Skip to main content

Does Mercy Triumph Over Judgment?

I was at the Audrey Assad concert/revival meeting in my town this past Friday, and Audrey sang: "You delight in showing mercy/And mercy triumphs over judgment." This prompted a friend to turn to me and ask, "Does it really?" And all I could say was, "yes." It's right there in the book of James, chapter 2, verse 13. I thought it prudent, rather than doubt the rather frank preaching of countless saints, to explore the possibility that we do not understand mercy, if its triumph is understood in contrast with justice. Indeed, I think that St. James understands judgment there as synonymous with justice.

Justice is an obligation. Judgment falls at the failure to uphold what is due in justice. Mercy ameliorates the consequences due to sin. That is, one interesting aspect of mercy is that it acknowledges that sin has taken place. Sin exists. Mercy cannot exist if the real possibility of sin does not exist.

Therefore, any indulgence or forbearance that denies the truth of some moral standard as given by God is not mercy. St. James is basically telling us that, because of the merciful indulgence of God in Christ, we have less excuse than we did before. Because in the Church, the preaching of Christ and the sacraments mean that repeated, grave failures of justice may well show that we don't understand Christ at all.

But what is it about the state of mortal sin that merits everlasting judgment? A person in a state of mortal sin has knowingly, deliberately chosen to set himself against God as his final end. Mercy acknowledges God as the Truth to which man is destined, so the one who receives mercy cannot be in such a state.

God does not merely want the balance-sheet square between us and Him; he wants us to be beloved children and heirs. It is clear that he's gone well beyond justice in dealings with us.

Pride confuses mercy with justice, and claims that God owes something in strict justice to man, which is impossible.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...