It's a serious question, and is not mocking. Just trying to get clarification from the ones that advocate for being able to continue in sin and still be saved.
As a young person I drank a lot and was drunk frequently which is a sin according to God's Word.
The person I responded too makes it sound as though all we need to do is sin a little less and it's all good.
What if a mass murderer gets saved? If he murders fewer people than he did before he got saved is he still saved?
The concern isn’t that the
Catholic Church encourages sin — they explicitly teach the opposite. The issue is that
any system built around repeatable confession and penance can be misunderstood or misused. When forgiveness is accessed through a predictable ritual, some people may begin to treat sin as a “manageable” or “low‑risk” behavior: commit a small sin, confess it, perform the penance, reset, repeat.
The Church itself would deny that logic, but the
practical effect on certain individuals can be a kind of moral complacency. The danger is not in the doctrine itself but in the human tendency to turn grace into a mechanism rather than a relationship.
Mardi Gras historically developed as the final day of feasting and indulgence before Lent — the season of fasting, repentance, and self‑denial. Over time, the cultural expression of that “last day before repentance” became associated with excess, revelry, and debauchery.
Some Christian traditions, including the Catholic practice of confession and penance, never teach that sin is acceptable. Yet the system can be easily misunderstood. When forgiveness is accessed through a repeatable ritual, some people begin treating sin as a small, manageable offense — something they can commit now and “clean up” later. This mindset has historically contributed to cultural patterns like the excesses of Mardi Gras, where the promise of repentance tomorrow becomes the excuse for indulgence today. The problem isn’t the doctrine itself but the human tendency to turn grace into a license rather than a call to holiness.
There are groups who misuse
1 John 1:9 — which is a beautiful promise — but with a
distorted application of it. When a teacher emphasizes confession-as-a-formula (“If you confess, God forgives, period”), some hear that as a kind of spiritual reset button.
This can unintentionally train people to treat grace as a
mechanism rather than a
relationship.Confess → forgiven → move on → repeat. The doctrine is true; the
use of the doctrine becomes mechanical.
Some groups teach salvation and ongoing forgiveness in a way that is so streamlined, so simplified, and so transactional that it can produce the same effect I described with confession and penance:
- Minimal repentance — sin is treated lightly because forgiveness is treated lightly.
- Formulaic confession — “Just confess it and God wipes it away.”
- No relational depth — grace becomes a tool rather than communion with God.
- Moral complacency — sin becomes a small inconvenience rather than a rupture in fellowship.
In this model, 1 John 1:9 is not denied — it is
flattened.It becomes a spiritual vending machine: insert confession, receive forgiveness.
There are also groups that teach what is often called “easy believism,” where 1 John 1:9 is emphasized in a way that makes confession feel like a simple reset mechanism. The promise of forgiveness becomes detached from genuine repentance and ongoing fellowship with God. When grace is reduced to a formula — confess and you’re forgiven — people can begin treating sin as a minor inconvenience rather than a relational breach. In practice, this produces the same problem as any ritualized system of forgiveness: grace becomes a mechanism instead of a relationship, and holiness becomes optional rather than essential.
Both systems — ritualized penance and formulaic confession — fail in the same way:
They treat sin as something that can be managed rather than something that must be mortified.