Brainwashed

[Guest]

5 year olds don't commit mortal sin. You're not to bright are you?

And get over yourself saying I don't know God. I guarantee you I know God. I know Him enough to instantly know 5 year olds aren't in hell.

You are a reason people become atheist. You should get that CHECKED.

[Credo in Deum]

5 year olds don't commit mortal sin. You're not to bright are you?

Last time I checked there were three requirements for a sin to be mortal and an age limit was not listed as one of them.  Sounds like you should brush up on your catechism, Josh. 

[Guest]

You're a clown

[Credo in Deum]

You're a clown

A Catholic Clown, get it right. 

[Guest]

[KnightofChrist]

5 year olds don't commit mortal sin. You're not to bright are you?

And get over yourself saying I don't know God. I guarantee you I know God. I know Him enough to instantly know 5 year olds aren't in hell.

You are a reason people become atheist. You should get that CHECKED.

When a five year old drowns their baby cousin to death because the baby wouldn't stop crying what kind of sin, if any do you think that is?

[Benedictus]

"wow" lol love how this get turned around on me like I'm the one saying 5 year olds are damned to hell for eternity. That God kills an 8 and 12 year old right after their "first sin" before they can confess and they burn in hell for eternity. Nah that doesn't get a "wow" but me objecting to it does. lol Hilarious. Have a good one. 

Josh - I see your point but I think you're getting caught up on emotive aspects of age and capacity.  In times gone by people had to grow up faster and they expected more of them from a much younger age. They viewed children very differently in various periods of time. Most kids were put to work and took on responsibility as soon as they could be trained to do tasks. It wouldn't be unusual for a child from 5 years upwards to be an apprentice or have fairly extensive chore schedules. Private revelation would have been framed by the mindset of the time period and how those experiences were presented or used.

The reality is only God knows whether a person has committed a mortal sin, it doesn't matter who they are. We can only work on the basis of our understanding of the remits of when a person has enough capacity to understand the implications of what they do and why. It can be a tricky area, even for adults, but there has to be some sort of scope or teaching, which we have, but there will always be exceptions on all parts of the spectrum. There probably could be a case to say anyone has some baggage or issue that prevents them having committed a mortal sin. That doesn't mean we shouldn't keep evaluating ourselves and trying to do better for the wrongs we do. Our own psyche and ego have a great capacity to distort and find reasons to let ouselves, and people we like, off the hook (but not people who do the same things if we dislike them or they hurt people we like ).

It's tough for many people to believe young children can have the capacity to do some very bad things. However, there are young children that do such things, and it's not necessarily linked to something like conduct disorder. There have been cases of children doing arson, sibling/animal abuse, murder, lying, stealing etc. The two boys who abducted, tortured and killed a toddler in England in the 1990's (Bulger Killers) were only 9 or 10 years old at the time. They had done other stuff before that too, when they would have been even younger.

Our own idea of whether anyone has capacity is relative to the action and the person concerned. It's often very situational and that's why it's important people, or family units, have an SD or confessor that knows them and can discern these sorts of things more clearly.

[Guest]

@KnightofChrist I would say that's the sin of some idiot low life parents who neglect a 5 year old and his baby cousin. 

Edited November 5, 2015 by Guest

[KnightofChrist]

I would say that's the sin of some idiot low life parents who neglect a 5 year old and his baby cousin. 

The parents had left the children with a teenage family member who fell asleep. Likely having no idea that the child would be so annoyed at the cry of a baby that they would kill the baby. So really the child is at no fault, committed no sin whatsoever?

What about when a six year old gets into a fight with his friend, loses then runs home grabs a shotgun runs back to his friend and says "I'm going to shoot you" and then shoots and kills his friend, what sin if any did the six year old commit?

What about an eight year old who killed three babies, one he strangled to death, the other two he beat to death, what sin if any did the eight year old commit? Or is again just the parents fault and the child is completely innocent of any sin?

[Guest]

Josh - I see your point but I think you're getting caught up on emotive aspects of age and capacity.  In times gone by people had to grow up faster and they expected more of them from a much younger age. They viewed children very differently in various periods of time. Most kids were put to work and took on responsibility as soon as they could be trained to do tasks. It wouldn't be unusual for a child from 5 years upwards to be an apprentice or have fairly extensive chore schedules. Private revelation would have been framed by the mindset of the time period and how those experiences were presented or used.

The reality is only God knows whether a person has committed a mortal sin, it doesn't matter who they are. We can only work on the basis of our understanding of the remits of when a person has enough capacity to understand the implications of what they do and why. It can be a tricky area, even for adults, but there has to be some sort of scope or teaching, which we have, but there will always be exceptions on all parts of the spectrum. There probably could be a case to say anyone has some baggage or issue that prevents them having committed a mortal sin. That doesn't mean we shouldn't keep evaluating ourselves and trying to do better for the wrongs we do. Our own psyche and ego have a great capacity to distort and find reasons to let ouselves, and people we like, off the hook (but not people who do the same things if we dislike them or they hurt people we like ).

It's tough for many people to believe young children can have the capacity to do some very bad things. However, there are young children that do such things, and it's not necessarily linked to something like conduct disorder. There have been cases of children doing arson, sibling/animal abuse, murder, lying, stealing etc. The two boys who abducted, tortured and killed a toddler in England in the 1990's (Bulger Killers) were only 9 or 10 years old at the time. They had done other stuff before that too, when they would have been even younger.

Our own idea of whether anyone has capacity is relative to the action and the person concerned. It's often very situational and that's why it's important people, or family units, have an SD or confessor that knows them and can discern these sorts of things more clearly.

Great post and great points. Thanks for taking the time to respond. I agree that young children are capable of evil things. My initial objection and why I started the thread was on the premise that a 8 year old girl dies unexpectedly and goes to hell to be tortured for all of eternity for taking the Lord's name in vain in the second grade. Not murdering anyone or drowing a baby.

Then a Sermon gets posted about a 5 year old going to hell and being tortured for eternity for doing the same thing. In the same Sermon other examples are given of children committing their "first sin" and God allowing them to die unexpectedly and then sending them to hell to be tortured for eternity. And also the idea God stops forgiving after you mess up a certain amount of times. As little as five times possibly.                                                                                                                                          Those were my objections. I understand that we have to confess our sins and that grave sins can become mortal and we have the capability to reject God's grace and die in mortal sin. I accept this leads to hell. What I don't expect is God is setting up little kids to fail or that God stops forgiving me after I confessed a sin a certain number of times. If I truly repent and try to change I'm forgiven.

[Basilisa Marie]

So, uh, wow. 

Sometimes people who preach will embellish details to make a point. It's actually really common, and was an acceptable oratory technique back when this sermon was preached. For example, that's one of the reasons why Mary Magdalene "became" a lusty prostitute before her conversion. Preachers used her as an example to preach conversion and chastity, even though there's zero scriptural evidence that she was a prostitute. I suspect something similar is happening here. The point of the sermon may have been to emphasize the seriousness of every sin, and how even those whom we would think are the most innocent are still capable of sin, because we're all human. 

God doesn't set people up to fail. We trust in the loving mercy of God, and that God is a God who is truly just. That means no one is going to hell who doesn't deserve it. God NEVER stops forgiving us - in fact we are already forgiven, we just have to turn back to God and accept that forgiveness, like the prodigal son. The Father of that son didn't wait until the son had apologized, just until the son was in the father's sights, walking on the road back home. People who are in Hell are there because they have rejected God's forgiveness. 

Not everything from our history is going to be great - just because it's old or even said by a saint, doesn't mean it's good. I'd stay away from threads in Catholic Answers that promote stuff like this. It's dangerous and leads to people doing exactly what you are with this thread. It leads to bad theology and unnecessary anxiety. 

[Credo in Deum]

I wonder if you can show where the Catholic Church teaches that 7 is the cutoff for the age of reason. The link you provided is for the relevant canon law, which provides a legal background but not a theological one. As with all laws concerning age the choice of a specific age is necessary for the purpose of the law but it is relatively arbitrary. A good example is the age of majority which the canon says is at 18. In different times adulthood was fixed earlier or later. There is nothing divinely revealed about the age of 18.

One does not magically acquire the capacity to commit mortal sin when the clock strikes midnight on your 8th birthday. So can you show me where the Church teaches a specific age as a divine truth? Thanks. 

The Church does not set an age because the Church knows that the time a child can attain reason can vary from individual to individual.  The Church, however, has set out the clear conditions which have to be met in order for a sin to be mortal and our personal beliefs do not change the reality of these conditions or the vary real possibility that people of varying ages, even 5 years of age, can, and have, met these conditions.  This idea that all children are innocent little cherubs who are incapable of committing mortal sins is naive thinking to say the least. 

Yet sadly this is the kind of thinking that we have to deal with nowadays where a sermon from a saint -which is completely in line with the Magisterium, the realities of our faith and the the world we live in- is dismissed because it dosen't hold up to our naive beliefs. 

There are child geniuses and prodigies.  They do exist, and so it is completely within reason that there have been children who have been capable of committing mortal sin. With this we know then that If a child who has committed a mortal sin dies unrepentant, then that child has rejected God and is in Hell.  It's a sad reality, but one that is a reality nonetheless.  

In the end, what we do know is that God knows our hearts and the circumstances of our lives, and the amount of graces He has given us to come to Him.  With this knowledge we can say that God is always just and that if there is a 5 year old in hell, then they have put themselves there by rejecting God and that the Justice of God has given them what they desire and therefore has been accomplished perfectly. None of this should scandalize a single Catholic at all.  

Edited November 5, 2015 by Credo in Deum

[Gabriela]

Josh, didn't you just ask for all your previous threads to be deleted because you were ashamed of what was in them?

I would urge you to consider whether this thread may become one of those. If not because of your views, then because of your tone towards others.

[Credo in Deum]

Josh, didn't you just ask for all your previous threads to be deleted because you were ashamed of what was in them?

I would urge you to consider whether this thread may become one of those. If not because of your views, then because of your tone towards others.

I think this thread should be left open.  I don't appreciate Josh's tone with me in this thread, but I can sympathize with it. We are living in times when the name of God is taken in vain constantly in literature, movies, and music.  Many, even Catholic's, have become completely desensitized to it where they do not view it as a serious sin even though it is listed as the Second of the Ten Commandments.

Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord his God in vain.

We need to combat this error that saying the name of God in vain is a small offense, or that we are allowed to make a presumption on God's mercy.  

[Guest]

Josh, didn't you just ask for all your previous threads to be deleted because you were ashamed of what was in them?

I would urge you to consider whether this thread may become one of those. If not because of your views, then because of your tone towards others.

I'm not ashamed of all my past threads. There were some post when I was really wasted that I don't like. I'm not ashamed one bit of my views in this thread. Nor will I be in the future. I don't like my tone but I don't like others tone with me either.

I think this thread should be left open.  I don't appreciate Josh's tone with me in this thread, but I can sympathize with it. We are living in times when the name of God is taken in vain constantly in literature, movies, and music.  Many, even Catholic's, have become completely desensitized to it where they do not view it as a serious sin even though it is listed as the Second of the Ten Commandments.

Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord his God in vain.

We need to combat this error that saying the name of God in vain is a small offense, or that we are allowed to make a presumption on God's mercy.  

God is not a monster even if you really really reallllllllly want Him to be deep down inside. Sorry.

So forget the Sermon saying all these little kids are spending eternity in hell. How do you defend the teaching that God only forgives sins so many times? You agree with this @Credo in Deum?

Edited November 5, 2015 by Guest