Conditions for mortal sin

[james_neville]

I have seen the criteria for a mortal sin must meet the 3 criteria. grave matter, full consent and deliberate consent. I was just wondering if someone could elaborate on these conditions as i am not entirely sure i understand them properly.

Thanks in advanced

 

[Bookcat]

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a8.htm#IV

 

[Bookcat]

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI

1. When does one commit a mortal sin?

1855-1861
1874

One commits a mortal sin when there are simultaneously present: grave matter, full knowledge, and deliberate consent. This sin destroys charity in us, deprives us of sanctifying grace, and, if unrepented, leads us to the eternal death of hell. It can be forgiven in the ordinary way by means of the sacraments of Baptism and of Penance or Reconciliation.

1. When does one commit a venial sin?

1862-1864
1875

One commits a venial sin, which is essentially different from a mortal sin, when the matter involved is less serious or, even if it is grave, when full knowledge or complete consent are absent. Venial sin does not break the covenant with God but it weakens charity and manifests a disordered affection for created goods. It impedes the progress of a soul in the exercise of the virtues and in the practice of moral good. It merits temporal punishment which purifies.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

 

[Bookcat]

Now…does that mean that one has have heard of “mortal sins” in order to commit them? or have some particular theological knowledge? No. Not per se. (but it may play into things…)

And remember too that many things can be known via natural moral law --like murder, adultery etc…

 

[james_neville]

Now…does that mean that one has have heard of “mortal sins” in order to commit them? or have some particular theological knowledge? No. Not per se. (but it may play into things…)

And remember too that many things can be known via natural moral law --like murder, adultery etc…

so does this mean that “full knowledge” that something is a grave sin, or just a sin doesnt need need to be fully known? this is the part that i think i struggle with and the deliberate intention (since a large proportion of the time i dont think people would deliberately intend to offend God) if they fully knew what they were doing was wrong

 

[Bookcat]

so does this mean that “full knowledge” that something is a grave sin, or just a sin doesnt need need to be fully known? this is the part that i think i struggle with and the deliberate intention (since a large proportion of the time i dont think people would deliberately intend to offend God) if they fully knew what they were doing was wrong

I am not completely following the question there (read again both the CCC and the compendium and see if your question gets answered from that)

But one does not need to “deliberately intend to offend God” in order to commit a mortal sin.

Many can be “sins of weakness”.

 

[Corki]

so does this mean that “full knowledge” that something is a grave sin, or just a sin doesnt need need to be fully known? this is the part that i think i struggle with and the deliberate intention (since a large proportion of the time i dont think people would deliberately intend to offend God) if they fully knew what they were doing was wrong

You have to know it’s sinful; you don’t have to know it’s a grave sin. Otherwise the whole thing would be circular.

The ten Commandments are broken into two groups - those regarding love of God and those regarding love of neighbor. Likewise sin can be offense to God (blasphemy, heresy, spiritual sloth for example) or sins against God’s people (harming others physically, neglecting others’ needs, harming oneself are examples). The sins in the latter category may not have a conscious intent to offend God but are nonetheless sinful.

 

[Bookcat]

You have to know it’s sinful; you don’t have to know it’s a grave sin. Otherwise the whole thing would be circular.

I did not completely follow the question there…

In terms of mortal sin we all note of course that one needs grave matter, full knowledge and deliberate consent.

And that say a person who does not know the terms mortal sin or grave matter…etc can still commit a mortal sin …such as murder for example.

 

[Corki]

I did not completely follow the question there…

In terms of mortal sin we all note of course that one needs grave matter, full knowledge and deliberate consent.

And that say a person who does not know the terms mortal sin or grave matter…etc can still commit a mortal sin …such as murder for example.

In order for it to be a mortal sin, there are three conditions. If the condition of “knowledge” is that one must know it to be a grave or mortal sin than the first condition is superfluous.

The example I use in catechesis is stealing. Even second graders know that stealing is a sin. Whether there is grave matter depends mostly on what was stolen and from whom. Grave to steal $20 from your mother’s purse. Probably not grave to steal a piece of candy from your sister’s Halloween stash.

Of course there are some sins that are ALWAYS grave, such as murder, which you mention. But the ones that create discussion are usually those that are not so clear cut.

 

[Bookcat]

In order for it to be a mortal sin, there are three conditions. If the condition of “knowledge” is that one must know it to be a grave or mortal sin than the first condition is superfluous.

The example I use in catechesis is stealing. Even second graders know that stealing is a sin. Whether there is grave matter depends mostly on what was stolen and from whom. Grave to steal $20 from your mother’s purse. Probably not grave to steal a piece of candy from your sister’s Halloween stash.

Of course there are some sins that are ALWAYS grave, such as murder, which you mention. But the ones that create discussion are usually those that are not so clear cut.

Yes as noted in the quotes I provided above – there are three aspects involved in committing a mortal sin.

(Without getting into the examples offered.)

I would note that yes the full knowledge required can involve knowledge as to “if the matter is grave”.

(Though they may not call it that having no knowledge of Catholic Moral Theology).

For example if I as a teenager honestly believed that x was not a grave matter but a venial matter (with lets say for argument sake via invincible ignorance) then when I did X I did not commit a mortal sin.

 

[thistle]

I have seen the criteria for a mortal sin must meet the 3 criteria. grave matter, full consent and deliberate consent. I was just wondering if someone could elaborate on these conditions as i am not entirely sure i understand them properly.

Thanks in advanced

• Grave/serious matter
• Full knowledge (This is simple. Do not get hung up of the word “full”. If you know the Church teaches a particular act is a sin of grave matter then that satisfies this condition)
• Full consent of the will (Again this is simple. If you know a particular act is a sin of grave matter and go ahead and do it anyway then you have committed a mortal sin).

 

[james_neville]

Just wondering for full knowledge if this is limited to a persons knowledge of the ACTUAL SIN vs what the church teaches. for example i know the church teaches that gluttony is a grave sin (so i KNOW that it is a sin) however i don’t know exactly WHAT gluttony it is.

would that mean i have committed a mortal sin if i KNEW that Gluttony was a sin but i didn’t KNOW what gluttony really is. (i.e. i know it has something to do with excessive food intake or something like that but not sure exactly what it is)

or would this be an example of not having full knowledge of the sin? since a mortal sin can’t be committed without us knowing that something is in fact sinful/or taught as a sin, hence not mortal? (realistically this seems the most rational answer but still just interested in what people think about this.)

 

[thistle]

Just wondering for full knowledge if this is limited to a persons knowledge of the ACTUAL SIN vs what the church teaches. for example i know the church teaches that gluttony is a grave sin (so i KNOW that it is a sin) however i don’t know exactly WHAT gluttony it is.

would that mean i have committed a mortal sin if i KNEW that Gluttony was a sin but i didn’t KNOW what gluttony really is. (i.e. i know it has something to do with excessive food intake or something like that but not sure exactly what it is)

or would this be an example of not having full knowledge of the sin? since a mortal sin can’t be committed without us knowing that something is in fact sinful/or taught as a sin, hence not mortal? (realistically this seems the most rational answer but still just interested in what people think about this.)

I don’t think you have to know EXACTLY what gluttony is. I’m quite sure most people have a good idea what it is and if they know the Church teaches it is a sin of grave matter then that satisfies full knowledge.
I believe that when anyone tries to say even though they knew the Church teaches something is a sin of grave matter but they did not know exactly or fully understand then they are simply looking for a way to justify continuing to sin.

For your information though here is the Catholic definition of gluttony:

GLUTTONY. Inordinate desire for the pleasure connected with food or drink. This desire may become sinful in various ways: by eating or drinking far more than a person needs to maintain bodily strength; by glutting one’s taste for certain kinds of food with known detriment to health; by indulging the appetite for exquisite food or drink, especially when these are beyond one’s ability to afford a luxurious diet; by eating or drinking too avidly, i.e., ravenously; by consuming alcoholic beverages to the point of losing full control of one’s reasoning powers. Intoxication that ends in complete loss of reason is a mortal sin if brought on without justification, e.g., for medical reasons. (Etym. Latin glutire, to devour.)

 

[james_neville]

But by not knowing what the sin actually entails, how can someone knowingly and willingly commit it?

Logically that is impossible

 

[thistle]

But by not knowing what the sin actually entails, how can someone knowingly and willingly commit it?

Logically that is impossible

So under your thought process a woman (plus anyone supporting her decision) who knows the Church teaches abortion is a sin and goes ahead and has an abortion has not committed a mortal sin because they don’t know the exact abortion procedure and what it entails???
Give me a break. Another looking for a get out of jail free card to justify sinning.

 

[Vico]

Blessed Pope John Paul II wrote of mortal and grave:Every human sin repeats the essential elements, which from the very beginning constitute the moral evil of sin in the light of the revealed truth on God and man. They are presented in a degree of intensity different from that of the first sin, committed in the state of original justice. Committed after original sin, personal sins are conditioned by the state of inherited inclination to evil (“the spark or incitement of evil desire”), in a certain sense already at the very point of departure. However, this situation of inherited weakness does not cancel human freedom. Every actual (personal) sin is a real abuse of freedom, contrary to the will of God. The degree of this abuse may vary. The different degrees of guilt of the sinner also depend on this. In this sense one must apply a different measure for actual sins, when it is a question of evaluating the degree of evil contained in them. From this, too, derives the difference between “grave” sin and “venial” sin. Grave sin is also “mortal” because it brings about the loss of sanctifying grace in the one who commits it.
…This disbelief, this lack of trust in God who is revealed as Creator, Father and Savior, indicate that man, by sinning, not only transgresses the commandment (the law), but really “lifts himself up against” God himself, “seeking to attain his goal apart from God” (GS 13). In this way we can find at the root of every actual sin the echo, distant perhaps, but nonetheless real, of those words which were at the basis of the first sin. The words of the tempter presented disobedience to God as a way of being like God; of knowing, like God, “good and evil.”
However, as we have already said, even in actual sin, when it is a case of grave (mortal) sin, man chooses himself in opposition to God. He chooses the creature in place of the Creator, and he rejects the Father’s love as did the prodigal son in the first phase of his foolish adventure. To a certain extent every human sin is an expression of that “mystery of iniquity” (2 Thess 2:7) which St. Augustine summarized in the words: amor sui usque ad contemptum Deiae, love of self to the point of contempt of God 3] .
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19861029en.html

 

[Pug]

But by not knowing what the sin actually entails, how can someone knowingly and willingly commit it?

Logically that is impossible

Perhaps you mean that someone has been taught that there is some mysterious word out there called “self-abuse” and that it is a mortal sin, but they have no idea that “self-abuse” is secret Catholic code for a very common behavior that they have been taught is perfectly good and natural and okay to do by their parents and school. They figure it means cutting or something. So you ask, is the teenager on the hook for “self-abuse” if they didn’t know it was that and instead had categorized what they were doing as okay to do?

Maybe. Depends on if they were sincere in thinking their behavior was really okay. I am of the perspective that some people have enough mental clarity to have their natural intuition about marriage tell them it is wrong despite having heard many pieces of false information about the topic. These folks might be on the hook for it on account of their sense of the natural law, despite them not connecting it to some official word that is a mortal sin.

 

[james_neville]

Perhaps you mean that someone has been taught that there is some mysterious word out there called “self-abuse” and that it is a mortal sin, but they have no idea that “self-abuse” is secret Catholic code for a very common behavior that they have been taught is perfectly good and natural and okay to do by their parents and school. They figure it means cutting or something. So you ask, is the teenager on the hook for “self-abuse” if they didn’t know it was that and instead had categorized what they were doing as okay to do?

Yes this is what i am trying to express, because they don’t know something is a sin. But they know the church teaches against “self abuse”. if a person doesn’t know that what they are doing would be classified under the label of “self-abuse” then i wouldn’t think this fulfils the condition of full knowledge. **similar principle with “abortion”. if a person HONESTLY doesn’t know that what they are doing would be classified as “abortion” and hence they think that what they are doing isn’t a sin (which would be pretty hard since they go to an “abortion clinic”) then i don’t see why it would be classified as a mortal sin since one of the three conditions isn’t met. They wouldn’t have the knowledge that what they were doing was wrong
**
Maybe. Depends on if they were sincere in thinking their behavior was really okay. I am of the perspective that some people have enough mental clarity to have their natural intuition about marriage tell them it is wrong despite having heard many pieces of false information about the topic. These folks might be on the hook for it on account of their sense of the natural law, despite them not connecting it to some official word that is a mortal sin.

 

[Pug]

The abortion clinic example seems so unlikely, but I suppose they could somehow be innocently confused. Remember, though, that you can also be on the hook if you were responsible to have known, but chose to bury your head in the sand. If the person sensed this procedure could kill their child, but deliberately avoided finding out because they wanted to not know so they could still do it, this probably negates the lack of knowledge escape clause.

I only mention that because the abortion clinic example seems so unlikely from my perspective. But everyone is different.

 

[White_Peony]

1. It must be serious, meaning it usually is harmful to another person or to yourself. You must also know that it is serious
2. You commited the sin all on your own; no one forced you to do it.
3. You have to think about the sin before you do it.