Do most Catholics commit a mortal sin at some point in their life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter excelsus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

excelsus

Guest
Or is it somewhat rare?

(Note, it’s just curiosity, don’t worry about me 😃 )
 
Yes, they do. Especially when one considers what constitutes “mortal sin” (I mean, you only have to skip Sunday mass when you’re able to attend).
The important thing is to recognise the fault and try to do better next time.
 
I would say that certain acts that have become socially acceptable, like contraceptive and pre-marital sex, are common among Catholic youth.
 
I was listening to a talk one time, I do believe it was Catholic Answers, where the guest said that a mortal sin can be different from person to person, especially from person to Saint.

For example, it may be considered a venial sin for someone like me to talk about someone behind their back. While it may be a mortal sin for St. Teresa to do the same, since her relationship with Christ is so much stronger than mine. She realizes how much she is offending God because she has a much stronger relationship with Him.

Just my 0.02

God bless…
 
Yes, I believe they do. I know I have. I think this is especally common with the third commandment in general (keep holy the Lord’s day) and the fourth (honor your mother and father) as a child or teenager. Saying the Lord’s name in vain is a common one as well.
 
YES. And the smartest thing we can do is recognize the weight of our sins.
A better questions is, how many of us who commit mortal sin are smart enough to go to confession and recieve the mercy that Christ wants to pour unto our souls!
 
Yes! Miss a sunday Mass or a Holy Day of Obligation (without special reasoning like being too ill to attend-but then you can’t go to the mall either) and a mortal sin is committed.

Chenry is also right. The closer you come to God, the more sins you realize that you are committing as well. Not to mention those of us that were Protestant Christians prior to coming in the Catholic church weren’t taught that certain things were sin (like BC) but now that we know we are bound by them.

Now, just because something is more acceptable, like pre-martial sex and BC, doesn’t negate the fact that it is still a sin. Most teens or young couples that practice either of these know what the church teaches but then says well, I don’t agree with it. Too bad if you don’t agree with it, if you do it, it is a mortal sin. Period.

So, yes, MOST catholics have committed a mortal sin. That is why we have confession. 😉
 
Yes most of us do, or at least have done. Myself included…not as a Catholic though. Remember that most people will not be saved. A great many members of the Church are really ‘dead’ members and cut off from Christ.
 
stuart12 said:
Yes most of us do, or at least have done. Myself included…not as a Catholic though. Remember that most people will not be saved. A great many members of the Church are really ‘dead’ members and cut off from Christ.
Click to expand...
Those are chilling, sobering, even scary thoughts. Not that it might be true, but that someone would actually believe this. Saying that most people will not be saved makes it appear to be a contest of sorts. The few that get the best grades will make it and the others won’t? I want to know: Does God grade on a curve? Sounds like I could get an A- but be excluded from heaven because too many others scored an A or A+ !

How could anyone be “cut off” from Christ? Who cut them off? If they are “dead” members that implies they are without hope, and God would not give them another chance at redemption. That is a terribly depressing thought.

You also seem to take pride in being without mortal sin since becoming a Catholic, which in your mind would likely qualify you for that minority who will be saved (since I would think the number of Catholics who have never committed a mortal sin is a minority). But are you sure that is enough? What if God expects more than that? I would refer you to what Jesus said in Luke Ch 18:

*"Two people went up to the temple area to pray; one was a Pharisee and the other was a tax collector. The Pharisee took up his position and spoke this prayer to himself, ‘O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of humanity–greedy, dishonest, adulterous–or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, and I pay tithes on my whole income.’

But the tax collector stood off at a distance and would not even raise his eyes to heaven but beat his breast and prayed, ‘O God, be merciful to me a sinner.’

I tell you, the latter went home justified, not the former; for everyone who exalts himself
will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted." *

I think it is a safer bet to be like the tax collector and admit before God that you are not perfect and have sinned.

And one other thought. If you exalt yourself by proclaiming your lack of sinfulness and with the presumption that you would then be part of the saved minority, isn’t that pride? And wouldn’t THAT be a sin? And with the indication that you might be judging others as did the Pharisee in the temple, wouldn’t that be another sin?

Uh, oh. It appears your perfect record may be somewhat blemished. Two possible sins just like that! Best work a little harder at it. You wouldn’t want to end up with an A- or, heaven forbid, just a B+. You might miss the cut!
 
thunderballs75 said:
Yes. All are sinners. None is good, not one.
Click to expand...
This is really a depressing forum. First Stuart has virtually eliminated more than half of all Christians from the chance of ever achieving heaven, and now we read that “none is good, not one.”

When Jesus talked about the difficulty of achieving heaven and his disciples asked who could ever make it, Jesus said that “with God, all things are possible.”

But these posts make it sound otherwise.

Committing a sin does not mean that someone is not good. Unless my criteria is very low compared to yours, I can think of several people I have known in my lifetime who I would call Very Good, and a couple who were close to Saintly. But perhaps for you that would not be “good enough”. Sounds like based on the requirements you and Stuart are setting heaven will be sparsely populated and that hell and purgatory will be packed full.

Or maybe not, since the one person that Jesus took with him to paradise on the day of his crucifixion was a condemned criminal, who certainly would be considered a sinner and not a “good” person.

You may want to rethink your thesis.
 
chaunceygardner said:
This is really a depressing forum. First Stuart has virtually eliminated more than half of all Christians from the chance of ever achieving heaven, and now we read that “none is good, not one.”…
Click to expand...
If this is depressing, you’ll feel real bad when you find out its from Roman 3:10. 😛
 
thunderballs75 said:
If this is depressing, you’ll feel real bad when you find out its from Roman 3:10. 😛
Click to expand...
You should say: “taken out of context from Romans 3”. Paul was quoting from Psalms, I believe, and discussing whether only Jews or Gentiles as well could inherit the kingdom. Later in that same passage Paul (not the author of a psalm) says:

“All have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God. They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus.”

So it seems that even though we are all sinners, we can be saved through the grace of Christ. That sounds a whole lot better than the exclusionary language you seem to prefer. Recall that Jesus made an effort, reported throughout the Gospel, to include the sinners, the rabble, the shunned.

Thanks for your advice, but I think I will stick with the tax collectors, the unclean, and the criminal on the Cross. And with Claire from DE above who has the right idea about those who repent their sins. They all appear to be in pretty good company.
 
I would seriously doubt that anyone above the age of about 18 or so has not commited at least one or two in his or her lifetime.
 
chaunceygardner said:
You should say: “taken out of context from Romans 3”. Paul was quoting from Psalms, I believe, and discussing whether only Jews or Gentiles as well could inherit the kingdom. Later in that same passage Paul (not the author of a psalm) says:

“All have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God. They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus.”

So it seems that even though we are all sinners, we can be saved through the grace of Christ. That sounds a whole lot better than the exclusionary language you seem to prefer. Recall that Jesus made an effort, reported throughout the Gospel, to include the sinners, the rabble, the shunned.

Thanks for your advice, but I think I will stick with the tax collectors, the unclean, and the criminal on the Cross. And with Claire from DE above who has the right idea about those who repent their sins. They all appear to be in pretty good company.
Click to expand...
Don’t get me wrong my brother. There is hope for all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top