Grave Matter

[frogman80]

From Summa Theoloica:
newadvent.org/summa/306606.htm

Objection (false objection):
It would seem that theft is not a mortal sin. For it is written (Prov. vi. 30): “The fault is not so great when a man hath stolen.” But every mortal sin is a great fault. Therefore theft is not a mortal sin.

Reply (Aquinas’ reply):
The statement that theft is not a great fault is in view of two cases. First, when a person is led to thieve through necessity. This necessity diminishes or entirely removes sin, as we shall show further on (II-II:66:7). Hence the text continues: “For he stealeth to fill his hungry soul.” Secondly, theft is stated not to be a great fault in comparison with the guilt of adultery, which is punished with death. Hence the text goes on to say of the thief that “if he be taken, he shall restore sevenfold . . . but he that is an adulterer . . . shall destroy his own soul.”

Objection (false objection):
Further, theft can be committed in small even as in great things. But it seems unreasonable for a man to be punished with eternal death for the theft of a small thing such as a needle or a quill. Therefore theft is not a mortal sin.

Reply (Aquinas’ reply):
Reason accounts as nothing that which is little: so that a man does not consider himself injured in very little matters: and the person who takes such things can presume that this is not against the will of the owner. And if a person take such like very little things, he may be proportionately excused from mortal sin. Yet if his intention is to rob and injure his neighbor, there may be a mortal sin even in these very little things, even as there may be through consent in a mere thought.

Aquinas wrote quite a bit on theft… you can read the various articles here:
newadvent.org/summa/306600.htm

 

[Celeste88]

ByzCath:

Yes, as with all mortal sin, if the 3 conditions (1) grave matter, 2) full knowledge, 3) full consent) are not met then it is a venial sin. If those three conditions are met, one of which is always met with theft (it is always grave), then it is a mortal sin.

So…are you saying that if an 8 year old kid steals a sucker from another kid he will burn in hell for that?? Surely God is more merciful than that?!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Celeste88:

So…are you saying that if an 8 year old kid steals a sucker from another kid he will burn in hell for that?? Surely God is more merciful than that?!

8 year old? What is the age of reason? Consent and knowledge might not be met by an 8 year old.

How about an 8 year old who kills another child?

Canon Law says that it covers those who are baptized, who have sufficient useo f reason, and have completed their seventh year of age.

Can. 11 Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who were baptised in the catholic Church or received into it, and who have a sufficient use of reason and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, who have completed their seventh year of age.

But again, if they do so with full knowledge and consent, then yes it is a mortal sin and needs to be confessed.

I do not say they will go to Hell. That is not for me, or anyone else to say. God only knows.

I think this is a very important reason to teach our children the truth and to punish them accordingly when they do wrong.

 

[frogman80]

ByzCath:

But again, if they do so with full knowledge and consent, then yes it is a mortal sin and needs to be confessed.

Wrong this is not always true. Please see my quotes from the Summa above.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

frogman80:

From Summa Theoloica:
newadvent.org/summa/306606.htm

Aquinas wrote quite a bit on theft… you can read the various articles here:
newadvent.org/summa/306600.htm

Yes, this is what Aquinas says. Can you show me where the Church says the same?

I will also comment on what you added bold emphasis to.

** First, when a person is led to thieve through necessity. This necessity diminishes or entirely removes sin**

If you go back and read all my replies I think you will find that I do not deny this. If it is not clear then let me say now that does so but I do not agree that it entierly removes the sin, or that if it does it is only in very rare cases for that to be.

** And if a person take such like very little things, he may be proportionately excused from mortal sin.**

I added an underlined emphasis to one of the key points. It may be excused, not always is.

Also the next sentence is also key, here it is again.

Yet if his intention is to rob and injure his neighbor, there may be a mortal sin even in these very little things, even as there may be through consent in a mere thought.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

frogman80:

Wrong this is not always true. Please see my quotes from the Summa above.

Not wrong, see my reply above. The Summa is not a Church document. Yes it is a writing of a Saint, even a Doctor of the Church, but it is not dogma and does not require consent.

On top of that, it does fit what I have said as I show in my reply to you.

 

[frogman80]

ByzCath:

** First, when a person is led to thieve through necessity. This necessity diminishes or entirely removes sin**

If you go back and read all my replies I think you will find that I do not deny this. If it is not clear then let me say now that does so but I do not agree that it entierly removes the sin, or that if it does it is only in very rare cases for that to be.

I realize that… just being thorough for everyone else. If I had been debating you directly, I would have addressed this quote to you directly.

ByzCath:

** And if a person take such like very little things, he may be proportionately excused** from mortal sin.

I added an underlined emphasis to one of the key points. It may be excused, not always is.

That is my point. Stealing even is not always a mortal sin. (Even if it is not about “necessity.”)

ByzCath:

Also the next sentence is also key, here it is again.

Yet if his intention is to rob and injure his neighbor, there may be a mortal sin even in these very little things, even as there may be through consent in a mere thought.

Yes, I recommend you read the Summa on the difference between robbing and stealing.

 

[frogman80]

ByzCath:

Not wrong, see my reply above. The Summa is not a Church document. Yes it is a writing of a Saint, even a Doctor of the Church, but it is not dogma and does not require consent.

On top of that, it does fit what I have said as I show in my reply to you.

Where do you think this topic of stealing (as covered in the CCC) came from? A theologian? A dogmatic decree? A pope?

 

[thistle]

I basically agree with you about copying something you do not own.
However what I occasionally do if I want to hear a new song someone has told me about is download, listen to it and then delete it. If I like it then I would go and buy it but I need to hear it first.
I view this the same as going into a music store where I can listen to a whole cd, and if I like it I buy it but if I don’t I hand it back.

 

[frogman80]

ByzCath:

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: “Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother.” The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

Is it your understanding that any sin directly against the 10 commandments (if done with full knowledge and consent) is a mortal sin?

 

[thistle]

frogman80:

Is it your understanding that any sin directly against the 10 commandments (if done with full knowledge and consent) is a mortal sin?

I know your question is not to me but anyway I would say yes any sin against the 10 commandments is a mortal sin, but there are also mortal sins other than the commandments.

 

[Penitus]

Superstar905:

um…you can’t earn salvation, so I’d stop trying to.

Yeah, I chose a bad choice of words. A better phrasing would have been, “I’m making sure I’m not in the state of mortal sin.”

 

[frogman80]

thistle:

I know your question is not to me but anyway I would say yes any sin against the 10 commandments is a mortal sin, but there are also mortal sins other than the commandments.

Would these be mortal sins or venial:

Reusing a postage stamp that had not been “canceled” by the post office. (Stealing).

Photocopying a page from a cheap paper back novel (copyrighted book). (Stealing)

A teenager staying up past their bed time to finish a chapter in a book against their parents wishes. (Honor thy father and mother)

Making up a story about a fish that you caught… “It was 10lbs!!” when really it was 7lbs. (Lying)

(Granted… I know that even the smallest of sins can become mortal sins.)

 

[Celeste88]

What about picking up a penny from the sidewalk that someone dropped? Is that a mortal sin? :twocents:

 

[stayathomemom]

What about the commandment of honoring father and mother? What if the parents are manipulative, verbally and mentally abusive. Is it grave matter if you decide they will not be a part of you, your spouse or your children’s lives?

 

[thistle]

frogman80:

Would these be mortal sins or venial:

Reusing a postage stamp that had not been “canceled” by the post office. (Stealing).

Photocopying a page from a cheap paper back novel (copyrighted book). (Stealing)

A teenager staying up past their bed time to finish a chapter in a book against their parents wishes. (Honor thy father and mother)

Making up a story about a fish that you caught… “It was 10lbs!!” when really it was 7lbs. (Lying)

(Granted… I know that even the smallest of sins can become mortal sins.)

I don’t know what they would be. A priest should be able to answer that.
What I meant when I said there are mortal sins outside what is stated in the 10 Commandments I meant the following.

These are mortal sins because they mean automatic excommunication.

Canon 1364: apostasty, heresy, or schism
Canon 1367: violation of the Scared Species
Canon 1370: laying violent hands on the Pope
Canon 1378: absolution of an accomplice
Canon 1382: episcopal consecration without without authorisation from the Holy See
Canon 1388: violation of the seal of confession by a confessor
Canon 1398: procuring abortion

Abortion of course is murder and so comes under the Fifth Commandment but not all of the others are in the Commandments.

 

[frogman80]

Ok, people…

Before we get into a firestorm of posts on mortal sin there is already a thread on “What is a mortal sin?” here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=92101

This thread in particular is about stealing. Most people can accept that stealing is not mortal, and may not even be a sin in a circumstance of necessity. (ex… Man steals a loaf of bread from a rich man to feed his starving family.)

So, for times of non necessity… if a person consciously chooses to steal… can it ever be a venial sin. Aquinas says it can be a venial sin. It appears to me that others (in particular ByzCath) are saying that the CCC reads differently, and I am trying to see what they see.

 

[Celeste88]

stayathomemom:

What about the commandment of honoring father and mother? What if the parents are manipulative, verbally and mentally abusive. Is it grave matter if you decide they will not be a part of you, your spouse or your children’s lives?

I think the Church changed its mind about certain sins over the ages. Parents were allowed to beat their kids (spare the rod, spoil the child) husbands were allowed to beat their wives (but the stick had to be less than a certain width). People kept slaves and how could stealing a man’s freedom be not a grave sin?

 

[Elizabeth_B]

It seems to me that folks are nit-picking on the gravity of sins in order to rationalize “not so bad” actions.

I don’t consider myself to be scrupulous, by any means, but the more I strive to follow Christ, the more I find to correct.

In the past, my sins seemed “bigger”. I won’t detail them here because I have already confessed them, but they definitely fell in the mortal sin category.

As my faith matures, I find that my “little” sins are just as serious as those I considered grave because they reveal a disordered attachment and a denial of Christ. As my eyes and heart are opened, I am more accountable than before.

Illegally downloading music, telling a “little white lie”, or sharing some juicy gossip are all sinful and should be avoided just as stealing a large sum of money, purjury, and murder should be.

While its ultimately up to God to determine how fully the three criteria for mortal sins are met in a specific circumstance, we should be striving to be holy as our Father in Heaven is holy by avoiding *all * sinful thoughts, words and deeds.

 

[frogman80]

Elizabeth B.:

It seems to me that folks are nit-picking on the gravity of sins in order to rationalize “not so bad” actions.

Not me… I am nit-picking to point out what seems to be a legalistic interpretation on stealing that could send scrupulous people into fits of terror!! I do not think people should steal at all, for some of the very points you listed. I am in no way implying that it is ok for people to steal.

I brought up the 10 commandments because ByzCath had a quote from the CCC which stated that that all sins against them were grave. It seems me that ByzCath then reasons that if all sins against the 10 commandments are grave… consciously stealing must always be a mortal sin. (Excluding stealing out of necessity.) I wanted to verify my assumption about his argument.