Can this be clarified? Young kids and mortal sin

[Confiteor]

Elzee:

Can he really comprehend *the eternal ramifications?
*

I’ve often thought if this is the standard, none of us will ever have full knowledge…It seems are meeting the knowledge criterion if we know that the act is wrong. I don’t think adults or children can truly know about eternal ramifications… we’d never be able to commit mortal sin. What do others understand the standard to be?

 

[Brendan]

Confiteor:

Another area that I think is tricky is “full knowledge” – people undoubtedly do things they think are NOT serious --i.e. missing Mass on Sunday. So if they rationalize that’s they are “good” people (let’s say this is true based on the way they live the rest of the week) and presume on God’s mercy, then perhaps they are not committing the mortal sin that would otherwise ascribed. That is, they sincerely think they are excused.

That is called the “Fundamental Option” and was condemmed by Pope John Paul in Vertitas Splendor.

It confuses Knowledge (Missing Mass is wrong) with Rationality (these are my reasons for missing Mass)

Again, it boils down to a real lack of proper catechisis, NOT to the inability to understand.

 

[Elzee]

itsjustdave1988:

Murder, for example, is objectively a grave sin. If anyone (pre-7, 7, or post-7) commits grave sin with full knowledge and consent, the grave sin is a mortal sin.

As for subjective judgement, it’s not about what we think. Only God knows the impediments to voluntary sinfulness, and can determine the subjective state of any human soul.

But doesn’t the Church teach that if we are in a state of mortal sin and have lost sanctifying grace from our soul that the judgment is hell? It sounds like you’re saying the sin may be mortal, but the *judgment is subjective even though the sin is mortal. * I thought the Church taught it the other way around - if the sin is mortal, then you lose sanctifying grace and spiritual death follows. If there is room for subjective judgment, then the sin wasn’t a mortal sin for that particular person. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t serious, but it doesn’ t cause spiritual death. Do I have this wrong?

 

[Confiteor]

Elzee:

But doesn’t the Church teach that if we are in a state of mortal sin and have lost sanctifying grace from our soul that the judgment is hell? It sounds like you’re saying the sin may be mortal, but the *judgment is subjective even though the sin is mortal. * I thought the Church taught it the other way around - if the sin is mortal, then you lose sanctifying grace and spiritual death follows. If there is room for subjective judgment, then the sin wasn’t a mortal sin for that particular person. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t serious, but it doesn’ t cause spiritual death. Do I have this wrong?

I think you might be equating grave matter (the objective criterion for a mortal sin) and “mortal” sin. The “mortal” determination requires all three criteria to be present: grave matter, knowledge, will. If all three are present, it would be subjectively “mortal” (which is what the culpability is based on). That is why it can be complex…

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Elzee:

But doesn’t the Church teach that if we are in a state of mortal sin and have lost sanctifying grace from our soul that the judgment is hell?

Yes, if one dies impenitent of *formal *mortal sin.

It sounds like you’re saying the sin may be mortal, but the *judgment is subjective even though the sin is mortal. *

Yes. Objectively grave sin required subjective elements to be present for the sin to be formally mortal sin. Otherwise it is said only to be materially a mortal sin, which carries the guilt of venial sin or no guilt at all if invincible ignorance is the cause.

For example, I’m shooting my gun at a box for target practice. I had no way of knowing that inside the box, a child was hiding. Killing the child was a grave sin (materially), but I was ignorant of my sin (lack full advertence) and did not perfectly will to commit grave sin. I may be partially culpable insofar as I may have done more to know that a child was hidden in the box (ie. vincibly ignorant). Yet, as voluntariness diminishes, so too does culpability.

The other case is also true… I THINK that I’m about to shoot someone and kill them. However, I don’t know that someone put blanks in the gun. Although I do not actually kill the guy, I am guilty of grave sin for attempting to do so. If I had full advertence and perfect consent to commit murder (a grave matter) and deliberately acted in order to do so, my act was formally a mortal sin, even if the guy didn’t even get shot.

I thought the Church taught it the other way around - if the sin is mortal, then you lose sanctifying grace and spiritual death follows. If there is room for subjective judgment, then the sin wasn’t a mortal sin for that particular person. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t serious, but it doesn’ t cause spiritual death. Do I have this wrong?

Perhaps. I’m not clear on what you are saying.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas,

… a sin which is generically mortal, can become venial by reason of the imperfection of the act, because then it does not completely fulfil the conditions of a moral act…This happens by a kind of subtraction, namely, of deliberate reason. And since a moral act takes its species from deliberate reason, the result is that by such a subtraction the species of the act is destroyed. (ST IIa, 88, 6)

Lack of “deliberate reason” required for a moral act means the lack of full advertence and perfect consent.

What this means is…

What is an objectively mortal sin can carry no culpability, if the moral act completely lacks deliberate reason (e.g., an accidental killing).

What is an objectively mortal sin can carry some but not complete culpability, if the moral act partially lacks deliberate reason. This can be cause by many number of impediments to one’s intellect or will (as in a very immature child or an adult with dimished capacity to reason or act voluntarily).

It is a subjective judgment indeed, but it is a judgment made by only God. No other person can know with perfect knowledge whether the subjective elements of mortal sin are present.

Mortal sin requires: 1) grave matter, 2) full advertence of the intellect, 3) perfect consent of the will.

The Church has the competence and authority to determine what is objectively mortal sin, that is, what is a sin of grave matter. She also teaches us that subjective elements must be present to be culpable for the full guilt of mortal sin.

Murder is grave matter. However, if a child (or an adult) lacks full advertence OR perfect consent, then the objectively mortal sin is said to lack the proper “form” of a mortal sin, and as such is said not to be “formal sin” but merely “material sin.”

God’s justice and mercy are perfect, and they take the subjective impediments to each individual soul into consideration. A sin must be fully voluntary to be fully culpable. And you can’t fake ignorance or involuntariness with God. So, we trust God will make the right judgement on such matters.

To insist strictly upon the “age of seven” as being the magical number of accountability is a bit absurd. It is intended, I think, as a “rule of thumb” for canonical purposes, but as St. Thomas states, law is for the good in general, but not necessarily in particular (cf. *Summa Theologica *IIa, 96, 6). That’s precisely why we have such a thing as “dispensation” from the law, because in particular, the Law-giver’s spirit and intent may not be fulfilled by the letter of the law for particular circumstances.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Elzee,

See more here…

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Sin

Material and Formal Sin

This distinction is based upon the difference between the objective elements (object itself, circumstances) and the subjective (advertence to the sinfulness of the act). An action which, as a matter of fact, is contrary to the Divine law but is not known to be such by the agent constitutes a material sin; whereas formal sin is committed when the agent freely transgresses the law as shown him by his conscience, whether such law really exists or is only thought to exist by him who acts. Thus, a person who takes the property of another while believing it to be his own commits a material sin; but the sin would be formal if he took the property in the belief that it belonged to another, whether his belief were correct or not.

 

[wjp984]

wouldn’t fighting with ciblings physically be an example of motal since one can make or more so the oldest child beating on his younger ciblings to get what he wants. And I don’t even mean evil kids and stuff but just the commone cibling rivalries that probably occur in every family.

 

[Elzee]

itsjustdave1988:

Yes, if one dies impenitent of formal mortal sin.

Yes. Objectively grave sin required subjective elements to be present for the sin to be formally mortal sin. Otherwise it is said only to be materially a mortal sin, which carries the guilt of venial sin or no guilt at all if invincible ignorance is the cause…

Thanks Dave. This helps a lot. But it brings me full circle back to my original question…what would be an example of a mortal sin (a* formal* mortal sin) that a 7 year old could commit (i.e. - where the result is a loss of sanctifying grace and eternal damnation if the child died impenitent). Maybe I have just reached a point beyond my understanding, but for the life of me I can’t imagine someone so young doing something with such full knowledge that God would condemn him/her to hell. I know all about ‘age of reason’ - but there are limits to a 7 year old’s capacity for reason. So, even given the most mature 7 year old, I just can’t comprehend a scenario where God would send a child this young to hell. Can you give me one?
Thank you. Your post helped tremendously.

 

[mercygate]

Elzee:

Thanks Dave. This helps a lot. But it brings me full circle back to my original question…what would be an example of a mortal sin (a* formal* mortal sin) that a 7 year old could commit (i.e. - where the result is a loss of sanctifying grace and eternal damnation if the child died impenitent). Maybe I have just reached a point beyond my understanding, but for the life of me I can’t imagine someone so young doing something with such full knowledge that God would condemn him/her to hell. I know all about ‘age of reason’ - but there are limits to a 7 year old’s capacity for reason. So, even given the most mature 7 year old, I just can’t comprehend a scenario where God would send a child this young to hell. Can you give me one?
Thank you. Your post helped tremendously.

itsjustdave1988 is the BEST! Elzee, ask your question another way: at what point do you think it might be possible for anybody to commit a grave sin with full knowledge and will? That is the real question.

 

[Elzee]

mercygate:

itsjustdave1988 is the BEST! Elzee, ask your question another way: at what point do you think it might be possible for anybody to commit a grave sin with full knowledge and will? That is the real question.

I think that would be interesting, but I’m really trying to understand how a young child could do this. You’re right - the question could be asked of anyone; and I’m sure there are some adults who haven’t yet reached the ‘age of reason’, or who are mentally impaired or psychologically damaged where ‘full knowledge’ would be an issue. But to avoid being side-tracked, I’m trying to get an example of how a 7 year old child, considered by his/her priest and parents to be of the ‘age of reason’ as best as a 7 year old can, could commit a *formal *mortal sin. I know the Church says he/she can and I accept that - I just would like someone to give me an example so I can try to better understand what a 7 year old could do that would condemn him to hell.

 

[Ham1]

Elzee:

I think that would be interesting, but I’m really trying to understand how a young child could do this. You’re right - the question could be asked of anyone; and I’m sure there are some adults who haven’t yet reached the ‘age of reason’, or who are mentally impaired or psychologically damaged where ‘full knowledge’ would be an issue. But to avoid being side-tracked, I’m trying to get an example of how a 7 year old child, considered by his/her priest and parents to be of the ‘age of reason’ as best as a 7 year old can, could commit a *formal *mortal sin. I know the Church says he/she can and I accept that - I just would like someone to give me an example so I can try to better understand what a 7 year old could do that would condemn him to hell.

Just because a child is capable of sin does not necessarily mean that child can commit a mortal sin. A child’s understanding of his relationship with God would be so basic as to admit the possibility of sin but not yet maintain the full knowledge and control of the will in order to commit mortal sin. The question is basically without a firm answer. Similar to the “age of reason” itself, I would say there is a state in the development of the child where the child becomes capable of commiting serious sin. I suppose you could say that there are 2 thresholds. First the age of reason, then the age of being likely to possess “full” knowledge and consent of the will. Those 2 thresholds could be years apart in some children or weeks in others. I would tend to agree with the priest that someone quoted that very very few 7 year olds possess the full knowledge and control of the will to commit a formal mortal sin. While it may be theoretically possible with some children, I have to think it would be quite rare. Remember 7 yr olds are naturally very good and usually their sins involve passions of which, as children, they have relatively little control.

The important thing to remember is that a child ought to confess all sins (within reason) in confession of which he is aware. At some point, only God may know whether a particular act has risen to the level of mortal sin but as long as that sin is mentioned in confession then it is forgiven. The point in all this is to teach the child the habit of frequent confession.

 

[Brendan]

itsjustdave1988:

Mortal sin requires: 1) grave matter, 2) full advertence of the intellect, 3) perfect consent of the will.

I think it’s important to discuss exactly what is meant by ‘perfect consent of the will’

That is determined by how well, and to what extent we resist the tempation. It is VERY likely that 7 year olds have perfect consent of the will.

Imperfect consent is when we hesitate prior to performing the action, or when we only half heartily attempt to resist the tempation.

Perfect Consent of the Will is when we engage in the action with little or no hesitation.

Most 7 year olds I’ve met do things with Perfect Consent of the Will.

An equal standard exists for Adherence of the Intellect.

It means that we have the Intellectual Understanding of the fact that the action we are about to undertake is sinful. This is just straight ‘book knowledge’ of facts that can easily be grasped by a 7 year old. In fact, the very fact that that the Church declares that the age of reason is 7 years of age shows the level of understanding necessary to meen this mark.

So for an example of a 7 year old commiting a mortal sin.

Place a 7 year old outside of a Church on a Sunday. Tell him clearly and distincly that Deliberatly Missing Mass on a Sunday is a Mortal Sin that would, if unrepented, condemn him to eternal punishment. Ask him to veridy that he does understand that it is the Church that teaches this, not just you and your personal authority.

If the child, without much hesitation runs off to the playground instead of attending Mass, the Child has committed a Mortal Sin.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

I just would like someone to give me an example so I can try to better understand what a 7 year old could do that would condemn him to hell.

I believe a particular example is necessarily lacking because we don’t know the results of any person’s particular judgment by God. All that we can say is that it is possible for humans to commit grave sin, and the extent that such sin is committed with deliberate reason, it would be a formal mortal sin.

Does the answer to you question have any affect on practical Catholicism? I don’t think so. In other words, what would you do differently if you could possibly know the answer to your question?

 

[fix]

Brendan:

Perfect Consent of the Will is when we engage in the action with little or no hesitation.

After reading this thread I want to thank you and Dave for clarifying the issues for us. I want to ask one of you whether one may commit a mortal sin in an instant and be fully culpable. I ask this because several times I have read it is very hard to commit a mortal sin as the three requirements are very specific and all must be met. It seems to me this is a false understanding of what these requirements actually entail as you point out.

So, for a child or adult, is it possible in a flash to commit an objective mortal sin and be subjectively fully culpable? I think it is.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Brendan:

…

So for an example of a 7 year old commiting a mortal sin.

Place a 7 year old outside of a Church on a Sunday. Tell him clearly and distincly that Deliberatly Missing Mass on a Sunday is a Mortal Sin that would, if unrepented, condemn him to eternal punishment. Ask him to veridy that he does understand that it is the Church that teaches this, not just you and your personal authority.

If the child, without much hesitation runs off to the playground instead of attending Mass, the Child has committed a Mortal Sin.

I don’t think it’s that simple. For example, add to your scenario the fact that 1 hour before, the boy’s baptist grandpa told him that if he ever entered into that Catholic Church, he would be committing idolatry, because Catholics worship Mary. The grandpa insists that the Catholic Church is the beast who teaches in opposition to God above.

Why did the kid run off? What impediments to his intellect and will were present at the moment of his act of will? According to St. Pius X “Full advertence in sinning is had when we know perfectly well that we are doing a serious evil… Perfect consent of the will is verified in sinning when we deliberately determine to do a thing although we know that thing to be sinful.” (Catechism of St. Pius X). Did the child deliberately determine to do a thing he knew to be serious evil? It’s not based upon what he was told. But upon what he knew. We don’t know what he knew and what impediments to voluntariness were present. We can speculate, but only God actually knows.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

fix:

So, for a child or adult, is it possible in a flash to commit an objective mortal sin and be subjectively fully culpable? I think it is.

Yes. Sufficient reflection could have occurred prior to the event presenting itself for the act of will.

 

[fix]

itsjustdave1988:

Yes. Sufficient reflection could have occurred prior to the event presenting itself for the act of will.

So I understand you clearly perhaps you could use an example?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

fix:

So I understand you clearly perhaps you could use an example?

A women can make a flash decision to abort her child. Is it possible that prior to making this decision, she had full knowlede and perfect consent? Certainly. She could have studied Catholic morality in college, written papers on the illicitness of abortion. Selfishness could be her only antecedent willful motive.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

As for the capabilities of children, I don’t think a general rule can be applied. For example, Physcists William Thomson entered Glasgow University at age 10, and graduted only months later. I don’t think we can simply state categorically that children lack the deliberate reasoning skills that many of us only aquire at a much later age.

 

[Giannawannabe]

As a First Communion and Reconciliation teacher, I tell my students that they go to Confession for 2 reasons—1)forgiveness of sins 2**)to receive graces in order to strengthen their souls against temptation to sin.** In this way, not only is it important to confess mortal sin, but venial sin as well. Venial sins make our souls weak and less able to resist commiting mortal sins—that’s why we need the graces received in Confession.

As to 7-year-olds committing mortal sin…my students appear to have very good understanding of sin. They know if something is wrong. So, if they go ahead and commit an act that they know is wrong, they understand that it is a mortal sin. I usually have them use the Ten Commandments for an examination of conscience. If they sin against any of the Commandments, with full knowledge that it is wrong, then it would be a sin for them to confess. Children need to start somewhere to examine their actions and realize that their sins hurt God. If they do something to hurt God, they need to say they are sorry and make up for it.

It seems that if we keep finding reasons for kids not to go to Confession regularly, then they won’t.