Dilemma- Is knowledge of a mortal sin harmful?

[Gidras05]

Hey everyone,

I am completely confused by this. According to the catechism,

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."

Now, let us imagine Person A. He’s a younger person, maybe… 17? 18? He is brought up in the Catholic Faith (with the exception of the next part), and has sufficient knowledge at his age to make moral choices on his own. However, he is never taught, nor understands, the gravity by which masturbation is a mortal sin. In other words, no one has ever told him it is a mortal sin, or why it’s a mortal sin, or how it is an offense to God or the Moral Law.

It’s a shame but a lot of society, including what is actually taught in schools, praises masturbation for many reasons, including supposed health benefits and psychological stress relievers. This is not to say that these ideas are justified at all, but this is a hypothetical scenario.

Now, according to the Catechism, “Full knowledge” means:

**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. …] Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin. **

Now, this wouldn’t be feigned ignorance. He really wouldn’t know that it was a sinful act. Some would argue then that it is not a mortal sin, because he does not know it to be a sin.

I hope that so far you’re with me with this hypothetical situation.

Now all of a sudden, boom, he finds out that this whole time he’s been committing a sin. Can you imagine what this would mean?! Now, every single time he does it from now on, he’s effectively doing a mortal sin.

Therein lies my question.

If knowledge that things are sins, or why they’re sins, or how they constitute grave matter, make them essentially mortal sins, then doesn’t the lack of knowledge, in some respects, protect you?

I understand there’s a concept of invincible ignorance, and whether that is applicable to this case or not, I’m not sure. However, wouldn’t “ignorance is bliss” be somewhat applicable to this whole scenario?

In other words, the minute we find out that we’re sinning, we’ve just essentially made it MUCH harder for us to NOT sin, you know? In an even alternate way of putting it, by asking on forums such as these, or learning more about what things are sins, or grave matter, aren’t we hurting our chances of Heaven?

Understand again that this case is particularly extreme, and I meant it as such, since it helps demonstrate my point. I hope that we will pick apart the main point, and not the case example itself. I’m not particularly eloquent when it comes to analogies

 

[davidv]

You dilemma leaves out a very important fact:

Sin has consequences.

Many of these consequences occur whether the sinner knows if they are sinning or not.

Clearly this is a case where what you don’t know can hurt you and others around you.

 

[Gidras05]

You dilemma leaves out a very important fact:

Sin has consequences.

Many of these consequences occur whether the sinner knows if they are sinning or not.

Clearly this is a case where what you don’t know can hurt you and others around you.

That is absolutely true, and it does give us reason to want to know how our sins affect others, but I don’t think it changes the main point of the dilemma. The problem is, if you don’t know that it’s a sin, it essentially becomes a venial sin, even if it’s grave matter, which is explained in the Catechism as well.

In fact, it even explains that "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."

However, since masturbation doesn’t DIRECTLY affect another being, and since it’s, in this sense and to Person A, a morally ambiguous act (I know PERSONALLY that it’s a mortal sin, but Person A does not), then it’s very difficult to argue that it is a “principle of moral law”.

Lastly, even if masturbation DID somehow affect someone else, it doesn’t change a venial sin to a mortal sin, since, as discussed before, the person had no idea it was a sin.

 

[Loren_1of6]

Well, yes. To put it simply, ignorance is bliss and knowlege equals responsibility.

 

[Gidras05]

Well, yes. To put it simply, ignorance is bliss and knowlege equals responsibility.

Oh man I gotta get off these forums then!

Hm, yet strangely, I kind of want the responsibility, since it’s my duty to know about what offends God, since I love Him.

 

[davidv]

That is absolutely true, and it does give us reason to want to know how our sins affect others, but I don’t think it changes the main point of the dilemma. The problem is, if you don’t know that it’s a sin, it essentially becomes a venial sin, even if it’s grave matter, which is explained in the Catechism as well.

In fact, it even explains that "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."

However, since masturbation doesn’t DIRECTLY affect another being, and since it’s, in this sense and to Person A, a morally ambiguous act (I know PERSONALLY that it’s a mortal sin, but Person A does not), then it’s very difficult to argue that it is a “principle of moral law”.

Lastly, even if masturbation DID somehow affect someone else, it doesn’t change a venial sin to a mortal sin, since, as discussed before, the person had no idea it was a sin.

Every sin DIRECTLY affects another being, God.

Why does the sin being venial make it OK, particularly in this case when the act is intrinsically grave? Repetitive venial sins eventually lead to mortal sins.

 

[Gidras05]

Every sin DIRECTLY affects another being, God.

Why does the sin being venial make it OK, particularly in this case when the act is intrinsically grave? Repetitive venial sins eventually lead to mortal sins.

I never said that venial sins were okay, and I agree that they are not. Also, I agree that repetitive venial sins eventually lead to mortal sins.

However, in our Doctrine, we are taught that unconfessed mortal sins are basically a one way ticket to Hell. Now, following this logic, the more sins we learn are “Mortal”, the bigger the list is for the sins we commit to become “mortal”, since now we’re knowingly committing them.

Now, if the list becomes bigger, the possibilities of committing a MORTAL sin versus a VENIAL one becomes much greater, and we now have to watch ourselves for a great many mortal sins. Now, Person A has to resist all temptation to masturbate, since he now would be committing a mortal sin. This would be the same case if he knowingly committed something that is not grave matter, which means it would be a venial sin, because it’s still wrong.

However, mortal sins are the big factor here in damning you for eternity. By learning about sins, we are affectively marking a bunch of them as mortal, and now if we do ANY of them and die before confession, we are…well… damned.

Is that really our Doctrine? Wouldn’t that favor being ignorant, since it at least turns the mortal sins into venial sins, which carry less weight when we’re being judged, according to our teaching. I mean, sometimes almost ALL CULPABILITY is relieved of us if we are ignorant of them being sins, it says so directly in the Catechism, which I quoted in my previous replies.

 

[davidv]

I never said that venial sins were okay, and I agree that they are not. Also, I agree that repetitive venial sins eventually lead to mortal sins.

However, in our Doctrine, we are taught that unconfessed mortal sins are basically a one way ticket to Hell. Now, following this logic, the more sins we learn are “Mortal”, the bigger the list is for the sins we commit to become “mortal”, since now we’re knowingly committing them.

Now, if the list becomes bigger, the possibilities of committing a MORTAL sin versus a VENIAL one becomes much greater, and we now have to watch ourselves for a great many mortal sins. Now, Person A has to resist all temptation to masturbate, since he now would be committing a mortal sin. This would be the same case if he knowingly committed something that is not grave matter, which means it would be a venial sin, because it’s still wrong.

However, mortal sins are the big factor here in damning you for eternity. By learning about sins, we are affectively marking a bunch of them as mortal, and now if we do ANY of them and die before confession, we are…well… damned.

Is that really our Doctrine? Wouldn’t that favor being ignorant, since it at least turns the mortal sins into venial sins, which carry less weight when we’re being judged, according to our teaching. I mean, sometimes almost ALL CULPABILITY is relieved of us if we are ignorant of them being sins, it says so directly in the Catechism, which I quoted in my previous replies.

The CCC also says the following in rebuttal of your conclusion that ignorance is better.

1801 Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments. Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt.

Deliberately chosing to be ignorant is a sin.

 

[Gidras05]

Deliberately chosing to be ignorant is a sin.

I was actually fearing this answer, because that pretty much locks anyone who begins their journey to be closer to God, to be in a much “worse” position when it comes to being judged than those who by no fault of their own cannot know this journey like we can. In other words, my friends who aren’t even Catholic but might be Christian have a better chance than we do just based on unintentional ignorance, to get into Heaven? Or not so much a better chance, but more like an easier time?

 

[Bookcat]

Sin is about evil. Evil is harmful even if there is “invincible ignorance” lessening etc the culpability.

Sin enslaves. Truth sets free.

 

[Gidras05]

Sin is about evil. Evil is harmful even if there is “invincible ignorance” lessening etc the culpability.

Sin enslaves. Truth sets free.

Yes sin is harmful but you’re completely missing my main point- this is in reference to how we will go to Hell if we have one single unconfessed mortal sin at death. Thus, by knowing if sins are mortal makes them therefore mortal sins, aren’t we making it MUCH harder to get into Heaven by trying to determine which are mortal than if we didn’t know they were mortal sins and therefore had only been committing Venial ones?

 

[DexUK]

If we know better then we know better. Sin is sin and for us who know this, the effects of sin upon our souls are worse because we have the guilt of deliberately acting while knowing what it is we shouldn’t do.

Now one thing you should remember about CCC 1860 is that the whole of it wasn’t quoted here.

The whole passage reads thus: 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.

It’s the second half (with my emboldening) that qualifies the first, since our natures include the ability to know something but not be able to fully grasp it either through some fault of character or some form of external influence that compels us to act in a certain way that others would not. If that act might be sinful for someone else it might not necessarily carry the same weight with another person.

It’s not a ‘get out of jail free card’ by any means, but it does illustrate that the commission of acts that in and of themselves might be mortal may not always have a mortal effect on the person carrying them out.

So basically, in the case of masturbation, if one was conditioned by habit or addiction to carrying it out, the culpability that person carried would be mitigated by the addiction over which they would have less, little or no immediate control.

That doesn’t mean that a person acting in such a way is allowed to get away with it forever: certainly not. They should try their hardest, with their new found knowledge, to break the habit, but God, who sees and knows all that is in our hearts and minds, will be able to tell just how much that person is capable of withstanding the temptation. At the point that they become capable, the addiction begins to be conquered and abstinence from masturbation will not be an insufferable trial.

 

[Gidras05]

I found this thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=425709

After perusing through the thread, and reading the responses here, there are several conclusions that can be made, some of them are a bit unsettling.

1. Mortal sins become mortal sins when a person learns they are sinful.
2. Sins normally considered mortal are considered venial if a person is truly ignorant.
3. It is possible to enter Heaven with venial sins, and not mortal sins. Mortal sins condemn you to Hell.
4. People who are truly ignorant have, in some respects, an easier “ride” so to speak, since sins like missing Sunday mass or Masturbation no longer carries the weight of “Mortal”.
5. Being Catholic/Recognizing the Catholic Faith immediately makes us accountable for these sins, because by being Catholic we are no longer ignorant of this, and if we choose to be deliberately ignorant, it is no longer invincible ignorant.
6. Being Catholic has the benefits of providing sacraments of the Eucharist to purify our souls, and Confession to cleanse them.

This is particularly troubling. Those who are indeed ignorant get the benefit of committing sins that we consider mortal (some of them that are not as objective, like Sunday Mass Obligation). They lose the benefit of the graces of the Sacrament, but while we may cherish those graces, Confession by definition is to absolve sins, particularly Mortal Ones. Doesn’t Confession become useless then if we’re NOT Catholic, since we wouldn’t be committing mortal sin?

Likewise, those who are not in the know… how is it possible that they’d have an easier time getting into Heaven than us in the know? Granted we have great spiritual gifts in the Sacraments, but Confession is a spiritual gift that essentially equalizes the boat back to the same as the ignorant, since we become free of mortal sin, like they ALREADY are. Except that if we DONT’ go to Confession, we’re condemned to Hell.

Let me put it to you this way. Imagine that Mortal Sin is a virus. People who are invincibly ignorant are pretty much immune to the Mortal Sin, although they can still get sick (venial sins). We as Catholics are no longer immortal to that virus.

People say “But we have confession! That’s a blessing!”

That’s like saying “But the Catholics have a cure that they have to keep taking for the rest of their lives as soon as symptoms develop (commits a mortal sin) to keep from dying (eternal damnation)”.

How is that ACTUALLY an advantage? That’s not an advantage at ALL is it?

I am incredibly distressed over this. I love God and I actively want to know which sins are mortal, but I also feel that this is INCREDIBLY unfair. We may proclaim that “But we have God and we get to feel his Grace” but just compare how fair it is if it’s a Catholic versus a Protestant. They ALSO have the love of God, and more or less the same principles, and also have a lot of the blessings we do in “knowing God”, but they get off free with things like Masturbation and other sins that the Catholic Church condemns as “mortal”.

Please please please offer me some solace here.

 

[Bookcat]

Yes sin is harmful but you’re completely missing my main point- this is in reference to how we will go to Hell if we have one single unconfessed mortal sin at death. Thus, by knowing if sins are mortal makes them therefore mortal sins, aren’t we making it MUCH harder to get into Heaven by trying to determine which are mortal than if we didn’t know they were mortal sins and therefore had only been committing Venial ones?

“Joe Everyman” who has not yet encountered Christ and his Church… does not per se get to heaven by not committing mortal sins…

He needs to hear the Gospel and respond by grace with Faith and be baptized etc…

(he is missing out on a great deal…even though Jesus can in ways known to him alone…can work otherwise…)

 

[Gidras05]

Whoa whoa whoa I just realized something! Actually it’s good news for Catholics!

If we confess our sins, our sins are absolved, meaning

Mortal sin → No sin.

While they Graces of God and the ability to be closer to Him is great, we’re only here on Earth for a short while, meaning, we should definitely be considering our stance in the Final Judgment. Which is why we’re having this conversation to begin with.

Think about this everyone!

By not having sins compared to venial sins, sure we’re also more responsible now for mortal sins, and yes on the other hand we are closer to God, but when it comes to Judgment, not only will God take this into consideration, BUT!

Purgatory! Think of it like this. If we commit a million venial sins but were really invincibly ignorant, we would end up spending SUCH A LONG TIME in Purgatory being cleansed of these sins before Heaven.

If we Confess, and die without mortal sin, don’t we get like… a backdoor entry into Heaven? We essentially skip a lot of Purgatory compared to our fellow Brethren that may have been admitted, despite not being Catholic.

That’s a good thing!

However, it’s still -slightly- troubling that by being Catholic we’ve become “conscious” and therefore “responsible” on a much larger level than those around us. That kinda sucks… but at least we get all these benefits as well.

Ultimately, being closer to God, even if just here on Earth, far outweighs my entire argument. I suppose my human mind doesn’t like the inherent disadvantage Catholics have of being one mortal sin away from damnation, and it’s hard to equate that to the advantages.

 

[Gidras05]

This also answers a lot of my questions:

archive.catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9907chap.asp

 

[Bookcat]

“Although non-Christians can be saved through the grace which God bestows in “ways known to him”,[21] the Church cannot fail to recognize that such persons are lacking a tremendous benefit in this world: to know the true face of God and the friendship of Jesus Christ, God-with-us. Indeed “there is nothing more beautiful than to be surprised by the Gospel, by the encounter with Christ. There is nothing more beautiful than to know him and to speak to others of our friendship with him”.[22] The revelation of the fundamental truths[23] about God, about the human person and the world, is a great good for every human person, while living in darkness without the truths about ultimate questions is an evil and is often at the root of suffering and slavery which can at times be grievous. This is why Saint Paul does not hesitate to describe conversion to the Christian faith as liberation “from the power of darkness” and entrance into “the kingdom of his beloved Son in whom we have redemption and the forgiveness of our sins” (Col 1:13-14). Therefore, fully belonging to Christ, who is the Truth, and entering the Church do not lessen human freedom, but rather exalt it and direct it towards its fulfilment, in a love that is freely given and which overflows with care for the good of all people. It is an inestimable benefit to live within the universal embrace of the friends of God which flows from communion in the life-giving flesh of his Son, to receive from him the certainty of forgiveness of sins and to live in the love that is born of faith. The Church wants everyone to share in these goods so that they may possess the fullness of truth and the fullness of the means of salvation, in order “to enter into the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (Rom 8:21).”

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20071203_nota-evangelizzazione_en.html