Michael: I would point out the following:

1) Jesus says that words spoken against the Son of Man will be forgiven.
2) Jesus says that, in contrast, words spoken against the Spirit will not be forgive.
2a) the words spoken against the Spirit will not be forgiven “in this age.”
2b) the words spoken against the Spirit will not be forgiven “in the age to come”

The clear implication is that words spoken against the Son of Man will be forgiven both “in this age” and “in the age to come.”

Now there are a lot of ways to take “age,” of course, and I would probably rather support “the age to come” as having an eschatological sense, but if one accepts that the “age to come” is understood in the sense of “when this life is over, and we are in the afterlife,” or even “when we are in the New Heaven and New Earth, and living in the final fulfillment of the Kingdom,” then at least some sins will be forgiven in the afterlife. It makes sense, therefore, that they would have to be forgiven either they are not forgiven in this life, which would only occur because they were not repented of in this life.

There’s considerable maneuvering room there too, because the understanding of what constitutes “repentance” comes into the discussion.

I probably don’t absolutely agree with any of the Catholic understandings of any of the terms in question, and I’ll admit that I’m completely stumped as to what constitutes the difference between “a word against the Son of Man” and “a word against the Holy Spirit.” But I’ve come to the conclusion that since the only reason anyone will be separated from God in the afterlife is their own will to be so separated, it is entirely within the character of God to believe that His offer to restore the relationship and remove that separation is something that He extends eternally.

Of course, it’s Wednesday, so I’m a Universalist. I expect effigies of me will be burned shortly.