Does anyone commit a mortal sin, knowingly?

[LittleSoldier]

I struggle with comprehending this.

As a Protestant I TRULY believe I committed two mortal sins. I know I committed them because I swear to you I could feel the moment when God’s grace was removed from me because of my decision to cut the tie.

As a Protestant I had NO CONCEPT of what mortal sin was. I knew what SIN was and I knew in my very core that what I was about to do was wrong but I pushed my conscience aside and did it anyway. That was about as close to spiritual death as I’ve ever been and those sins ate away at me for YEARS until I went to confession.

So now when people say: It’s not mortal unless you KNEW it was mortal…? That confuses me a lot because I know the effect those two ‘big’ sins had on my life and I cannot see how they could just be venial or ‘grave’ matter simply because I didn’t understand the distinction.

The Holy Spirit was at work in me before I committed those sins and I rejected His guidance.

I’m a new Catholic so yeah… I really struggle with comprehending this.

Thanks for posting this. It shows how it isn’t so easy, is it? Defining and/or determining whether one has committed a mortal sin isn’t as simple as being shown a list of sins, even if that list comes from the bible.

And that’s why I think it’s always a good idea to talk to a priest. First, they are able to guide us with questioning during the Sacrament of Reconciliation. They can also offer absolution as they were given this power by God. And through the Sacrament God bestows grace upon us which gives us the strength to avoid both sin and the near occasion of sin.

In a way I feel very happy for you because perhaps God made it clear to you. I think that if one feels that one is drawn away from God it probably is happening. To know it is a gift. To not know can lead to one becoming scrupulous (and a priest can help with this, too) or to become successful at rationalizing and continuing to sin until it’s a habit and one doesn’t even think about it as being a sin anymore (and, of course, a priest can help with this, too).

You said that you knew from your very core that what you were going to do was wrong. You KNEW. And that, IMHO, means that you were aware of the gravity of the sin. And you did it anyway which indicates full consent.

I can’t say if you committed a mortal sin because it’s not my place. And I think that the distinction between mortal and venial sins is blurred. They are both sin. They are both bad. They are both evil. And they both take us away from God and blacken our souls as we offend Him.

And of course non-Catholics can commit mortal sins, even if they aren’t called mortal sins. Non-Catholics can go to hell and to heaven. And God’s Law is written on our hearts. It seems that you can access that Law and that is wonderful.

God’s peace to you!

 

[steve_b]

That’s fine. But please do not change my quotes.

where did that happen
LS:

I used the word “please.” That means it is a request - not a demand. You have not used the word “please” but have simply told me what to do - twice. Please do not tell me what to do!

Does that go for the Church as well?
LS:

Um, I believe I stated that* I do not have a problem with Paul*. Are you saying I am lying? Please let me repeat: I do not have a problem with Paul. And I will even expand a bit: Paul wrote what was placed in the NT under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. He is a saint. I love him as I love all saints and I pray to him. I have no problem with Paul. I have a problem with you (although I love you as I love all people). I doubt you are under the delusion that you are Saint Paul, so please pay attention to my words - what I have written. I’m not lying. I don’t lie.OK. The problem is that you seem to think that you are an expert on sin - even mortal sin. And so you appear to be judging people as to whether they have sinned when you are not an expert on sin at all. We are not supposed to decide whether people have sinned - we are not God. If one believes that it is his place to decide whether people have sinned he is putting himself in the place of God. God is omniscient. That makes Him the only perfect judge. He is also omnibenevolent and perfectly merciful.

Isn’t it interesting. I quote Paul and use his quotes copiously to make my points. I also use the Catechism. And you throw a fit at me . Is it because Paul and the catechism, are telling you, what to do and that’s what this is all about?
LS:

You and I are simple, fallible human beings. It is not our place. It might be a priest’s place during the Sacrament of Reconciliation. But it is not your place and it is not my place. If you can’t understand this I can’t help you.

So in your world, how does the following (in red) work?

**1868 **Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:

• by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
• by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
• by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
• by protecting evil-doers.

LS:

Without judging we cannot interact with other people and live in society. But it is still not up to us to judge whether what another person has done is a sin - especially when it comes to something as serious as mortal sin. Are you God?

refer to my previous entry. In order to hinder someone from sin you have to know something is a sin…it’s not only sin for you but for that person as well. There’s no double standard here. We have an obligation then to disclose and hinder when possible another person commiting sin.

that’s from #1868 of the CCC
LS:

Telling people that envy, fornication, and all those other sins you listed, on its own, does not help because it is just way too complicated for that. What is envy? What is fornication? What factors influence culpability? What factors influence knowledge? Why should someone believe you about sin? Why should someone believe what the bible states?

since I’m not the one who made the rules, you’re telling Paul ***do not tell me what to ***
LS:

People are extremely complicated beings who deal with cognitive dissonance, misunderstanding, failure to communicate, differing amounts of intelligence based on innate processes, health (both physical and mental), age, experience, everything that goes on with what their parents have told them as they mature, the use of defense mechanisms which may not even be conscious and yet you think you can make the determination that someone has sinned?

Did Paul fail to communicate? Was his audience so low in the intelligence quotient, they couldn’t possibly understand what he was talking about?
LS:

And early in the morning he came again into the temple: and all the people came to him. And sitting down he taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst, And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery. Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou? And this they said tempting him, that they might accuse him. But Jesus bowing himself down, wrote with his finger on the ground. When therefore they continued asking him, he lifted up himself and said to them:** He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.** And again stooping down, he wrote on the ground. But they hearing this, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest. And Jesus alone remained, and the woman standing in the midst. Then Jesus lifting up himself, said to her: Woman, where are they that accused thee? Hath no man condemned thee? Who said: No man, Lord. And Jesus said: Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more.

[John 8:2-11],

Was Jesus therefore excusing adultery? What’s really going on there?

 

[cemiller]

Unfortunately I have committed mortal sin with full knowlege and consent… My God grant me the strength to refuse those sins in the future!

 

[nodito]

"Little Solider:

That’s fine. But please do not change my quotes.

steve b quoting Little Solider:

That’s fine. But please do not change my quotes.

where did that happen

Steve b,

Little soliders’ original posts do not have underlined words in them. When you quote him and then add underlining, it changes the emphasis of his words and makes it sounds as if he is stressing points which he did not intend to. Other posters who are reading your quotes can get confused.

You can achieve the same effect by simply quoting smaller segments of his posts and then responding to them individually (as you have started doing), but it’s best not to alter the original quote at all.

 

[LittleSoldier]

where did that happen

Does that go for the Church as well?

Isn’t it interesting. I quote Paul and use his quotes copiously to make my points. I also use the Catechism. And you throw a fit at me . Is it because Paul and the catechism, are telling you, what to do and that’s what this is all about?

So in your world, how does the following (in red) work?

**1868 **Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:

• by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
• by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
• by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
• by protecting evil-doers.

refer to my previous entry. In order to hinder someone from sin you have to know something is a sin…it’s not only sin for you but for that person as well. There’s no double standard here. We have an obligation then to disclose and hinder when possible another person commiting sin.

that’s from #1868 of the CCC

since I’m not the one who made the rules, you’re telling Paul ***do not tell me what to ***

Did Paul fail to communicate? Was his audience so low in the intelligence quotient, they couldn’t possibly understand what he was talking about?

Was Jesus therefore excusing adultery? What’s really going on there?

This is game-playing on your part and is therefore off-topic and uncharitable. You are not only changing the context of my words by changing the colors and using underlining, you have now added words to at least one of my quotes. Others will see that and think that I said “Are you God?” when I did not. You are now on my Ignore List. I will leave it to others to come to their own conclusions as to your words.

 

[CapitalT]

Sorry, but you have contradicted yourself. One cannot unwittingly commit mortal sin. (That, BTW, is my entire point.) One of the criteria for a sin to be mortal is full knowledge of the sinful character of the act.

Unwitting (adj.) 1. inadvertant; unintentional; accidental. 2. not knowing; unaware

How can one have full knowledge while at the same time not knowing and being unaware?

Kay Cee,

I still must insist that you are wrong. As I think is clear in my context, one can commit a mortal sin without knowing it is a “mortal sin”, which is what I meant by “unwittingly.” You are saying, in effect, that one must know one has committed a “mortal sin” to have indeed committed that mortal sin, which is not true. One must know one has broken God’s law (even if they do not intellectually recognize ‘God’), but one does not need to know they just “committed mortal sin.”

Though you continue to say you do not believe one must believe in mortal sin to commit mortal sin, that is the logical result of saying you must have full knowledge that a sin is specifically mortal/grave. The Catechism defines full knowledge as full knowledge of “its opposition to God’s law” (that it is a sin), not full knowledge of its specific degree or categorization.

As the Catholic Encyclopedia states:

**“Actual advertence to the sinfulness of the act is not required, virtual advertence suffices. It is not necessary that the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present, the full and free consent of the will to an evil act suffices.” ** (newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm#III; section under “mortal sin >> imputability”)

 

[nickybr38]

Kay Cee,

I still must insist that you are wrong. As I think is clear in my context, one can commit a mortal sin without knowing it is a “mortal sin”, which is what I meant by “unwittingly.” You are saying, in effect, that one must know one has committed a “mortal sin” to have indeed committed that mortal sin, which is not true. One must know one has broken God’s law (even if they do not intellectually recognize ‘God’), but one does not need to know they just “committed mortal sin.”

Though you continue to say you do not believe one must believe in mortal sin to commit mortal sin, that is the logical result of saying you must have full knowledge that a sin is specifically mortal/grave. The Catechism defines full knowledge as full knowledge of “its opposition to God’s law” (that it is a sin), not full knowledge of its specific degree or categorization.

As the Catholic Encyclopedia states:

**“Actual advertence to the sinfulness of the act is not required, virtual advertence suffices. It is not necessary that the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present, the full and free consent of the will to an evil act suffices.” ** (newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm#III; section under “mortal sin >> imputability”)

This is a great explanation. Thank you. I was understanding it as the poster you were responding to but this definitely helps to clear things up.

 

[steve_b]

Steve b,

Little soliders’ original posts do not have underlined words in them. When you quote him and then add underlining, it changes the emphasis of his words and makes it sounds as if he is stressing points which he did not intend to. Other posters who are reading your quotes can get confused.

You can achieve the same effect by simply quoting smaller segments of his posts and then responding to them individually (as you have started doing), but it’s best not to alter the original quote at all.

Thanks for your explanation.

I forgot to put as I usually put when highlighting a quoted text, “(all emphasis mine)”. .

btw, if you notice, the vast majority of posters who highlight the one they are responding to, don’t do that. And it causes no problems because everyone knows what’s going on. But for LS, I’ll be careful next time.

 

[LittleSoldier]

This is game-playing on your part and is therefore off-topic and uncharitable. You are not only changing the context of my words by changing the colors and using underlining, you have now added words to at least one of my quotes. Others will see that and think that I said “Are you God?” when I did not. You are now on my Ignore List. I will leave it to others to come to their own conclusions as to your words.

Addendum: I did state “Are you God?” but you left out where I qualified that question. You have changed my quotes so much that I don’t even recognize them any more.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Steve b,

Little soliders’ original posts do not have underlined words in them. When you quote him and then add underlining, it changes the emphasis of his words and makes it sounds as if he is stressing points which he did not intend to. Other posters who are reading your quotes can get confused.

You can achieve the same effect by simply quoting smaller segments of his posts and then responding to them individually (as you have started doing), but it’s best not to alter the original quote at all.

Thank you! This is what I tried to tell him but without any success at all. I appreciate your help.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Thanks for your explanation.

I forgot to put as I usually put when highlighting a quoted text, “(all emphasis mine)”. .

btw, if you notice, the vast majority of posters who highlight the one they are responding to, don’t do that. And it causes no problems because everyone knows what’s going on. But for LS, I’ll be careful next time.

Thank you. I would appreciate that. I tried to explain. I tried to be charitable. But it got to the point where I didn’t even recognize my own quotes! I would never just state “Are you God?” and then just leave it at that. But with the change in colors and underlining I no longer knew which words I had stated and which words had been changed.

As far as I know you didn’t add any words to my quote, as I stated earlier and I apologize for the misunderstanding.

I just want this to be a serious and charitable discussion. (And I will add the disclaimer that I have had to add once before: I have brain damage due to long-time opiate use for severe chronic pain. The damage is in my memory and language processing centers. It was slowly reversing but my pain level skyrocketed and I’ve lost some ground. I don’t like to mention this, although it’s on my profile page, because I don’t want pity or have people think that I want to blame everything on this alleged brain damage. It’s also very humiliating to admit.)

Is everything OK between us?

 

[steve_b]

kpeople:Hey Little Soldier, per your request, all emphasis mine That goes for underlining, color changes, italics, bold, smiles , …] bracketing, [snip]…, yada yada.

I have no problem with Paul. It seems as if you believe that you can take a list of sins, hold it up to someone’s face and say "OK - now you know these are grave acts because Paul said so and he was guided by the Holy Spirit and you have no defense. Now that you know (even if you aren’t Catholic or non-Catholic Christian) you have fulfilled criteria #1 and #2. And criteria #3, too. You just have. It’s not rocket science."

LS:

And the person who has now seen this list of sins walks away wondering “well, gee, I did see that really pretty girl and I didn’t want to think of having sex with her but that thought just popped into my head and I tried to get rid of it and finally succeeded by taking a cold shower but I guess maybe I committed a mortal sin. I did have that thought about my mean boss having a gargoyle fall on him and I admit I smiled at the thought because he makes so much more money than I do and I have so many financial obligations so that must mean I am envious. I think. And instead of mowing the lawn yesterday I laid down on the sofa and watched the Ducks-Beavers football game. I think I’m guilty of sloth but I’m not sure. I think I’m going to camp out in front of the church and accost the priest every morning, noon, and evening, for the Sacrament of Reconciliation.”
But what you are doing is judging people without knowing what you need to know about

I changed what I previously wrote as a result of reading your explanation of your situation. I see now what is behind your style of writing. :hug1:
LS:

Excuse me? I have no idea what you are saying here. Will you please clarify? Thank you.

I wrote

"Free will is what makes every human culpable for what we do. What you’re doing is drawing attention to the disordered will and disobedience that comes through sin. Jesus already set the terms and conditions in place that He expects us to follow. There are no other terms and conditions coming. Those who don’t follow his plan, will have consequences for their actions. "

iow,

free will seperates us from animals. If we don’t have free will, we can’t be held responsible for what we do. Our will however, suffers from the fall of Adam. So we have a predisposition to disobedience, which is a disorder. Paul otoh, complements the Church of Rome on their "obedience of faith." Rom 1:5 & 16:26] One could say then, Obedience of faith opens and closes Paul’s letter to the Church of Rome. So we need to strive for that obedience which is why scripture makes obedience a major point.

why stress that? Because we want to imitate Jesus and not the disorder caused by Adam.

Rom 5: 18 just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

We obey because Jesus wants us to obey. Therefore, we obey His commandments, His Catholic Church, remain united to the chair of Peter, receive the sacraments faithfully, and be obedient to this faith given once for all to the saints. Those are His terms and conditions.

 

[steve_b]

Thank you. I would appreciate that. I tried to explain. I tried to be charitable. But it got to the point where I didn’t even recognize my own quotes! I would never just state “Are you God?” and then just leave it at that. But with the change in colors and underlining I no longer knew which words I had stated and which words had been changed.

As far as I know you didn’t add any words to my quote, as I stated earlier and I apologize for the misunderstanding.

I just want this to be a serious and charitable discussion. (And I will add the disclaimer that I have had to add once before: I have brain damage due to long-time opiate use for severe chronic pain. The damage is in my memory and language processing centers. It was slowly reversing but my pain level skyrocketed and I’ve lost some ground. I don’t like to mention this, although it’s on my profile page, because I don’t want pity or have people think that I want to blame everything on this alleged brain damage. It’s also very humiliating to admit.)

Is everything OK between us?

Of course. Everything is okay. :console: