Clarifying when something is a sin

[Polak]

I partially got into this in another topic, but wanted to create one just for this by itself.

The question is, when does a sin actually count as sin?

I’m hearing that if you don’t know that it’s a sin and you do it, you’re not sinning.

So the follow up question is, what counts as not knowing something is a sin?

I understand if you have never been informed by anyway that something you are doing is sinful, then you can’t know you are sinning. What about people who are told, by Christians for example, that what they do is sinful and angers/upsets God, but they just choose not to believe what they are told? Are they sinning? They have been told, but you don’t believe what they have been told, so as far as they are concerned, it isn’t a sin. Is that just ignorance on their part and they are sinning, or are they not sinning because they don’t believe what they are doing is a sin?

 

[Irishmom2]

If they are choosing not to believe it, it sounds like it would be a sin if they do it anyway.

For example, there are plenty of people that engage in pre-marital sex because they do not believe it is wrong. You tell me, is it wrong?

 

[TheLittleLady]

From the Catechism:

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60

 

[Sirach2]

Luke 12:47-48 And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating. But the one who unknowingly does things worthy of punishment will be beaten with few blows.

I think that when the person has been told something is sinful and makes no effort to learn the truth, he is justifying his actions and may be found guilty by Our Lord. But if he truly and innocently does not know something is sinful, “he will be beaten with few blows.” That doesn’t make it okay, especially if it is truly an offense against God.
We know the Holy Spirit’s role is to convict men of sin and the truth, so let’s hope he discovers his error and changes course.

 

[Polak]

For example, there are plenty of people that engage in pre-marital sex because they do not believe it is wrong. You tell me, is it wrong?

I don’t know. Is it, if they don’t believe it is?

From the Catechism:

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60

This is very useful thanks, but I am a bit confused with 1793. Is this saying it isn’t enough to blame it on ignorance, or you can defend yourself by claiming ignorance?

 

[Irishmom2]

Isnt murder still a sin if someone doesn’t believe it is?
Of course it is.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Take a look at the original and the documents in the footnotes

 

[Nihilo]

Whether or not something is a sin, is an objective matter.

It is also objective as to whether a sin is grave or light.

And it is objective that if you are conscious of committing grave sin, that you should seek reconciliation with the Church, and not receive Holy Communion until then.

 

[Polak]

Isnt murder still a sin if someone doesn’t believe it is?
Of course it is.

I have a similar view.

I struggle with the whole ‘didn’t know it was a sin, so it doesn’t count as a sin’ idea. It’s like those who do not believe in God, and then the time of judgment comes, they can just say

‘Well we didn’t realise God was real’

‘But they told you’

‘Yeah but we assumed there were talking nonsense’.

‘Ah okay, no problem’.

Nah, I don’t think that’s going to cut it. I think if you have been informed of something being a sin and choose to believe it isn’t, that’s on you.

 

[jesusmademe]

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience

What about people who commits evil actions due to psychological problems?