Catholic guilt vs. Eastern understanding of Mortal Sin & Confession

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catholic1seeks

Guest
I’m not going to beat around the bush. I’m mostly asking about sexual sins, ones deemed as “mortal sin” by the Catholic Church. For example, masturbation is inherently grave matter and so always a mortal sin when committed with full knowledge and free consent of the will. That is how (Western tradition) Catholics talk about it.

Let me set up the question a bit more:

I’ve noticed that when I fall to certain sexual sins, I easily become despondent and defeated. Sometimes, I have fallen even more because I think “Well, if I’m in the state of mortal sin now, I guess it doesn’t even matter.” I know this is not the way to approach the moral life, but I have a strong suspicion that part of my guilt and sense of defeat (when I fall to sexual sins, for example), is the Catholic understanding of mortal sin, especially as expressed in the West (Aquinas, Latin tradition, etc.).

I was wondering if Eastern Christians have different perspectives. For example, say you fall to a sin deemed grave by the Catholic Church. Do you automatically feel a great urgency to go to confession? Or is mortal sin a little different – say, not by particular acts, but a general lifestyle?

Say you fall to a sexual sin. Do you automatically think you’re no longer in the “state of grace”?

(Sorry if the thread title is not very good. I was trying to throw in as many elements in the title to get the idea across.)
 
Last edited:
Not sure what the modern Eastern approach is, but in some older sources it seems the same as that in the West. From an old EO Catechism:
Question 18.

What is mortal Sin ?

Answer.

Mortal Sin is, when the perverse Will of Man doeth a thing manifestly forbidden by the divine Law ; or, on the other hand, omitted to do, with the whole Heart and Desire, that which is commanded of God, whereby Charity towards God and our Neighbour is broken.

This Will of Man excludeth from the Grace of God, and killeth him who fulfilleth it in his Works. For which Reason their Degree of Sin is said to be mortal ; according to the Apostle {Rom. vi. 23), The Wages of Sin is Death.
Click to expand...
after discussing original sin, it continues:
Question 21.
What is voluntary mortal Sin ?

Answer.

Voluntary mortal Sin is that which, after having received Baptism, and being arrived in Years of Discretion, laying aside the Love of God and of our Neighbour, and of our own free Will we commit against the manifest Command of God. By which Sin we are deprived of the divine Grace that we received in holy Baptism, and of the Kingdom of Heaven, and become Captives to eternal Death : As saith the Apostle {Rom. vi. 16), Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves Servants to obey., his Servants ye are to whom ye obey ; whether of Sin unto Death, or of Obedience unto Righteousness ? This Sin is taken away by Repentance and the Mercy of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord, when his Priest absolveth the Penitent at Confession from his Sins.
Click to expand...
In St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite’s Exomologetarion (which from what I can tell is one of the most important Orthodox books on confession), he says this:
  1. Concerning Mortal Sins
    According to Gennadios Scholarios, George Koressios, the Orthodox Confession, and Chrysanthos of Jerusalem, mortal sins are those voluntary sins which either corrupt the love for God alone, or the love for neighbor and for God, and which render again the one committing them an enemy of God and liable to the eternal death of hell. [11] Generally speaking, they are: pride, love of money, sexual immorality, envy, gluttony, anger, and despondency, or indifference. [12]
Click to expand...
He even shows how they often describe more degrees than just mortal and venial (aka pardonable) with an example:
The initial movement of anger is pardonable; near to the pardonable is for someone to say harsh words and get hot-tempered. A non-mortal sin is to swear; near the non-mortal is for someone to strike with the hand. Between the non-mortal and the mortal is to strike with a small stick; near the mortal is to strike with a large stick, or with a knife, but not in the area of the head. A mortal sin is to murder. A similar pattern applies to the other sins. Wherefore, those sins nearer to the pardonable end are penanced lighter, while those nearer to the mortal end are more severely penanced. [14]
Click to expand...
 
This is a really interesting question that I’m excited to hear the answers to. From what little I know about EO, they do not categorize mortal vs venial sins the way we do. Rather they view any sin as “missing the mark” of perfect holiness.

But like I said, I know very little. Hopefully some EO can chime in.
 
Last edited:
Previous posts suggest they do have the concept. I’ll have to look into his quotes and sources more.

I think I’d want to focus on the personal perspective of Eastern penitents. Do they feel a sense of urgency after falling to a grave sin? Do they consider confession as mandatory for forgiveness? If one falls to a sexual sin, like mastutbation, do they fret over their salvation?
 
HPart of the thing might be the fact that there’s no central teaching authority in Orthodoxy (apart from the councils and past tradition), so it’s not as if there’s one set teaching for everything. After all, even though mortal sin was a pre-schism belief, it much more developed in the west with Aquinas and natural law and so forth. I think. Someone should correct me if not.

Then again, the link you provided seemed not to totally get the Catholic view, since it called it pre-Vatican II. It’s still a teaching. All that author had to do was pick up a Catechism…
 
Last edited:
If you, say, dropped your phone and a single crack appeared on the screen, would you repeatedly throw it on the ground because “it isn’t perfect now anyway” or would you ask someone to fix the crack?
 
Good point.

However, I think the Catholic understanding of mortal sin can sometimes lead to this view instead:

I drop my phone and in doing so break it - it no longer works.

So in frustration or despondency or feeling of defeat, I no longer care for the broken phone, until I get a brand new one again.

So with regards to the thread topic, I’m wondering if an Eastern Catholic/Orthodox view fosters a different perspective.

Maybe like:

I dropped my phone, but it’s just a crack. Therefore, I will continue to protect my phone and work on it unless it becomes so distorted and broken that it no longer functions.
 
Last edited:
Hi catholic1seeks,
I am a new Melkite Catholic, just confirmed this Easter. I asked my pastor almost the same question. Not coming from a Catholic background, confession is something I have been a little uncomfortable about. His answer to me was, if you commit a sin and you’re truly sorry, confess to the Lord right then and there. Because we confess in front of the icon of Christ we are confessing our sins directly to Him, and the priest is just an intermediary. He told me we are only required to go to confession twice a year, but we should confess to God when we have committed a sin. Confession is for our benefit for healing.
Hope this helps,
 
I should have titled this thread differently. Because I know there are many Eastern Christians who could help with this.

Just want their experiences of confession.
 
Last edited:
Get a hold of a Catechism of the Catholic Church. Look up sexual sins, especially the one you have trouble with and see what the Catechism says. Especially section 2352. Then make up your own mind. Along, of course, with a good confessor. That’s where you’ll find your answers, not from a bunch of anonymous posters on an internet forum.
 
KJW5551 said:
But then there is this source saying that they don’t have the concept:
Click to expand...
EC and EO do not distinguish between the western notions of mortal and venial sin (although there are, iirc, four special sins: striking a priest, adultery, murder, and [I forget] that get treated differently)

That said, there are a surprising number of both EC and EO sources about the difference between these two things which we don’t differentiate . . .

This is, of course, disturbing to the western mind, but not so much so with the Eastern which is generally tolerant of mistery 🤣

hawk
 
Last edited:
I have a catechism. It mostly represents the Western Catholic tradition. I’m asking Eastern Christians…
 
I have been asked to comment on this thread, so please forgive the intrusion as I am Eastern Orthodox and can only speak from that perspective.

If a parishioner came to me with this question, Orthodox, Byzantine Catholic, or even Roman Catholic, my initial response would be offered confidently and immediately. Have you brought this to your father confessor? If not, do so immediately. If you have, what questions do you have regarding his counsel? I would encourage them to return to their confessor for more detailed discussion unless there was some grave reason otherwise.

Regarding mortal vs venial sin, as others have noted there is no such distinction in Eastern theology. Sin is sin and every sins turns us away from Christ bit by bit.
One should be properly disposed before approaching the chalice, if you have quarreled with someone, beg their forgiveness before communion. If your heart is heavy, unburden yourself, whether this means confession or private prayer in your icon corner. But, you should always prepare with a recent confession, pre-communion prayers, and the communion fast from both food and water from the evening before (again, under the direction of your Fr. Confessor).

I am sorry for the rather general response, but the answer would vary from confessor to confessor and church to church and communicant to communicant. In Eastern theology there is much more nuance than (in my experience) there is in the Roman Code of Canon Law. Each individual may be given different spiritual medicine from their Fr. Confessor based upon many factors. Since I am not a confessor, any more than a very general response would be nothing more than theologoumena on my part. And nobody should rely on the musings of a young Deacon.

Bottom line, since we in the East have no such clear demarcations of sin, talk to your priest and follow his advice if you ever have any doubt.

Fr. Dcn. John
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your response!

Would it be fair to say that something akin to “mortal sin” is represented in Eastern theology? After all, scripture mentions “sin that leads to death” and Patrisrics talk about the bigger sins that required more explicit confession, like apostasy, murder, and adultery.

Is there any kind of elaboration? Maybe even a difference between sin done with malice (“I’m stealing because I hate God!”) vs other motives (“I’m stealing even though I know it’s wrong”)?
 
Thank you for offering us your understanding, not on this question in particularl, but on sin.
 
catholic1seeks said:
Would it be fair to say that something akin to “mortal sin” is represented in Eastern theology? After all, scripture mentions “sin that leads to death” and Patrisrics talk about the bigger sins that required more explicit confession, like apostasy, murder, and adultery.

Is there any kind of elaboration? Maybe even a difference between sin done with malice (“I’m stealing because I hate God!”) vs other motives (“I’m stealing even though I know it’s wrong”)?
Click to expand...
There are certainly more serious sins, even those scripturaly “against the Holy Spirit”. However, there really is no inclusive list of mortal sins that require confession before approaching the chalice.

In the East, we are blessed with typically much smaller parishes than in the West. This allows for much greater access to one’s priest/confessor where these matters are typically dealt with. Extreme instances of sin that you have mentioned one should of course go to confession before approaching the chalice. However, the waters get a bit more muddy with others. Missed your prayer rule, had a slice of cheese pizza on a fast day, held anger in your heart, these are all sins that’s should be addressed with you confessor but not necessarily keep you from receiving communion.

In Eastern praxis, you typically stay with one father confessor who really gets to know you and you him. My understanding is that with frequent confession with your father confessor, you develop a relationship and gain an understanding of your particular boundaries, obligations, and expectations based upon where you are in your particular spiritual journey.

I hope this helps rather than further confuses.

Fr. Don. John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top