Failure to Commit a Mortal Sin

[Rau]

Jesus said anyone who lusted in their hearts (minds), were already guilty of the act/ sin, so naturally, another sin, killing, more than likely, if someone commits it in their in mind or heart (desires it), they are already guilty of the sin itself…these are his words, not mine, Im not sure how you could interpret that any different.

Since you are guilty of the actual sin if you only think about it or strongly desire it, Im not sure how actually following thru with the physical act would make a difference at that point, what would the additional sin be?

This is not a question that man can answer, just as man cannot truly know the culpability of an individual for their wrong acts.

Following through on an act serves to reinforce a view about the the deliberateness of a choice made. The failure to follow through (reasons unknown) tells us nothing morally significant.

 

[Solmyr]

Don’t think anyone is disputing those observations about the law of the land.

Conspiring (to murder) is also a crime. Nothing needs to be done but engage with another person about an act one intends - never even lifting a finger to actually execute the plan.

And what would be “conspiring”? It would assume at least two persons, who devise a plan to murder someone. But without attempting to actually committing it, it could be just idle fantasizing. So, something needs to be done.

A different crime for sure, but, as measured by the penalty, not VERY different.

Yes, the point is that it is DIFFERENT. Unlike Matthew 5:27. (By the way, it would belong to a different thread, but I suggest you ponder the difference between actively committing an act and passively allowing it.)

The secular law does not hold one’s thoughts against anyone (for obvious reasons). God sees more deeply and is quite able to do so should he please.

All you said here that God can be as capricious and irrational as he pleases, and that is also not disputed. You know… “might makes right”.

I am also amused that you guys keep comparing “the emotion coming from being attracted to someone (love making)” and “the intent to murder someone”. How strange, and how irrational.

 

[Rau]

And what would be “conspiring”? It would assume at least two persons, who devise a plan to murder someone. But without attempting to actually committing it, it could be just idle fantasizing. So, something needs to be done.

Yes, the point is that it is DIFFERENT. Unlike Matthew 5:27. (By the way, it would belong to a different thread, but I suggest you ponder the difference between actively committing an act and passively allowing it.)

All you said here that God can be as capricious and irrational as he pleases, and that is also not disputed. You know… “might makes right”.

I am also amused that you guys keep comparing “the emotion coming from being attracted to someone (love making)” and “the intent to murder someone”. How strange, and how irrational.

Most of your remarks here seem intended to obfuscate, or miss the point entirely - as though you have something to say which you will say (in an argumentative or petulant manner) somewhat regardless of what I’ve put to you. And the reference to “you guys” appears to have no relevance to my post.

 

[Solmyr]

Most of your remarks here seem intended to obfuscate, or miss the point entirely - as though you have something to say which you will say (in an argumentative or petulant manner) somewhat regardless of what I’ve put to you.

You are mistaken. I would like to see clear, unambiguous arguments. Just like challenging the usage of “conspiring”. A conspiration is MORE than a few people getting together and talking about an illegal act. The DESIRE to carry it out and ACTIONS to achieve it are also necessary.

On the other hand Matthew 5:27 only talks about having lustful thoughts and equating them to the actual action. That is why I call it “thought-crime” so aptly named in 1984. No actions, just “thoughts”.

 

[Bookcat]

Jesus said anyone who lusted in their hearts (minds), were already guilty of the act/ sin, so naturally, another sin, killing, more than likely, if someone commits it in their in mind or heart (desires it), they are already guilty of the sin itself…these are his words, not mine, Im not sure how you could interpret that any different.

Since you are guilty of the actual sin if you only think about it or strongly desire it, Im not sure how actually following thru with the physical act would make a difference at that point, what would the additional sin be?

Jesus was not seeking to give some detailed moral theologylecture there. Note though he said the person has committed “Adultery in his heart”.

First off - the mere thought that happens to someone or experience of desire (no matter how strong or persistent the temptation is) does not mean necessarily there is any sin. We were discussing mortal sin -where there is not only grave matter (like lusting for a woman) but also full knowledge and deliberate consent (complete consent).

But yes a person who say lusts after a person (with full knowledge and complete consent) has committed a mortal sin interiorly. If that person carries out his lust into action -that yes increases the sinfulness into by the exterior action (deliberate lustful thoughts about fornication…and then engages in fornication). The person’s guilt is greater - as is the consequences of that guilt. And in this case the person might be including another person in their sin - they have increase their sin that way as well.

 

[BornInMarch]

Yes.

Mortal sin is already involved in deliberately choosing to do so - even if one is prevented from doing it.

Mortal sin is where there is grave matter, full knowledge and deliberate consent -if such is present though one is prevented from carrying into external action the sin - *there is already mortal sin. *

Mortal sin is not only regarding exterior actions.

I have a question.

If someone plans on committing a mortal sin but backs away from it at the last moment (for example: someone plans to shoot up a school, purchases firearms, observes the school for weeks to learn when it’s most busy … but loses his nerve on the scheduled day and instead throws his gun in a river), would he still be guilty of a mortal sin just for planning? In other words, is Conspiracy to commit a Mortal Sin also a Mortal Sin?

 

[ChadS]

I have a question.

If someone plans on committing a mortal sin but backs away from it at the last moment (for example: someone plans to shoot up a school, purchases firearms, observes the school for weeks to learn when it’s most busy … but loses his nerve on the scheduled day and instead throws his gun in a river), would he still be guilty of a mortal sin just for planning? In other words, is Conspiracy to commit a Mortal Sin also a Mortal Sin?

I think with the way this thread has been going that would be a resounding Yes!

ChadS

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Jesus was not seeking to give some detailed moral theologylecture there. Note though he said the person has committed “Adultery in his heart”.

First off - the mere thought that happens to someone or experience of desire (no matter how strong or persistent the temptation is) does not mean necessarily there is any sin. We were discussing mortal sin -where there is not only grave matter (like lusting for a woman) but also full knowledge and deliberate consent (complete consent).

But yes a person who say lusts after a person (with full knowledge and complete consent) has committed a mortal sin interiorly. If that person carries out his lust into action -that yes increases the sinfulness into by the exterior action (deliberate lustful thoughts about fornication…and then engages in fornication). The person’s guilt is greater - as is the consequences of that guilt. And in this case the person might be including another person in their sin - they have increase their sin that way as well.

But isn’t lust a special case here? Lust often is done without any intention of following through with action. But the act of lust itself is a sin. That much we can agree. But with other sins, it is not so clear. If a person imagines what it would be like to rob a bank, but without ever having the slightest intention of following through, does that person sin by doing so?

The application of “lusting in your heart” to sins in general is a little problematic because of the special nature of lust.

 

[Bookcat]

I have a question.

If someone plans on committing a mortal sin but backs away from it at the last moment (for example: someone plans to shoot up a school, purchases firearms, observes the school for weeks to learn when it’s most busy … but loses his nerve on the scheduled day and instead throws his gun in a river), would he still be guilty of a mortal sin just for planning? In other words, is Conspiracy to commit a Mortal Sin also a Mortal Sin?

Yes.

For in this case the person has chosen to do so -with full knowledge and deliberate compete consent - so yes (all things being equal) that would involved mortal sin. Not the worse mortal sin of doing it but yes mortal sin.

Such can be different though with say a person being “tempted” but not consenting …or a person having some involuntary thoughts about doing such a think (for which they ought to get help).

 

[Bookcat]

But isn’t lust a special case here? Lust often is done without any intention of following through with action. But the act of lust itself is a sin. That much we can agree. But with other sins, it is not so clear. If a person imagines what it would be like to rob a bank, but without ever having the slightest intention of following through, does that person sin by doing so?

The application of “lusting in your heart” to sins in general is a little problematic because of the special nature of lust.

Yes there is a difference- you are correct.

But it is not that one is “applying the lusting in the heart” to other sins - but “lusting in the heart” is one example of interior sins (though yes one of its particular nature).

Can I write a novel about a bank robbery and imagine what it would be like and not sin? Sure.

But if I choose in my will to rob a bank - with full knowledge and complete consent - that is a mortal sin - even I later run away scared of the guards.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

But if I choose in my will to rob a bank - with full knowledge and complete consent - that is a mortal sin - even I later run away scared of the guards.

I could argue that until you have seen the bank and the customers coming and going, you are not really fully aware of what it was you had “decided” to do. Therefore your “decision” was made without full knowledge. I really don’t see how anyone can know that a decision has be completely consented to until the person takes a critical level of action.

Now if someone followed through to the extent of pointing a gun at a teller and demanding money, and was then thwarted by bullet-proof glass and so ran away, I would agree that such a person did pass that critical level of action that signifies full knowledge and complete consent. But someone having second thoughts upon arriving at the bank with a ski mask - I’m not so sure. Whether it is a sin or not, it would still be a good idea to talk to a priest about the temptations and inclination that got him that far.

 

[Bookcat]

I could argue that until you have seen the bank and the customers coming and going, you are not really fully aware of what it was you had “decided” to do…

And could that happen with some particular person? Perhaps.

But that would NOT be some general approach.

 

[Bookcat]

I could argue that until you have seen the bank and the customers coming and going, you are not really fully aware of what it was you had “decided” to do. Therefore your “decision” was made without full knowledge. I really don’t see how anyone can know that a decision has be completely consented to until the person takes a critical level of action.

Now if someone followed through to the extent of pointing a gun at a teller and demanding money, and was then thwarted by bullet-proof glass and so ran away, I would agree that such a person did pass that critical level of action that signifies full knowledge and complete consent. But someone having second thoughts upon arriving at the bank with a ski mask - I’m not so sure. Whether it is a sin or not, it would still be a good idea to talk to a priest about the temptations and inclination that got him that far.

And could that happen with some particular person? Perhaps. Sure.

But that would NOT be some general approach.