R
RedDuke50
Guest
Can someone please give me some examples of when judging is not a sin, a venial sin, and a mortal sin?
Thank you
Thank you
- Status
A
ahs
Guest
Judging is not a sin when you are only judging the behavior/action. Scripture and the Church actually calls us to do this, and to advise one another against behaviors that are contrary to the message of salvation.
We cannot judge a person’s soul, however. I’m not sure about examples of venial vs. mortal sin when judging someone.
We cannot judge a person’s soul, however. I’m not sure about examples of venial vs. mortal sin when judging someone.
T
Tomcmaj
Guest
“The time to make up your mind about people is never!” - Tracy Lord (Katherine Hepburn), “The Philadelphia Story”
B
Bookcat
Guest
2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.277 He becomes guilty:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. and if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.279
Catechism vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P8K.HTM
- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;278
- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. and if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.279
Catechism vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P8K.HTM
T
TimothyH
Guest
One of the most difficult thing to do in the internet age.
I’m sure God has some giant disk storage array in a server room in heaven with every word I have ever typed.
Yep, were doomed.
-Tim-
F
FreeSpirit1
Guest
Good answer. Thorough. An example.
Learned here. Will have to change some remarks and attitude.
Thank God for his MERCY.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Not a sin: Jack is a confessed and convicted murderer and Joe thinks “it is a shame that he committed that murder how sad”.
Not a sin: Steve and Sally are involved in an adulterous relationship. Kevin thinks “man adultery is a mortal sin I had better pray for them”.
Venial sin: Sue sees jack eating a piece of candy in a candy store. She just assumes he has stolen the candy he is eating. She did not see him take it but she just assumes.
Mortal sin: Tim sees John driving a brand new car. He judges that he is certain that John stole that car and thus he is certain he is guilty of committing a mortal sin. But without any foundation …no evidence. He does this with full knowledge and complete consent.
T
Tomcmaj
Guest
R
Rob_in_Oregon
Guest
A very orthodox, faithful priest said this in a homily (paraphrased):
Wanting the salvation of another person’s soul sometimes requires us to point out and discourage gravely sinful behavior. This is charity, not judgement.
Where we cross the line is by deciding that the other person deserves Hell. That judgement is up to God, and God alone.
This is the essence of what Our Lord meant when He said, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”
As a side note, there have been some letters in our Archdiocesan newspaper that expressed the writer’s belief that dead political enemies are surely burning in Hell. The writer evidently feels his own sins will be forgiven, but not those of opposing politicians. “Judge not,” applies here.
Wanting the salvation of another person’s soul sometimes requires us to point out and discourage gravely sinful behavior. This is charity, not judgement.
Where we cross the line is by deciding that the other person deserves Hell. That judgement is up to God, and God alone.
This is the essence of what Our Lord meant when He said, “Judge not, lest you be judged.”
As a side note, there have been some letters in our Archdiocesan newspaper that expressed the writer’s belief that dead political enemies are surely burning in Hell. The writer evidently feels his own sins will be forgiven, but not those of opposing politicians. “Judge not,” applies here.
O
OrangeOwl
Guest
Does this mean that, w/o foundation/evidence, it’s mortally sinful to assume the average person isn’t Catholic or doesn’t follow all of the Catholic Church’s stances?
B
Bookcat
Guest
Well from the point of view of reality …there are many who are not Catholic and there are those who do not follow all of the Churches’ teachings. There is evidence for this…Does this mean that, w/o foundation/evidence, it’s mortally sinful to assume the average person isn’t Catholic or doesn’t follow all of the Catholic Church’s stances?
This is the point of evangelization…and the new evangelization. So that they can come to know Jesus Christ or know him better…and follow him.
There are also many who are Catholic…and who have set out to live as the Church teaches.
But just thinking that there are many out there that are not and that there are those who do not live the teachings of the Church …and that it can be the average person that you happen to meet in general …due to ones experience in living among many different persons…(for in this present culture one is bound to meet all sorts of persons from all sorts of background…) is not necessarily any “rash judgment”. One should seek of course not to presume in a particular case but seek to bring all to a greater or new knowledge of Jesus Christ As we too must too increase in our knowledge and love etc.
But as for “moral fault” we should give the benefit of the doubt (do as the CCC suggests there).
And there are many out there who are not Catholics …due to no fault of their own… and many of the others you mention are confused as to what the Church may teach etc…etc. due to the surrounding culture etc
One should not presume moral culpability …but rather do as the CCC notes above.
Let us love and pray and seek to introduce others to Jesus of Nazareth …and to full communion with the Catholic Church…to the riches within.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Perhaps this can be of some help: (I would imagine it was written prior to the text in the CCC so it does not quote it…but the author’s cause has been introduced for Sainthood) therealpresence.org/archives/Commandments/Commandments_004.htm Scroll down …it is after the middle section
also of help are the links I posted earlier
also of help are the links I posted earlier
B
Bookcat
Guest
This being “certain” in the last example is a “firm conviction” (not just say some doubts etc) …and remember here he knows what he is doing and that he does not have good reasons…and he deliberately consents. And of course it is about some important matter (like grand theft auto!) not that John stole pencil…etc
And remember regarding these things…there can be a reasonable …“care” …or “circumspection” in life…not “blind trust”…for there are those out there who are not seeking your good…
P
promethius
Guest
First, I’m going to replace your verbage with acceptable, disordered, and gravely disordered. Assuming that one of these actions is done with full knowledge, intent, and free will, then they would take on the patina of non-sin, venial, and mortal… but we cannot know these dispositions of a hypothetical person from outside their perspective.
Acceptable: "Abortion is wrong!"
Why: we’re called to judge whether acts are morally wrong (aka, gravely disordered). This is called formation of conscience and is encouraged for ALL catholics (and indeed, all people). Acts are determined to be objectively disordered independent of persons involved or circumstances.
Disordered: "You stole that candy therefore you are in a state of sin!"
Why: We cannot know a person’s particular state of being during an act. That is between them, their conscience, and God. Therefore, while we can say a specific act was WRONG, we cannot determine that it was specifically sinful. Maybe Cindy (our candy thief) is a cleptomaniac and lacks free will, so she has a compulsion to steal candy from the store, but she always returns it and the store owner is aware of the situation and okay with it. We simply don’t know from external circumstances if a person incurs sin by an action.
Gravely Disordered: "Your abortion put you in a state of mortal sin you can never recover from. You might as well not bother with confession since now you’re excommunicated and going to hell"
Why: Not only are we judging that someone is in a state of sin with certainty we don’t possess, we are also using our judgement to determine the final condition of their soul (supplanting God’s position), determining that they will go to hell for it (certainty of what we cannot know), and causing them to despair of God’s grace in His church and His sacraments (Spiritual murder via crushing someone’s hope for salvation). All of these actions are gravely disordered in and over themselves.
B
Bookcat
Guest
( I gave my examples and am not commenting in a detailed way on the post…but I would like to note the following)
Side note…one does not need full knowledge and complete consent for venial sins…deliberate ones more so…but not all venial sins are fully deliberate…
P
promethius
Guest
Thanks for the clarification, that is correct. However, what I was referring to was that a gravely disordered judgement might be rendered venially sinful if one of those qualifiers was not present (not that venial sin requires them, but that without those we cannot judge an action to be mortally sinful)
B
Bookcat
Guest
Such is what I thought indeed you were seeking to get at ( in terms of the need for there to be grave matter, full knowledge and complete consent for mortal sin)…
For readers here is a good summary from the Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI
- When does one commit a mortal sin?
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.
- When does one commit a venial sin?
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.
R
RedDuke50
Guest
Thanks for the answers. My brother frequently accuses me of judging so I wanted to know exactly what it was. 
Y
yablabo
Guest
When one judges just judgment (whether it is the manifest status of other people or that his goldfish need to be fed), he is doing good, not sinning at all.
If one makes a rash judgment, that is, jumps to a conclusion without sufficient deliberation on the matter, then the judgment is sinful. The question of venial or mortal depend on the gravity of the matter being judged. If one is judging something of grave matter, such as whether a person is a murderer or not, to make a rash judgment would be a grave sin. If it is committed with full knowledge and consent of the will, the sin is mortal. If the matter is only light, or the grave matter is not committed with full knowledge and consent of the will, the sin is venial.
If one makes a harsh judgment, that is, calls a neutral or good action a sinful action, or calls a venial sinner a mortal sinner, then the judgment is sinful. In the case of calling a neutral or good action a sinful action, the sin would either be light or grave depending upon the gravity of the matter judged. In the case of calling a venial sinner a mortal sinner, that would be a grave sin, since the matter is grave; done with full knowledge and consent of the will, that would be a mortal sin.
One has to be very careful in exercising judgment in respect to others since the penalty of the sin, of which one falsely judges another, would be imputed to one’s self.
– Nicole
- Status