity is anti-humanitarian and undermines the value of life over a theistic hypothesis. Many top Christians just pretend to honour the absolute value of life. The Catholic Church commits a mortal sin merely by espousing this attitude and if it were really open to virtue it would have the right view. We cannot make excuses for people who have bad opinions of others without proper cause. So anyway human life is the absolute value meaning that every moment of human life is precious too for it is a moment of life. Therefore to hurt a person is to hurt a precious moment of life and is seriously wrong.

Venial sin is a lie.

THE SIN OF PARTIAL CONSENT
 
The Church of Rome alleges that when you sin you consent to it either partly or fully. For a sin that tears you away from God and makes you fit only for being dumped in Hell forever you have to have full consent. If the consent is incomplete then the sin is venial.

If a person is blinded by lust and falls into bed with somebody elseís spouse that is a venial sin because the ignorance inflicted by the desire forced the person to freely choose to sin. The person forgot that adultery is a mortal sin and because of that he or she could not commit a mortal sin by committing adultery.
 
People follow religion for they hope it will have practical good consequences. With a doctrine like that you see how useless religion is.

The Church teaching that there is no serious evil in you if you have not fully consented to the sin no matter how terrible it is seems fine, it seems reasonable. And it seems to prove that venial sin does exist at least when there is partial consent. But that is merely because of our selfish prejudice and the lack of integrity that the Church likes to have ingrained in us. We sometimes like to pretend that our wrongdoing is not all our fault on the grounds that we did not have a complete understanding of what we were doing. We want to believe we sinned but not very much.

To sin at all you need to be aware that you are doing something that is against Godís way. Therefore to say that a person who cannot resist choosing to commit, say, adultery does not fully know what she or he is doing and therefore not committing a mortal sin is ludicrous for she or he knows all they need to know. If you know that much and can sin then you have enough freedom regardless of the other motives caused by weakness or whatever.

If you are overcome with passion and examine yourselves you will see that your consent to sin was just as good as any other.

Perhaps the will is partly forced to commit adultery by the intense lust?

Stupid question.

Anybody who is weak is weak because they want to be if there is a God to help. Weakness is no excuse or half-excuse especially in the matter of the graver sins.

If the person freely consents to mortal sin then it is a mortal sin for if it is not then the person had no free will at all. The person had enough freedom to sin. It is a contradiction to say that some part of free will can be outside a personís control.

So, the doctrine that mortal sin is impossible without perfect consent is incoherent and childish because there is always sufficient assent. If a person can sin venially without full control of the will then he or she can sin mortally too.
 
Why is it that we never hear of a person doing good works with imperfect consent? If the Church really believed in partway consent she would remove the things that make people do good though alleged weakness. She would have us dressed in long robes with paper bags on our heads before letting us do good. That would make sure we are not doing it largely for show. And she claims she is here for making us the best!

The partial consent doctrine is covering over the gravity of mortal sin. It is telling people that they are better than they truly are. It is treating their victims as nothing. Through the doctrine, many believers are able to virtually condone many child-murders. When they do that they are pronouncing their hatred on the little victims and even for the killer though he or she is preferred at the same time.

It is vital for Catholics to examine their minds so carefully that they will know if they granted full consent to any sin. The Church says she is concerned that they might smear themselves in confession so she instructs them to be sure. But the only thing they could be sure of is that they did consent fully. They must know that the official teaching on the matter does not prove that venial sin exists.

If experience tells you that you sinned but were not fully responsible then that is venial sin. But what about Christians who do not believe in venial sin? They are being accused of fraud, of denying on religious grounds what they see to exist by gazing into their own hearts. They are accused of deliberate fraud because if you are not totally to blame for your choice you would find out if you examine yourself. If Catholicism really believes in the partial consent doctrine then she stoops low by treating those people as sincere dedicated followers of Christ.

It is often hard to be sure if you have consented fully to something or not if the doctrine of the Catholic Church is correct. You need to go over every second to be sure. Memory fails us and can be contaminated. So what do you do? The mortal sinners would have to assume that they are not mortal sinners to be on the safe side. Would it not be the safe side to assume you have committed a mortal sin? No for the Church says that if you are not sure that a sin was fully intended by you to be mortal then you are right with God and he cannot hold it against you. The Church advises against seeing yourself as a mortal sin without need.
 
Most of the exceptionally damaging sins that happen are caused by strong desire. The Church says that even weaker desire could take away full use of the faculty of free will like when you are rushing. The partial sin doctrine hints that most of the people in jail should be out. The doctrine is a menace. The Church even lets people be jailed over the doctrine though it tells us she should not.

If you think you should assume that you are a mortal sinner the situation is different but no better.

It is common nowadays to insist that mortal sin is a rare occurrence because people are so weak and sin is partly caused by desire. Religious teachers might tell you that the more you want to commit what is seriously harmful the more venial it is if you commit it. That means it is better to kill a person who clearly intends to commit a mortal sin if it would be a venial sin for you to murder. Then it might not be a venial sin at all for it is averting a greater evil.
 
The Catholic doctrine of sin is messy and silly. Its an insult to people who want to live better lives.

RC CHURCH KNOWS THEREíS NO VENIAL SIN
 
All priests must know fine well that all sin is mortal for they preach the necessity of looking at all your sins to see if you intended to divorce God by them. They are as bad as the Pharisees of the Bible. Catholics who agree with them are in the Devilís chains if there is a Devil.

One can nearly hear the Catholics saying: ĒThe priests and theologians are continually pondering over such matters so they would teach the same as you if you were right. Please, donít ask me to believe that all those wonderful men were liars and that they suffered and sometimes died for falsehood and hypocrisy.Ē Atheists are sorry but they have to. The Catholic priests are just all frauds for they know that all sin is an infinite insult and then they arbitrarily and bigotedly contradict it by preaching venial sin! This is blasphemy. They hate anyone they have got prosecuted for blaspheming for they blaspheme too. They even refuse to submit that their own blasphemy should be counted as or considered to be a serious sin. If there is a Satan he is very powerful and when one reflects upon the sly ways of the priests and the theologians one will notice that one has underestimated his magic before.

I will never forget the first moment I learned why mortal sin deserves Hell. For in that moment while waiting for confession in my parish Church, I realised that all sin must be mortal. I preferred my Catholic pipe dreams to the truth so I pushed my doubts to the back of my mind. I did not realise it for many years but I had sold my soul to Satan just to gratify that part of me that was conditioned to heed and adore the Catholic cult.

Anyone who preaches that venial sin exists is either totally naÔve or lying.

God or the priests are in no position to tell me what is a mortal sin and what isnít. It is my conscience and decision and belief that determine if any act will be a mortal sin. They are telling me if I have sex outside marriage that I should intend it to be a mortal sin. Do they want to punish me not because sex is that wrong but because I have sex? If so then this is jealousy and interference and persecution in their purest forms and self-righteousness and sadism are the motivations.
 
What business has God and priests forgiving mortal sins against me in confession or whatever without my consent as if I was never harmed? Catholics believe in people making amends to God for the sins of others in their place. Surely then God should ask me what penance I want the person to do for me. Surely the priest who absolves should or tell the penitent to ask me first and get back to him. What business has God making these decisions as if I had no right when he cannot even prove that he can be loved or should be? When you get married you have to make sure you know the person but you donít know God at all and he is so mysterious and does things that look evil. But that does not stop him being domineering.
 
Jesus said that God accepts no sacrifice from anybody who has fallen out with a neighbour and who does not go and make peace with the neighbour first. This proves that the Catholic Church which does not insist on this is in breach of the law of Christ and is not his infallible bride. Jesus was right so the Church is blind to what the right thing is and that is terrible and more inexcusable when it reads his words.
 
FINALLY
 
Venial sin does not make sense if there is a God. All sin demands and deserves and wins everlasting punishment. If sin takes you to Hell, then what if you think you are okay when you die and are not sorry for venial sin? Blame the Church!

WORKS CONSULTED
 
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS CATHOLICS ARE ASKING Tony Coffey, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 2006
 
FRIDAY PENANCE, John C Edwards SJ, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1985
 
CITY OF GOD, St Augustine, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1986

EVERYMANíS ROAD TO HEAVEN, Leo J Trese, Geoffrey Chapman, London, 1961

APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, M H Gill & Son, Dublin, 1954

RADIO REPLIES, VOL 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938

THE SINNERíS GUIDE, Ven Louis of Granada, TAN, Illinois, 1983

CHRISTIANITY, David Albert Jones OP, Family Publications, Oxford, 1999

THE INSTITUTES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, John Calvin, Hodder and Stoughton, London 1986

BIBLE VERSION USED
The Amplified Bible