A Baptist friend stated this on social media and I’m just wondering if this would be correct to Catholics? Would someone who committed venial sin be considered to not at all have a relationship with Jesus?
If this is true, then no one can have a relationship with Jesus, because we are all sinners.
I think in order to have a relationship with the Lord, you need to sincerely try to follow His will and commandments and to be sincerely sorry for when you sin and do your best to avoid sin. But to make a blanket statement that you can’t have a relationship with the Lord if you sin…I think that person is wrong.
Now in answer to your question- would being committed to a venial sin be considered to not have a relationship with Jesus- I’d still say no, but with the caveat that it would almost certainly detract from that relationship and block you from receiving His graces. Now if you were committed to a mortal sin, I would say that yes, that could ruin your relationship with Jesus, at least until you turned away from it and repented.
Define “in a relationship” with Jesus. Is that a status update? The Catholic Church addresses this with the idea of being in communion. I can understand why baptists might shy from that language, but the idea of "in a relationship with Jesus is mushy and vague. The devil is in a relationship with Jesus…
So someone else posted this link.
What do you guys think of what it says about sin
As with most things protestant, it contains partial truth. It has a very incomplete understanding of sin it does not really go into original sin, or distinctions and it does little to show someone how to get rid of sin. Also, common in many protestant thinking is this idea that mankind is innately evil and sinful. We as Catholics do not necessarily view it that way, with sacraments for bringing grace and sanctity to us that many protestants do not have, not to mention the Virgin Mary and many many many saints who show us that holiness and a state of grace is attainable and man’s most happy state. I do agree that one cannot serve two masters which the author touches on. How would the author rid sin and the consequences thereof?
But most importantly, what do you think? What are your thoughts on this debate you are having with this friend? Where are you coming from in the debate? What blogs have you given him to read?
Well my first reaction was that the original statement didn’t make too much sense. Sort of similar to the first reply on here. The article that was posted kinda makes sense but it seems like it only sees one kind of sin. Am I right that the church holds that grave sin is what kills grace (“the life of God” the article refers it to)? I haven’t offered any blogs. If you know of a good one please let me know
Venial sins do NOT separate us from God.
CCC 1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable.** “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.”**
While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.