Theological Flint: Does “not intending” sin make it not sin?

JMJ

Dr. Malloy pulls things together pretty well concerning when is an action sinful etc.

Very appropriate for Pachemama-Gate.

Dr. Malloy has graciously given me permission to re-post his article on Tradicat.

P^3

Courtesy of Dr. Malloy - Theological Flint

Does “not intending” sin make it not sin?

October 26, 2019

No. Acts are objectively good or evil in themselves. Acts objectively good in themselves cannot be excused by “lack of intention” or “non-intention” of their evil. An evil intention may make an otherwise good act evil. For instance, to donate money for the sake of one’s reputation is evil. The object of the act is good, but the intention is evil. So, the act is evil. But a good intention does not render an evil object good.

I cannot murder you so as to save someone else, even so as to save a city. Why? Because I first choose the evil itself, to murder you. In doing so, I become an enemy of life and an enemy of God. I am now an enemy of Christ. In such a state, I can in no way intend a good end in a holy manner. Rather, lacking holiness, I move forward easily succumbing to evil thoughts and deeds. This state does not fit with my wanting a good end in a holy manner. As St. Paul says, do not do evil that good may come. God forbid.

So, CAN WE DO THE OBJECTIVELY EVIL ACT OF IDOLATRY AND YET MAKE THE ACT GOOD BY “NOT INTENDING” THE ACT AS IDOLATRY?

Why don’t you bring that question to the old, feeble woman of Maccabees. Could she have just “eaten pork” and not intended disobedience to God? Was that the way she saw it? Good enough?

Nonsense.

Bring it up to the martyrs. Why not just burn a little incense before Caesar? By doing so, you save your life in an evil regime. You get to raise your kids in troubled times. You get to keep your job, etc. Just a little incense. Just don’t “intend” idolatry.

NONSENSE.

What is the purpose of an idol? The purpose of an idol is to be worshipped. And is that act good? No, it is evil. In all cases, evil.

ALL THOSE WHO HEAR THE VOICE OF CHRIST CRY OUT IN ANGUISH AND IN PROTEST AGAINST THE WORSHIP OF IDOLS.

Comments

Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani

+ JMJ I suspect that the 'resistance' will be freaking out about this ... but as with the Archbishop, when Rome calls ... they go ... even if just to let them know (again) why they do what they do. Concerning the alleged 'sell-out' I have this to say: I should update the meme ... with 2017, 18 etc. The 'resistors' should stop and think a little: We are in the 18th year of the latest sell-out frenzy. So we're still waiting. Try and reconcile the 'resistance' positions with the Catholic Faith. If it doesn't objectively sync up - admit that you're wrong and take appropriate action. I have also attached some commentary from CFN. P^3 Courtesy of FSSPX.news Courtesy of Catholic Family News Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani November 24, 2018 By Eucharistic Crusade The Palace of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith i...

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

+ JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...

Tradicat

Search This Blog