B
Bookcat
Guest
and for example in Sacred Scripture see 1 John 3:15
(not external…but internal…just as the CCC notes)
(not external…but internal…just as the CCC notes)
- Status
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
Ugh, it’s NOT a decision, it is hypothetical, and I can’t think of a single person I know who wouldn’t miss Mass for a million dollars.
B
Bookcat
Guest
if one “decides” that such is what one “would do” if such were offered…yes that is a decision (but I imagine such things are often said in a different way…or not with all the full knowledge and complete consent etc"
I would not! (I can of course fall into mortal sin like anyone…so I too must ask for grace…but we should NOT say to ourselves…if such were offered I would!..)
No one should.
(though…one could do so without any mortal sin…just call ones pastor and ask for a dispensation…for one is getting some money to help build the school
…hehe)Some kinds of “hypotheticals” of course are very different such as “It it were on a sin–I would skip mass for $$$$$”
B
Bookcat
Guest
YES…see below
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
2303 Deliberate hatred is contrary to charity. Hatred of the neighbor is a sin when one deliberately wishes him evil. Hatred of the neighbor is a grave sin when one deliberately desires him grave harm. “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven.”
Ok there it is in black and white as they say.
If I deliberately desire (and in internal act of the will) to do grave harm (such as murdering him…) such is a mortal sin.
No external action involved. No actual “grave harm” but only the internal desire
(which of course one would still need full knowledge and complete consent of course…but that is taken for granted)
F
fbl9
Guest
are any of these true statements.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Originally Posted by fbl9 View Post
bookcat
x$ to miss mass.
sure i’ll take it, hey wait a minute you want me to commit a mortal sin…but i already did
Maybe…it depends
.
perhaps by full knowledge it is meant if a person has already weighed the gravity of the sin
Yes that is part of it sure…
i know it is wrong but…then there is sin.
yes…one needs the to know what one is doing…one needs full knowledge and also full consent…for it to be mortal. One could perhaps make an joke…in way that lacks such…or has a passing thought etc…
B
Bookcat
Guest
opps typoif one “decides” that such is what one “would do” if such were offered…yes that is a decision (but I imagine such things are often said in a different way…or not with all the full knowledge and complete consent etc"
I would not! (I can of course fall into mortal sin like anyone…so I too must ask for grace…but we should NOT say to ourselves…if such were offered I would!..)
No one should.
(though…one could do so without any mortal sin…just call ones pastor and ask for a dispensation…for one is getting some money to help build the school
Some kinds of “hypotheticals” of course are very different such as “It it were NOT a sin–I would skip mass for $$$$$…like if I had a dispensation”
do not pass over this post : forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7282405&postcount=64
F
fbl9
Guest
As for the person fantasing about murder thinking it’s a “harmless” way of blowing off steam. Upon reflecting on their fantasy they think no i wouldn’t do that , that’s wrong! There would no mortal sin committed because they did not have full knowledge that having these thoughts where a sin. But the person knowing that entertaining these thoughts were sinful would be committing mortal sin.
There are times i wish i was still living my old life ingnorance is bliss, then i kneel in front of the tabernacle by myself and i wouldn’t want to leave that spot for all the “good” times i had.
P
Pitcharan
Guest
Our Lord Himself, made it very clear that lustful looks amount to adultery. However, there is a difference between “sinful urge” and “sinful intention”. Succumbing to a “sinful urge” and allowing a “sinful urge” to develop, are equally bad and amount to “venial sin”. Similarly, deciding and confirming a “sinful intention” in the heart and committing such a sin, are equally bad and amount to “mortal sin”. In my life there have been countless occasions when I providentiallly missed sinning and I can say, that many of them were in fact “sinful urges” and not “sinful intentions”. “Sinful intention” is something pre-meditated and developed with full awareness of the grave consequences after rejecting all good promptings of the spirit. If you are being prompted by the devil to comit a sin and develop a sinful urge, God and His angels and saints will do everything to dissuade you and save you from doing it. But if you have thought over the whole thing and clearly decided to follow Satan, then God may either let you go your own way or thwart your plan for His own reasons (eg., for protecting another who would be a victim of your sin). In either case, the sin remains the same.
Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. (Rom 1:28)
B
Bookcat
Guest
Read the first link from Jimmy in my post above…it goes into good detail.
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
You don’t actually have to DESIRE to harm someone in that way to fantasize about killing them, nor do you have to have a burning hatred for someone to do the same. Like the article you cited stated, in the worst case scenario, this man was annoyed in traffic and took a little sadistic pleasure in thinking about going on a bad-driver killing spree. Just because something like that may be fun to fantasize about doesn’t mean you really wish anybody dead, but according to the article, it’s still a mortal sin.
Sorry, but I’m gonna stick to worrying about sins I’ve actually committed.
Also, taking a million bucks to miss mass isn’t choosing money over God, as if it were akin to saying “I hate God and I love money”, it’s missing one single mass for total financial freedom and all that it entails. It’s not a black and white issue. Not to mention the fact that getting a dispensation to miss mass anyway rings hollow to me and seems like a mere formality…
B
Bookcat
Guest
Well what I have been saying is just Catholic Moral theology…
*and you said the only internal sins of thought are lust if I recall (you may have added another…but you excluded deciding to murder)…but here the Catechism lists “desiring to gravely harm another” as mortal sin. No external action.
Financial freedom in exchange for a mortal sin???
“it profits a man nothing to gain the whole world but loose his soul”…but for “financial freedom” it is ok…?
You need to think through these things more.
B
Bookcat
Guest
This will help to further distinguish things…
From the Catholic Encyclopedia (CA):
Internal Sins
That sin may be committed not only by outward deeds but also by the inner activity of the mind apart from any external manifestation, is plain from the precept of the Decalogue: “Thou shalt not covet”, and from Christ’s rebuke of the scribes and pharisees whom he likens to “whited sepulchers full of all filthiness” (Matt., xxiii, 27). Hence the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, c. v), in declaring that all mortal sins must be confessed, makes special mention of those that are most secret and that violate only the last two precepts of the Decalogue, adding that they “sometimes more grievously wound the soul and are more dangerous than sins which are openly committed”. Three kinds of internal sin are usually distinguished: delectatio morosa, i.e. the pleasure taken in a sinful thought or imagination even without desiring it; gaudium, i.e. dwelling with complacency on sins already committed; and desiderium, i.e. the desire for what is sinful.
An efficacious desire, i.e. one that includes the deliberate intention to realize or gratify the desire, has the same malice, mortal or venial, as the action which it has in view.
An inefficacious desire is one that carries a condition, in such a way that the will is prepared to perform the action in case the condition were verified.
When the condition is such as to eliminate all sinfulness from the action, the desire involves no sin: e.g. I would gladly eat meat on Friday (of Lent (edit), if I had a dispensation; and in general this is the case whenever the action is forbidden by positive law only. When the action is contrary to natural law and yet is permissible in given circumstances or in a particular state of life, the desire, if it include those circumstances or that state as conditions, is not in itself sinful: e.g. I would kill so-and-so if I had to do it in self-defense. Usually, however, such desires are dangerous and therefore to be repressed. If, on the other hand, the condition does not remove the sinfulness of the action, the desire is also sinful. This is clearly the case where the action is intrinsically and absolutely evil, e.g. blasphemy: one cannot without committing sin, have the desire—I would blaspheme God if it were not wrong; the condition is an impossible one and therefore does not affect the desire itself. The pleasure taken in a sinful thought (delectatio, gaudium) is, generally speaking, a sin of the same kind and gravity as the action which is thought of. Much, however, depends on the motive for which one thinks of sinful actions. The pleasure, e.g. which one may experience in studying the nature of murder or any other crime, in getting clear ideas on the subject, tracing its causes, determining the guilt etc., is not a sin; on the contrary, it is often both necessary and useful. The case is different of course where the pleasure means gratification in the sinful object or action itself. And it is evidently a sin when one boasts of his evil deeds, the more so because of the scandal that is given.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia (CA):
Internal Sins
That sin may be committed not only by outward deeds but also by the inner activity of the mind apart from any external manifestation, is plain from the precept of the Decalogue: “Thou shalt not covet”, and from Christ’s rebuke of the scribes and pharisees whom he likens to “whited sepulchers full of all filthiness” (Matt., xxiii, 27). Hence the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, c. v), in declaring that all mortal sins must be confessed, makes special mention of those that are most secret and that violate only the last two precepts of the Decalogue, adding that they “sometimes more grievously wound the soul and are more dangerous than sins which are openly committed”. Three kinds of internal sin are usually distinguished: delectatio morosa, i.e. the pleasure taken in a sinful thought or imagination even without desiring it; gaudium, i.e. dwelling with complacency on sins already committed; and desiderium, i.e. the desire for what is sinful.
An efficacious desire, i.e. one that includes the deliberate intention to realize or gratify the desire, has the same malice, mortal or venial, as the action which it has in view.
An inefficacious desire is one that carries a condition, in such a way that the will is prepared to perform the action in case the condition were verified.
When the condition is such as to eliminate all sinfulness from the action, the desire involves no sin: e.g. I would gladly eat meat on Friday (of Lent (edit), if I had a dispensation; and in general this is the case whenever the action is forbidden by positive law only. When the action is contrary to natural law and yet is permissible in given circumstances or in a particular state of life, the desire, if it include those circumstances or that state as conditions, is not in itself sinful: e.g. I would kill so-and-so if I had to do it in self-defense. Usually, however, such desires are dangerous and therefore to be repressed. If, on the other hand, the condition does not remove the sinfulness of the action, the desire is also sinful. This is clearly the case where the action is intrinsically and absolutely evil, e.g. blasphemy: one cannot without committing sin, have the desire—I would blaspheme God if it were not wrong; the condition is an impossible one and therefore does not affect the desire itself. The pleasure taken in a sinful thought (delectatio, gaudium) is, generally speaking, a sin of the same kind and gravity as the action which is thought of. Much, however, depends on the motive for which one thinks of sinful actions. The pleasure, e.g. which one may experience in studying the nature of murder or any other crime, in getting clear ideas on the subject, tracing its causes, determining the guilt etc., is not a sin; on the contrary, it is often both necessary and useful. The case is different of course where the pleasure means gratification in the sinful object or action itself. And it is evidently a sin when one boasts of his evil deeds, the more so because of the scandal that is given.
F
fbl9
Guest
Tell them to meet you oversees next week first before you miss mass. Then fly home and catch mass on Sunday again.
But isn’t thinking about doing it desire.( bad driver eradication.)
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
That falls under the sin of Anger does it not…one of the 7 deadlies? That’s right there in the Bible.
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
Honestly, I think God would understand. He is after all a being of infinite intelligence and wisdom. He knows what is in the human heart.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Yes…like he “understands”* all mortal sins*.
Just like he would “understand” if I commit adultery, or murder, or grave theft, or abortion, rape or blasphemy, denial of Christ etc…
He understands…so what did he do? He sent his Son Jesus Christ to die on the Cross for me and for you so we can know true life with him …in him. He understands so well that he gave us a Church to teach us, he gave us the Sacraments …and in particular that of Confession for if we fall into mortal sin we can by grace return to him …return to life…
and that Church teaches that “the end does not justify the means”…
and he also gave us the warnings about sin…
and that we cannot “serve God and money”
and the parable of the man who thought he would now have security for the future in life…but God said “you fool, tonight your life will be demanded of you who will have these things”…
He knows what is in the human heart…
He gives us the grace to choose good and to avoid mortal sins!
Yes if we fall…
He does seek out his lost sheep…(yes he is willing to forgive if we are willing to change…to repent…etc!)
But we are to live as the disciples of Jesus and not fall…not choose even a single mortal sin for the sake of “financial security”.
“what does it profit a man to gain the whole world but to lose his soul?”…
…but for financial security.…such is worth it…worth a mortal sin…
B
Bookcat
Guest
Yes…(but by “deadly sins” they do not mean that they are per se mortal sins…for one can of often commit anger or pride etc in venial ways…they are referred to rather as the “seven capital sins” meaning they are the “heads” from which spring so many other sins…")
But you have not addressed what I wrote here or other places…the fact is the Catechism states very clearly that internal sins can be mortal sins without any action at all…as does Sacred Scripture.
And that this is simply Catholic Moral Theology.
And this is not just restricted to things like lust (as you thought).
But yes if I decide to murder someone with full knowledge and complete consent…it is right there and then a mortal sin.
Period. This is Catholic Theology…not some single persons…“opinion”
It is not a matter of “opinion”.
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
Well, I’m pretty sure God understands the need for people to feed and educate their children, to try to get out of suffocating debt, to pay crushing medical bills, etc.
I don’t buy this idea that by choosing to miss mass one is choosing money over God or rejecting God in some way. If you had a son who was supposed to meet you for dinner and he called and said, “Sorry Dad, but my job just offered me a 1,000,000 promotion and today is the only day I can sign the contract, so can we have dinner next week?”, would you hold it against him? What about God, who loves us infinitely more and is infinitely merciful?
I don’t buy this idea that by choosing to miss mass one is choosing money over God or rejecting God in some way. If you had a son who was supposed to meet you for dinner and he called and said, “Sorry Dad, but my job just offered me a 1,000,000 promotion and today is the only day I can sign the contract, so can we have dinner next week?”, would you hold it against him? What about God, who loves us infinitely more and is infinitely merciful?
B
Bookcat
Guest
This is very good in explaining how certain kinds of “thinking and choosing” in “a theoretical way” is mortal sin.
and the ways it is not… like when one says “if it would be ok with God and the Church…I would miss Sunday Mass for $100,000,000” etc
(but even these are as it says “dangerous” usually and should be gotten rid of…)
I would also add that …again often a person is just having some passing thought…or temptation…etc where one does no thereby commit a mortal sin …lacking either full knowledge or deliberate consent.
Also again it is NOT a good idea to sit and “think” if this than that…but rather we should instead renew or Baptismal promises every day …our commitment to follow Jesus of Nazareth in joy…avoiding especially all mortal sins…and living as he taught…following him …our Lord and Master…as the sheep following their Shepherd …a Shepherd who loves his sheep so much that he laid down his life for them…in order to give them true life.
- Status