Can an 8 year old commit a mortal sin?

[cam100]

There are many examples when an 8 year could commit a mortal sin. That is the point.

See here:

St. Thomas Aquinas, who is an authority of the highest order, which reads: "When children begin to have some use of reason, so that they can conceive a devotion toward this Sacrament (the Eucharist), then this Sacrament can be given to them."6 Ledesma thus explains these words: “I say, in accord with common opinion, that the Eucharist is to be given to all who have the use of reason, and just as soon as they attain the use of reason, even though at the time the child may have only a confused notion of what he is doing.” Vasquez comments on the same words of St. Thomas as follows: “When a child has once arrived at the use of reason he is immediately bound by the divine law from which not even the Church can dispense him.”

This document actually doesn’t say that a child of 8 would be expected to be capable of mortal sin. In fact, if children committed mortal sins as soon as they reached the age of reason, it would be a grave disservice to wait until the age of reason to introduce them to confession. Since it’s impossible to determine the exact moment a child reaches the age of reason, the child could well be in mortal sin long before the precise date that confession is made available to them.

The Church in her wisdom, however, knows that by supplying confession at the approximate time the age of reason is reached, the child will be participating in the sacrament by the time he or she becomes capable of mortal sin, which is at some yet undetermined time afterward.

 

[fix]

This document actually doesn’t say that a child of 8 would be expected to be capable of mortal sin.

Yes, it does not say expected. It is possible.

In fact, if children committed mortal sins as soon as they reached the age of reason, it would be a grave disservice to wait until the age of reason to introduce them to confession.

Right.

Since it’s impossible to determine the exact moment a child reaches the age of reason, the child could well be in mortal sin long before the precise date that confession is made available to them.

Right.

The Church in her wisdom, however, knows that by supplying confession at the approximate time the age of reason is reached, the child will be participating in the sacrament by the time he or she becomes capable of mortal sin, which is at some yet undetermined time afterward.

She teaches the age of reason is when confession should start. Why? Because loss of sanctifying grace is possible. That means it is possible for an 8 year old to commit mortal sin.

It says:

"But when a child is capable of doing wrong, that is of committing a mortal sin, then he is bound by the precept of Confession and consequently of Communion…

 

[Caesar517]

She teaches the age of reason is when confession should start. Why? Because loss of sanctifying grace is possible. That means it is possible for an 8 year old to commit mortal sin.

Not all 8 year olds have reached the age of reason and not all people who are at the age of reason are 8 years old yet. “Age of reason” is not firmly tied to a numerical age, but a mental state. Eight is when many, perhaps most, children generally reach the age of reason.

If reaching the age of reason means you are always capable of mortal sin, then there could be children in the state of mortal sin who are not old enough for Confession.

 

[jesusismyrock]

If you knew what a sin was when you were 8 years old but did not know of a mortal sin then it would have been a venial sin I believe. Are there any priests here that can answer the question better.

For example… I know that when I was 4 I knew what sins were and I played the horrible game of doctor, but at that age even though I knew it was wrong I don’t think it was counted against me as a mortal sin, but I too have gone to confession for it.

 

[fix]

Not all 8 year olds have reached the age of reason and not all people who are at the age of reason are 8 years old yet. “Age of reason” is not firmly tied to a numerical age, but a mental state. Eight is when many, perhaps most, children generally reach the age of reason.

If reaching the age of reason means you are always capable of mortal sin, then there could be children in the state of mortal sin who are not old enough for Confession.

I am simply saying it is not impossible for a child, who has reached the age of reason, to commit a mortal sin. How often that happens is another issue.

I am not saying age 7 or 8 is a strict number that fits every person. What I am saying is there is no evidence the Church teaches someone who has reached the age of reason is incapable of committing a mortal sin because they are only 8 or 9 or 10 or whichever age you want to use.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

This is a link to a rather long piece from a holy priest that addresses some of your thoughts I think:
Undeveloped Conscience of Pre-Adolescents.

In part of it he refutes the idea that young people cannot commit mortal sin.

It is possible for an 8yr old to commit mortal sin if they have the use of reason, know that it is a serious wrong, intend to do it anyway, and freely act.

 

[Harmony1988]

Now several people here have called my statements ‘blanket statements’ and such, to that effect. In a way, it was, because I didn’t fully explain it.

However, now I will explain:

Children from a young age, can differentiate between right and wrong, though to a lesser degree than an adult, this is primarily because of the reasoning processes and the development of it with age. However, in the case of an 8 year old, the reasoning about sin, never mind ‘mortal sin’ is not something that’s fully comprehensible to them. If your understanding of sin is: “something that’s wrong and God hates it” - then you probably aren’t in the right place to discuss this, the issue of sin, culpability and reason can probably fill whole volumes of books.

The church defines mortal sin as a grave matter, however they also indicate ‘full’ knowledge as a pre-requisite for sinning mortally. The age of reason as to what someone said here was the age of 7, now where did they get this from? And if it’s from a credible source, can this be verified through experimentation? I’m going to say no, if you say yes, then show me scientific experimentation, inductive processes, not ‘majority’ vote from psychology tests.

Children grow very differently, some have better reasoning than others at the age of 7, and then again, this ‘age of reason’ - is not complete, reasoning develops as you get older. If you want to contradict this, then first try reading the Summa Theologica with your 7 year old son as a bed time story and get him to write an analysis for us on the issue of God, sin and omnipotency. Absolutely speaking, only God can know for CERTAIN whether a a specific 8 year old has committed a mortal sin. But given that with age also comes knowledge of right and wrong and the lack of sufficient knowledge as opposed to ‘because my mum says so’, an 8 year old cannot mortally sin.

As for the person who argued that because children at a young age can become saints, therefore they can also mortally sin…please put some proof up of this. It’s still not clear as to how you connected those two together. Children at a young age can become saints because they are more pure than adults, in their thoughts and actions. Mortal sins are attributed to adults because of their knowledge and better reasoning, which is lacking in an 8 year old child. Logical fallacy alert.

 

[Pro_Domina]

Nowadays it is very well probable.

I was in elementary school when people were already doing drugs and the sort.

I think 8 years old is right around when innocence is lost these days.

 

[fix]

The church defines mortal sin as a grave matter, however they also indicate ‘full’ knowledge as a pre-requisite for sinning mortally.

Children grow very differently, some have better reasoning than others at the age of 7, and then again, this ‘age of reason’ - is not complete, reasoning develops as you get older. If you want to contradict this, then first try reading the Summa Theologica with your 7 year old son as a bed time story and get him to write an analysis for us on the issue of God, sin and omnipotency.

If full knowledge means as you claim then almost no one in the population would ever be culpable for anything. But, then again we need to know how the Church defines full knowledge.

 

[mangy_dog]

Now several people here have called my statements ‘blanket statements’ and such, to that effect. In a way, it was, because I didn’t fully explain it.

However, now I will explain:

Children from a young age, can differentiate between right and wrong, though to a lesser degree than an adult, this is primarily because of the reasoning processes and the development of it with age. However, in the case of an 8 year old, the reasoning about sin, never mind ‘mortal sin’ is not something that’s fully comprehensible to them. If your understanding of sin is: “something that’s wrong and God hates it” - then you probably aren’t in the right place to discuss this, the issue of sin, culpability and reason can probably fill whole volumes of books.

The church defines mortal sin as a grave matter, however they also indicate ‘full’ knowledge as a pre-requisite for sinning mortally. The age of reason as to what someone said here was the age of 7, now where did they get this from? And if it’s from a credible source, can this be verified through experimentation? I’m going to say no, if you say yes, then show me scientific experimentation, inductive processes, not ‘majority’ vote from psychology tests.

Children grow very differently, some have better reasoning than others at the age of 7, and then again, this ‘age of reason’ - is not complete, reasoning develops as you get older. If you want to contradict this, then first try reading the Summa Theologica with your 7 year old son as a bed time story and get him to write an analysis for us on the issue of God, sin and omnipotency. Absolutely speaking, only God can know for CERTAIN whether a a specific 8 year old has committed a mortal sin. But given that with age also comes knowledge of right and wrong and the lack of sufficient knowledge as opposed to ‘because my mum says so’, an 8 year old cannot mortally sin.

As for the person who argued that because children at a young age can become saints, therefore they can also mortally sin…please put some proof up of this. It’s still not clear as to how you connected those two together. Children at a young age can become saints because they are more pure than adults, in their thoughts and actions. Mortal sins are attributed to adults because of their knowledge and better reasoning, which is lacking in an 8 year old child. Logical fallacy alert.

Since you seem to require facts and figures for - age of reason, loss of innocence, fore-thought and malice etc etc…then how about you tell which mortal sin you had in mind.

Or is this a fictional 8 y/o child?