Most people who have read this for a few months have worked out that I am a psychiatrist by trade. I spend about half the working week in a local acute unit, where I am responsible for caring for those who are “new to the system” or outside of the city limits. The culture on this ward is liberal and politically correct, in a city that has voted socialist for 100 years.
And within that subculture the idea of religion having power is discounted as something that is cultural. If you are Muslim or Maori, then it must be allowed: if Christian, it is conceded. We do have a chaplain, and we do have collection points for him.
But at times I wonder if we would commit Christ, because we do not understand him. The risk of my profession is calling that of the spirit psychosis, for we cannot discern: we can only describe. I don’t think this is the unforgivable sin: for “his family”, after his death and resurrection were in Jerusalem, praying. His family received the spirit.
Then he went home, and the crowd gathered again, so that they could not even eat. And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for they were saying, “He is out of his mind.”
Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit
And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, “He is possessed by Beelzebul,” and “by the prince of demons he casts out the demons.” And he called them to him and said to them in parables, “How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end. But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. Then indeed he may plunder his house.
“Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin”—for they were saying, “He has an unclean spirit.”
(Mark 3:20-30 ESV)
Onto the second part of this: the religious of Christ’s day acknowledged the spiritual. But they claimed Christ was like the Gedarene Demoniac. This text has been used by many as a hammer — either on spiritual warfare or to shut people up who question their actions, saying “The spirit told me”.
Asking “what spirit?” is no sin. What is a sin is calling good evil, and evil good. I’m quoting Cail with some caveats: I think the Roman rule here is too restrictive, and ignores the principle of double effect. I can think of three or four reasons for women to manipulate their hormones — ranging from vanity (no pimples) and convenience (no periods for three months if you continue to take active pills during that period) to avoiding the consequences of early menopause following surgeries. (And I am aware of how many ways the same medications can kill someone — which the secular press ignores. A few women dying of stroke, or developing nasty cancers cannot destroy the narrative). But if gives an example of how the modernists call good evil.
Also, many priests of a certain generation are just as dismissive of Church teachings on sex as anyone else. It’s not unusual for them to shrug this kind of thing off with, “Oh, it’s not that big a deal; no one’s perfect.” I’ve even heard of priests telling people to stop bringing it to Confession. I know people with several children whose priests have offered to give them a dispensation for using birth control — even though they have no such authority and no such thing exists. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s some of that coming into play here, with the priest wishing she’d just get with the program like the other 90% of Catholics who ignore the teachings on procreation and stop bugging him.
These “micro-managed rules” (which they aren’t: “no contraceptive sex ever” isn’t micro-managing; it’s actually one very simple rule) make sense and work just fine, in the context of an overall Catholic life. Not so much when the spouses are immersed in the female imperative; have been taught since Vatican II that you can pick and choose from these “old-fashioned” rules; and have a cowardly, modernist priest who only makes things worse. It’s not surprising that non-Catholics think it’s a lot of arbitrary nonsense with this kind of guidance happening.
To any Catholic readers, can I say again: I am not Catholic. My theology is reformed: my church is Presbyterian. The problem we have is not contraception, but people living in sin, and ministers calling that good and continence evil. Which adds to the burden for those, like me, who struggle with continence.
But again, these are things we can repent of.
So what is the unforgivable sin? It is walking continually away from the Spirit of God, from your conscience, from using your guilt and a shame as compass to allow you do choose the good, and making your own damnation. If you call yourself perfect, attribute to yourself the power of God (as your “inner Goddess”) you are placing yourself at risk.
And if you deny the spiritual, calling it all psychosis, you also are at risk. This is the problem of my day job, and yet another reason that I to pray more.