Discerning if a Sin is Mortal

  • Thread starter Thread starter scameter18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
=scameter18;6132596]This is something I have never felt really clear about since RCIA. How can an individual discern if their sin is mortal or venial? And this is especially important if it is time for obligatory Mass before you have the chance for confession, because you don’t want to take the Eucharist with mortal sin on you. Any help would be much appreciated.
THANKS FOR ASKING:)

Three elements MUST always be present for an act to be a “Mortal sin.”

1. Serious Matter: examples; skippin Sunday or Holiday Mass [note I said Skipping; not missing], Abortion. murder, adultry, pre-marital sex, contraception, destroying someones Good name [even if its true], serious lack of Charity, knowingly taking Holy Communion in Mortal sin, are just a few examples.

2. Pre-knowledge [knowing before you do the act that it will be a Mortal sin].

3. FREELY choosing to do it anyway.

If ANY of these elements are missing, a Mortal sin has not been committed, **UNLESS **common sense should have told you that it was a serious matter [mortal sin].

Wecome home!

Love and prayers,
Pat
 
This is something I have never felt really clear about since RCIA. How can an individual discern if their sin is mortal or venial? And this is especially important if it is time for obligatory Mass before you have the chance for confession, because you don’t want to take the Eucharist with mortal sin on you. Any help would be much appreciated.
If you are uncertain if a sin is mortal, go to confession. It is much better to confess than to commit the sacrilege of profaning the Body of our Lord through receiving him outside a state of grace. Human nature tends to try to rationalize away sin and remove fault. We must guard against such impulses at all costs, and if we committed something involving grave matter, we are obligated to go to confession before receiving holy Communion.

Frequent confession of even venial sins is recommended by the Church, and confession has so many values. I just heard a priest from EWTN in a show I had recorded from a while ago in which he explains that if one is not going to confession at least once a month, then he doesn’t see how he could possibly overcome sin or grow in grace and not fall into mortal sin. We need this sacrament, and that is why Christ instituted it: for our salvation.
 
The Anglican Holy Eucharist Liturgy has an invitation to confess one’s sins before receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. The invitation open’s :“Ye who do truly and earnestly repent you of your sins, and are in love and charity with your neighbors…” (1928 BCP). If one is still angry with another person and has not either apologized or made any effort to reconcile with him or her, should one take Communion with those feeling in his heart?
 
If you are uncertain if a sin is mortal, go to confession. It is much better to confess than to commit the sacrilege of profaning the Body of our Lord through receiving him outside a state of grace. Human nature tends to try to rationalize away sin and remove fault. We must guard against such impulses at all costs, and if we committed something involving grave matter, we are obligated to go to confession before receiving holy Communion.

Frequent confession of even venial sins is recommended by the Church, and confession has so many values. I just heard a priest from EWTN in a show I had recorded from a while ago in which he explains that if one is not going to confession at least once a month, then he doesn’t see how he could possibly overcome sin or grow in grace and not fall into mortal sin. We need this sacrament, and that is why Christ instituted it: for our salvation.
One is only obligated to confess mortal sins.

If one is not conscious of mortal sin – do not scruple about receiving Holy Communion for it is NOT a sacrilege of profaning the Body of our Lord – for one is NOT conscious of committing mortal sin-- grave matter, full knowledge and full consent…

but of course one may still wait…but those with scruples… do not let a scruple keep you from Communion…

yes – if one is conscious of a mortal sin that they committed since the last confession – one should get to confession first for then it can be a sacrilege…

so examine yourself as Paul says…but do not scruple.

And as was said in other posts it can be “recommended” to confess – saying that they are unsure or doubtful-- something that he thinks was a mortal sin…but for the scrupulous or those with scruples – it is advised that they confess something only if they are certain.

venial sins too are good to confess…say on a weekly or monthly basis --focusing on some of them …especially working on particular ones too can be recommended.

Confession is a great gift
 
On Prudence from the Catechism:

806 Prudence is the virtue that disposes practical reason to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it; "the prudent man looks where he is going."65 "Keep sane and sober for your prayers."66 Prudence is “right reason in action,” writes St. Thomas Aquinas, following Aristotle.67 It is not to be confused with timidity or fear, nor with duplicity or dissimulation. It is called auriga virtutum (the charioteer of the virtues); it guides the other virtues by setting rule and measure. It is prudence that immediately guides the judgment of conscience. The prudent man determines and directs his conduct in accordance with this judgment. With the help of this virtue we apply moral principles to particular cases without error and overcome doubts about the good to achieve and the evil to avoid.

 
One is only obligated to confess mortal sins.

If one is not conscious of mortal sin – do not scruple about receiving Holy Communion for it is NOT a sacrilege of profaning the Body of our Lord – for one is NOT conscious of committing mortal sin-- grave matter, full knowledge and full consent…

but of course one may still wait…but those with scruples… do not let a scruple keep you from Communion…

** yes – if one is conscious of a mortal sin that they committed since the last confession – one should get to confession first for then it can be a sacrilege…**
I’m sorry, but you must have misread something in my post, as I did not say that anyone was obliged to confess venial sins. However, you are absolutely obliged to confess mortal sins before receiving the body of our Lord, and if you have committed a mortal sin then it’s not that it “can” be a sacrilege; it IS a sacrilege. And as St. Paul says, such a person is “eating and drinking to himself damnation.” That word for damnation is the same word used elsewhere in Scripture referring to eternal damnation in hell. Not something to be messed around with, and it will do a person much more harm than good to receive holy Communion in such a state.
 
so examine yourself as Paul says…but do not scruple.

And as was said in other posts it can be “recommended” to confess – saying that they are unsure or doubtful-- something that he thinks was a mortal sin…but for the scrupulous or those with scruples – it is advised that they confess something only if they are certain.

venial sins too are good to confess…say on a weekly or monthly basis --focusing on some of them …especially working on particular ones too can be recommended.

Confession is a great gift
Amen to your last line! Confession is such an amazing gift. Without it how lost we would all be!

I find the problem with lashing out against scrupulosity is that it is really not needed much at all today. Most people are not going to confession every day worrying about whether or not when they drove 2 mph over the speed limit it was a sin or not. Such is virtually unheard of, but may happen on extremely rare cases. If you notice, the lines to confession are virtually empty? Why? Primarily because most priests are doing us all an extreme disservice by not preaching on sin and hell. People commit mortal sins all the time. Due to concupiscence, man’s natural inclination is to do it his way rather than God’s way and as a result he is constantly eating that forbidden fruit, which Satan makes look oh so appealing.

We must be on guard as many times people who lash out against scruples will define such as confession willful lust, masturbation, etc, and try to explain them away as if they are not sins. I’ve heard of priests actually telling people that masturbation is not a sin and didn’t need to be confessed! Yet the Catholic Church’s teaching is that such an action is “gravely disordered” and is absolutely grave matter. Understood, someone may have an addiction or something that could possibly diminish the guilt, but he would still absolutely be obliged to confess before receiving holy Communion, as there would be no way for him to determine that he was not guilty of a moral sin. In the case of lust, it can often be difficult to determine at what point exactly you became conscious and the sin took place. In addition, one becomes guilty of a mortal sin at the point that he intends to commit it, not at the time it is completed and even if the action never takes place and the person changes his or her mind. There can also be some circumstances where someone was not sure the degree of his intent, and in such cases, he should go to confession. Lastly, regarding attendance on a holy day of obligation, if a person innocently forgets, then he has not committed a mortal sin, but if the person missed out of some willful neglect or laziness, then he needs to confess.

The examples could go on and on, but the point of the matter is not to be scrupulous but to become holy. Confession should not be looked at as a burden or something to be avoided. It is such an amazing gift that we all need to get into heaven and should be used regularly by all.
 
I’m sorry, but you must have misread something in my post, as I did not say that anyone was obliged to confess venial sins. However, you are absolutely obliged to confess mortal sins before receiving the body of our Lord, and if you have committed a mortal sin then it’s not that it “can” be a sacrilege; it IS a sacrilege. And as St. Paul says, such a person is “eating and drinking to himself damnation.” That word for damnation is the same word used elsewhere in Scripture referring to eternal damnation in hell. Not something to be messed around with, and it will do a person much more harm than good to receive holy Communion in such a state.
Now you have misread my post 😉 Yes if done knowingly it is a sacrilege. (I used the word can deliberately – for there are cases when the Church says if one has a grave reason to go and one can not get to confession one is to make a pefect act of contrition and then they may go --but this is NOT the norm…it is for example when a person lives where a priest can only come every 6 months…and they have a grave reason …that sort of thing THEN they do not commit sacrilege.

Canon Law 916 “A person who is conscious of grave sin …or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.”

which again is not the norm! …but it is i guess a an hazard of such for those who study theology to make sure they try to include everything 🙂

Also My point was that this is when we have committed a mortal sin… your noting this fact about sacrilege followed after your saying that when one is uncertain…this is a different story …for one is not bound then and one does not commit sacrilege then…for by definition one is not conscious of having committed a mortal sin.

but go back a read the post for more details.
 
Amen to your last line! Confession is such an amazing gift. Without it how lost we would all be!

I find the problem with lashing out against scrupulosity is that it is really not needed much at all today. Most people are not going to confession every day worrying about whether or not when they drove 2 mph over the speed limit it was a sin or not. Such is virtually unheard of, but may happen on extremely rare cases. If you notice, the lines to confession are virtually empty? Why? Primarily because most priests are doing us all an extreme disservice by not preaching on sin and hell. People commit mortal sins all the time. Due to concupiscence, man’s natural inclination is to do it his way rather than God’s way and as a result he is constantly eating that forbidden fruit, which Satan makes look oh so appealing.

We must be on guard as many times people who lash out against scruples will define such as confession willful lust, masturbation, etc, and try to explain them away as if they are not sins. I’ve heard of priests actually telling people that masturbation is not a sin and didn’t need to be confessed! Yet the Catholic Church’s teaching is that such an action is “gravely disordered” and is absolutely grave matter. Understood, someone may have an addiction or something that could possibly diminish the guilt, but he would still absolutely be obliged to confess before receiving holy Communion, as there would be no way for him to determine that he was not guilty of a moral sin. In the case of lust, it can often be difficult to determine at what point exactly you became conscious and the sin took place. In addition, one becomes guilty of a mortal sin at the point that he intends to commit it, not at the time it is completed and even if the action never takes place and the person changes his or her mind. There can also be some circumstances where someone was not sure the degree of his intent, and in such cases, he should go to confession. Lastly, regarding attendance on a holy day of obligation, if a person innocently forgets, then he has not committed a mortal sin, but if the person missed out of some willful neglect or laziness, then he needs to confess.

The examples could go on and on, but the point of the matter is not to be scrupulous but to become holy. Confession should not be looked at as a burden or something to be avoided. It is such an amazing gift that we all need to get into heaven and should be used regularly by all.
I am afraid you have not read widely in these forums or listened to the programs on Catholic Answers …or read all people with scruples on EWTN’s Q&A or sat in a confessional (not that I have). So I make the distinctions I do since here there are a number of persons with them…and even if there is only ONE i would save them the suffering if i can…

It is true that it may be less than before…and yes many are need of confession! And people have to make an honest examine of conscience…and yes you say many true things!!

And yes We must stick with what the Church teaches and yes we must confess mortal sins…and yes that area is particularly troublesome …and yes some priests do not keep with what the Church teaches in this regards…(though do take not of the note in the Catechism on the m topic…)

What I was writing however is simply the teaching of the Church: one need only confess mortal sin. (this goes for everyone) --though it can be recommended to do so in cases where one is not sure…especially if one is lax…and i would be with you in recommending that a person who thinks they may have committed a mortal sin --especially of m or the decision etc to do so or to intentionally look at lustful pictures etc – should go to confession right away…as soon as is reasonable etc (anyone who came to me and told me they had committed m etc …i would send em to confession right away …and even if they were unsure i would recommend they wait on communion)

but it is still the case that we only have to confess mortal sins. BUT we also have to form our conscience ~~!

and often remember too that a person can be tempted…or have all sorts of thoughts go through their mind and NOT give full consent…and therefore not commit a mortal sin.

So yes – examine oneself in honesty…before Holy Communion …and love confession~!
 
PS: for the normal person I am not meaning that one has to have absolute certainty that they committed a mortal sin…but rather what they call “moral certainty”. Absolute certainty can be hard to come by…but an honest person seeking to live a good life will likely know when he is ‘sure’ he committed a mortal sin…it will stick out.

but again it is recommended …a sort of general rule for the non scrupulous --that if you think you committed a mortal sin but are not sure…go ahead and confess it. (adding of course that you are not sure…)
 
Now you have misread my post 😉 Yes if done knowingly it is a sacrilege. (I used the word can deliberately – for there are cases when the Church says if one has a grave reason to go and one can not get to confession one is to make a pefect act of contrition and then they may go --but this is NOT the norm…it is for example when a person lives where a priest can only come every 6 months…and they have a grave reason …that sort of thing THEN they do not commit sacrilege.

Canon Law 916 “A person who is conscious of grave sin …or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.”

which again is not the norm! …but it is i guess a an hazard of such for those who study theology to make sure they try to include everything 🙂

Also My point was that this is when we have committed a mortal sin… your noting this fact about sacrilege followed after your saying that when one is uncertain…this is a different story …for one is not bound then and one does not commit sacrilege then…for by definition one is not conscious of having committed a mortal sin.

but go back a read the post for more details.
Thank you for your follow up posts and clarifications. I would like to point out concerning the canon law definition that it does not say a person who is conscious of being guilty of mortal sin. It merely says a person conscious of grave sin. You have committed a grave sin if the matter is grave, but you don’t always know with moral certainty whether you are completely guilty of the sin. What I was pointing out is that in such cases where you are not certain, but the matter is grave, then you absolutely should confess before receiving Communion. It’s not something to gamble with or take lightly.

There is a mistaken notion today that is going around that everyone needs to receive Communion every Sunday. That is not the case. Yes, frequent Communion is recommended, but so is frequent confession (of venial sins). As I stated, it is better to not receive and to make an act of spiritual communion than to receive outside a state of grace or even to risk receiving outside of state of grace. True, we cannot know with absolute certainty in the day to day ins and outs of life, but once a grave matter has been committed and if there is doubt or uncertainty, then better to confess first than possibly receive outside a state of grace and do more harm to your soul than good. The advice I would give to a scrupulous person would be different, but again there are very few today who fit such a bill.
 
Thank you for your follow up posts and clarifications. I would like to point out concerning the canon law definition that it does not say a person who is conscious of being guilty of mortal sin. It merely says a person conscious of grave sin. You have committed a grave sin if the matter is grave, but you don’t always know with moral certainty whether you are completely guilty of the sin.
AHH I see where your you got a bit mixed up on this.

The Church uses the terms:

Grave sin and mortal sin interchangeable.

The Church teaches that one is not (again aside from that more rare exception) to receive Holy Communion if one is conscious of a grave sin --meaning a mortal sin.

For the Church teaches that if one commits a sin where the matter is grave – but without full knowledge (or full consent though one has full knowledge) then this is a venial sin. period and does not keep one from Holy communion.

The terms grave and mortal are meaning the same thing.
 
so examine yourself as Paul says…but do not scruple.

And as was said in other posts it can be “recommended” to confess – saying that they are unsure or doubtful-- something that he thinks was a mortal sin…but for the scrupulous or those with scruples – it is advised that they confess something only if they are certain.
For the few that are scrupulous, they should have the standard the degree of certainty should be greater. The best solution for the scrupulous person is not to stop going to confession regularly, but to study the teachings of the Church and to believe them. Typically the scrupulous person is inflicted with worry. They will mull over and doubt whether they really meant it or were really sorry enough when they confessed the sins and will re-confess sins over and over again doubting whether they were ever really absolved. They will also worry whether they were paying enough attention when they prayed their prayers for their penance, etc. The problem is often both with their excessive worry and doubt as well as their lack of faith or knowledge of the teachings of the Church. Yes, the approach for them is different, but they should still confess everything not just the things they are certain of. If they feel guilty, they should tell the priest and the priest can then let the penitent know whether or not such an action was a sin. It is essential that the person have a good confessor, and he or she should be well instructed in the faith. In many cases, I think some scrupulous people should consider seeking possible medical or psychiatric assistance for dealing with anxiety, as that is often the cause.
 
Grave sin, Mortal sin, and Serious sin

Are different words for the same thing.

The Compendium of the Catechism

"304. Which sins must be confessed?

1456

All grave sins not yet confessed, which a careful examination of conscience brings to mind, must be brought to the sacrament of Penance. The confession of serious sins is the only ordinary way to obtain forgiveness."

(note the use of the term grave sins and serious sins …in the same breath.)

ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA --Pope John Paul II

“If a Christian’s conscience is burdened by serious sin, then the path of penance through the sacrament of Reconciliation becomes necessary for full participation in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.”

Pope John Paul II Reconciliatio et Paenitentia 17.

“Considering sin from the point of view of its matter, the ideas of death, of radical rupture with God, the supreme good, of deviation from the path that leads to God or interruption of the journey toward him (which are all ways of defining mortal sin) are linked with the idea of the gravity of sin’s objective content. Hence, in the church’s doctrine and pastoral action, grave sin is in practice identified with mortal sin.”

In the Message of Pope John Paul II to the participants of a course on confession organized by the Apostolic Penitentiary in March 1998

“The sacrament of Penance is meant to take away personal sins committed after Baptism: first of all mortal sins, then venial. If the penitent has committed more than one mortal sin, they can only be remitted all at once. In fact, the remission of serious sin consists in the infusion of the sanctifying grace which has been lost, and grace is incompatible with any and every serious sin. Venial sins are to be regarded differently…”

Notice he used “mortal sin and serious sin” interchangably.

Pope Benedict XVI in his Catecheses with Children said:

"Only in that case, when you are in a state of “mortal” sin, in other words, grave (sin), is it necessary to go to confession before Communion. This is my first point. "

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/october/documents/hf_ben_xvi_spe_20051015_meeting-children_en.html

and here

“The faithful, in their turn, must seek to receive and to venerate the Most Holy Sacrament with piety and devotion, eager to welcome the Lord Jesus with faith, and having recourse, whenever necessary, to the sacrament of reconciliation so as to purify the soul from every grave sin.” vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20070511_canonization-brazil_en.html

There Pope Benedict refers to "grave sin’.

In regards to what an action is:

Murder, adulty, robbing a bank, etc are all “Mortal sins, grave sins, or serious sins” one can use either term.

And regarding as to of a person actually commits a Mortal sin.

this can also be referred to as a grave sin or a serious Sin.

This is how the Church uses the terms and that is how the get translated in official documents into English.

So when Canon law refers to being ‘conscious of grave sin’ it means that the person is conscious of actually committing a grave sin with full knowledge and full consent.

One can call it a grave sin or a mortal sin or a serious sin. same thing that the person is conscious of.
 
For the few that are scrupulous, they should have the standard the degree of certainty should be greater. The best solution for the scrupulous person is not to stop going to confession regularly, but to study the teachings of the Church and to believe them. Typically the scrupulous person is inflicted with worry. They will mull over and doubt whether they really meant it or were really sorry enough when they confessed the sins and will re-confess sins over and over again doubting whether they were ever really absolved. They will also worry whether they were paying enough attention when they prayed their prayers for their penance, etc. The problem is often both with their excessive worry and doubt as well as their lack of faith or knowledge of the teachings of the Church. Yes, the approach for them is different, but they should still confess everything not just the things they are certain of. If they feel guilty, they should tell the priest and the priest can then let the penitent know whether or not such an action was a sin. It is essential that the person have a good confessor, and he or she should be well instructed in the faith. In many cases, I think some scrupulous people should consider seeking possible medical or psychiatric assistance for dealing with anxiety, as that is often the cause.
…there are not only a few among active catholics…be be that as it may.

they should not “still confess everything not just the things they are certain of”

that is not the long pastoral practice of the Church in dealing with scruples…this just leads to more! they are to act against their scruples.

But yes they should have a good confessor and talk with him.
 
AHH I see where your you got a bit mixed up on this.

The Church uses the terms:

Grave sin and mortal sin interchangeable.

The Church teaches that one is not (again aside from that more rare exception) to receive Holy Communion if one is conscious of a grave sin --meaning a mortal sin.

For the Church teaches that if one commits a sin where the matter is grave – but without full knowledge (or full consent though one has full knowledge) then this is a venial sin. period and does not keep one from Holy communion.

The terms grave and mortal are meaning the same thing.
No I understand that mortal and grave mean the same thing; though I do know that there are a few who try to say they are different. What I was trying to distinguish is that one can commit a grave/moral sin but not necessarily be guilty for it. In other words the sin is involving the matter itself being grave. Objectively one can commit a grave sin but subjectively not be guilty for that sin. For example, when cannon law says that one who persists in public grave sin should not be given holy Communion, it is referring to manifest grave matter since one cannot know for sure that a person is guilty of that sin.

But after giving it some thought, one can engage in some grave matter such as in the example given of one who constantly has impure thoughts going through his mind but who does not consent to them at all and struggles unceasingly to get them out, then he would be conscious of grave matter but not grave sin so confessing such could be superfluous. If such a person was sure that he did not willfully consent to these thoughts at all or willfully engage them, then he would not need to confess for he has done no wrong, but if he is uncertain, he should confess.

Either way, if one knows for certain he is guilty of a mortal sin or if he has legitimate doubts (aka he is not scrupulous) then he should confess before receiving Communion. Again receiving the BBS&D of God in Holy Communion is not something to take lightly.
 
No I understand that mortal and grave mean the same thing; though I do know that there are a few who try to say they are different. What I was trying to distinguish is that one can commit a grave/moral sin but not necessarily be guilty for it. In other words the sin is involving the matter itself being grave. Objectively one can commit a grave sin but subjectively not be guilty for that sin. For example, when cannon law says that one who persists in public grave sin should not be given holy Communion, it is referring to manifest grave matter since one cannot know for sure that a person is guilty of that sin.

But after giving it some thought, one can engage in some grave matter such as in the example given of one who constantly has impure thoughts going through his mind but who does not consent to them at all and struggles unceasingly to get them out, then he would be conscious of grave matter but not grave sin so confessing such could be superfluous. If such a person was sure that he did not willfully consent to these thoughts at all or willfully engage them, then he would not need to confess for he has done no wrong, but if he is uncertain, he should confess.

Either way, if one knows for certain he is guilty of a mortal sin or if he has legitimate doubts (aka he is not scrupulous) then he should confess before receiving Communion. Again receiving the BBS&D of God in Holy Communion is not something to take lightly.
my point is that when Canon Law says one who is ‘conscious of grave sin’ is not to receive communion …it is referring not to only committing a sin that has a grave matter but that also with full knowledge and full consent…

thus only if a person commits a grave sin (mortal, serious) …

grave and mortal here mean the same thing. having actually committed it.

being conscious of mortal sin.
 
or if he has legitimate doubts (aka he is not scrupulous) then he should confess before receiving Communion. Again receiving the BBS&D of God in Holy Communion is not something to take lightly.
but we must go with what the Church teaches here and that is “being conscious” of mortal sin …it does not say being conscious of “having legitimate doubts that one may have committed it”.

rather the person is conscious…has that ordinary moral certitude…is sure…"ya i believe i committed a mortal sin’…or even ‘ya i committed a mortal sin’…

and YES of course the general rule or recommendation for those of normal or lax conscience is if they think they may have committed a mortal sin --go ahead and confess it (as being ‘i think i may have’).

In any case the person must make an honest judgment before God. and of course make a nice act of perfect contrition in any case …out of love…

And i would say …that it would be best if they really think they may have but are not morally certain …are not “conscious of doing so”…but have good reasons to think they actually did …it would be best to go to confession first…

and especially if the person does not have his moral sea-legs yet…they can get help forming their conscience
 
Now you have misread my post 😉 Yes if done knowingly it is a sacrilege. (I used the word can deliberately – for there are cases when the Church says if one has a grave reason to go and one can not get to confession one is to make a pefect act of contrition and then they may go --but this is NOT the norm…it is for example when a person lives where a priest can only come every 6 months…and they have a grave reason …that sort of thing THEN they do not commit sacrilege.

Canon Law 916 “A person who is conscious of grave sin …or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.”

which again is not the norm! …but it is i guess a an hazard of such for those who study theology to make sure they try to include everything 🙂

Also My point was that this is when we have committed a mortal sin… your noting this fact about sacrilege followed after your saying that when one is uncertain…this is a different story …for one is not bound then and one does not commit sacrilege then…for by definition one is not conscious of having committed a mortal sin.

but go back a read the post for more details.
True, true. This exception also needs clarification because “grave” reason today is often exaggerated. I heard that in a commentary on the code of canon law it claims that “grave reason” could be serious embarrassment! I’m sorry but embarrassment is not a matter of life or death. This grave reason exception could be for people who for example are about to go into battle and have a chance to receive Communion but no time for confession. Other extremely rare instances could be pondered. Nevertheless, an act of perfect contrition is very difficult and rare, so one should absolutely not try to stretch this teaching to try to receive Communion when they do not need to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top