Is copying prayers from Internet on Sunday a sin?

[superamazingman]

who in the world copyrights a prayer?

icel

 

[surritter]

Maybe the concept is included in there. But that is still a different way of thinking than the east…

Jimmy, this all came up because you implied in Post #21 that a single act of serious sin isn’t necessarily enough to condemn someone to hell, but instead implying that a pattern of sin is required for condemnation. That is not at all Catholic theology – in the West NOR the East.

Subsequent discussion has been good to clarify the points on both sides (and I do understand many of your points about the “sickness” aspect), but the bottom line is that if a super-good, holy person decides to commit a mortal sin in the last moments of life, that would certainly keep him from heaven.

Your debate seems to be with the definition of what constitutes a mortal sin. But if “full knowledge and consent” is given even in one solitary act, then it snuffs out the sacramental grace that provides life to the soul.

 

[jimmy]

Jimmy, this all came up because you implied in Post #21 that a single act of serious sin isn’t necessarily enough to condemn someone to hell, but instead implying that a pattern of sin is required for condemnation. That is not at all Catholic theology – in the West NOR the East.

Subsequent discussion has been good to clarify the points on both sides (and I do understand many of your points about the “sickness” aspect), but the bottom line is that if a super-good, holy person decides to commit a mortal sin in the last moments of life, that would certainly keep him from heaven.

Your debate seems to be with the definition of what constitutes a mortal sin. But if “full knowledge and consent” is given even in one solitary act, then it snuffs out the sacramental grace that provides life to the soul.

Actually, I never said anything about a pattern of sin. I never said anything about hell. I never implied any such idea. I didn’t mention the fundamental option, or imply anything near it.

I do disagree with your whole idea of mortal vs. venial sin though, and so does the east. The east doesn’t support the distinction and never has. It is an Augustinian invention. It is totally foreign. Your obsessed with everything in life, and everything becomes a sin. In the end, everyone goes to hell according to your worldview, or no one does. Some who support the distinction between mortal and venial condemn everyone to hell, in imitation of St. Leonard, the rest relativize it so much that it is impossible to commit a mortal sin because of the three requirements of mortal sin. When people hear it they end up just like the OP in this thread, concerned that every little thing they do is going to send them to hell. They can’t kiss a girl, eat an ice cream cone, rub their belly, print a prayer, jump up to a closer seat at a baseball game, drink a bear, smoke a cigarette, because everything is a sin; and its probably mortal. Western Catholics have become milquetoasty (my new favorite word).

I let that worldview drive me crazy enough in the past. I’m not gonna drive myself crazy anymore over it. It is bs. The only way it makes any sense is if our decisions are absolutely free, and there is no such thing as habit. It makes sense if our decisions are completely arbitrarily made, with no preconceptions or predeterminism due to previous decisions. But since there is no such thing as an arbitrary decision, then the distinction between mortal and venial is very shody.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Actually, I never said anything about a pattern of sin. I never said anything about hell. I never implied any such idea. I didn’t mention the fundamental option, or imply anything near it.

I do disagree with your whole idea of mortal vs. venial sin though, and so does the east. The east doesn’t support the distinction and never has. It is an Augustinian invention. It is totally foreign. Your obsessed with everything in life, and everything becomes a sin. In the end, everyone goes to hell according to your worldview, or no one does. Some who support the distinction between mortal and venial condemn everyone to hell, in imitation of St. Leonard, the rest relativize it so much that it is impossible to commit a mortal sin because of the three requirements of mortal sin. When people hear it they end up just like the OP in this thread, concerned that every little thing they do is going to send them to hell. They can’t kiss a girl, eat an ice cream cone, rub their belly, print a prayer, jump up to a closer seat at a baseball game, drink a bear, smoke a cigarette, because everything is a sin; and its probably mortal. Western Catholics have become milquetoasty (my new favorite word).

I let that worldview drive me crazy enough in the past. I’m not gonna drive myself crazy anymore over it. It is bs. The only way it makes any sense is if our decisions are absolutely free, and there is no such thing as habit. It makes sense if our decisions are completely arbitrarily made, with no preconceptions or predeterminism due to previous decisions. But since there is no such thing as an arbitrary decision, then the distinction between mortal and venial is very shody.

To be fair, St.Paul talks of sins which are deadly and sins that aren’t. A mortal sin is a sin that is spiritually deadly, a venial sin is one that isn’t. If this is an innovation it is a Pauline one.

 

[surritter]

Also see 1 John (chapter 5, I think).

 

[Elizium23]

I cannot win in this forum when it comes to copyright issues. I am attacked by pirates because I uphold copyright laws in the West as just and licit in the eyes of the Church. I am attacked by others because I am allegedly morally soft on copyright because I maintain that it is a culturally sensitive issue that is not universally applicable - in China they have a completely different view of Intellectual Property that is not compatible with United States jurisprudence.

Now I am attacked by the scrupulous for raining on their parade and by George Stegemir for giving bad pharasaic advice. It is a shame but I am only trying to convey reality. The reality is that the Church teaches we must obey just laws. In the absence of outcry from Church officials in the area of intellectual property laws, we must assume they are accepted as just. I am sorry if you are scrupulous and this hurts your feelings, but the cold reality is that we live in a world of many laws, from Divine Law to Canon Law to civil law, and as Christians we are bound to try our best to live within the law and follow God.

Once again, copyright laws offer many loopholes and exceptions for things such as fair use. You will not get dinged for making one copy of something on your computer or printer for private devotion. Lord knows that I copy many photos and files for my own use on a regular basis. If you are scrupulous and worried that you will commit a mortal sin then the ONLY advice for you is to seek professional help. A priest can guide you spiritually or a lawyer can guide you through the byzantine copyright laws that we have in this nation. You are not doing yourself any good for your disease by asking random strangers on a random Internet board about random questions about random sins. It is that simple: scrupulous? Ask a professional. Healthy conscience? Follow it.

If you can reasonably conclude that a prayer on the Internet is there to be prayed by people, then it is in the public domain.

The Eucharistic Prayers are not to be prayed by the general public: they’re there for priests. If you see it on the Internet, while it’s clearly there for understanding in one’s personal use (since by the time you read it, it’s already downloaded onto your PC) it’s not for anything else.

Absolutely untrue and very bad advice. Let’s take one example: divineoffice.org. They are authorized reproductions of the ICEL text of the Liturgy of the Hours. This is all copyrighted translation. All those prayers are public, meant to be prayed, and COPYRIGHTED. Nobody may download and print them off to distribute to others. Let’s take another example: The Catechism of the Catholic Church. This is available from at least two official licensed sources, one of which is the Vatican itself. The CCC is COPYRIGHTED. Even though the full text is indexed and provided to the public and meant to be researched online, that is not our license to copy it freely. For example, I am constructing quotes from the CCC for our parish website. If we quote enough of it, we will need to obtain written permission for reproduction.

Look at it another way, all parishes have hymnals or missals in the pews. Those are provided to the public and meant to be prayed. Does that mean that an RE teacher can take a hymnal and choose five hymns to make 30 copies and hand out to her whole class? Nope, permission and licensing is mandatory for copyrighted material. It would be a mortal sin for her to violate copyright in this way. Yet it happens every day, and people think that because we are in church that we are immune to the ways of the world. I have been in choir for 13 years and I can’t tell you how many copyvios I have endured. I attempt to turn a blind eye because I don’t **KNOW **the director failed to get a license. But so many of them are sloppy and lazy enough to just decide one night they need 12 handouts so we can get the hymns sung on Sunday that they don’t even stop to think they are violating the law.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

I just hope that the OP hasn’t gone off and turned himself into the police for violating copyright laws, in addition to believing he’s in mortal sin for “working” on the sabbath!

In Christ,
Ellen

 

[HouseUponRock]

My question had NOTHING to do with copyright issues, but if it is sinful to write on Sabbath.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

My question had NOTHING to do with copyright issues, but if it is sinful to write on Sabbath.

So long as it isn’t a strenuous labor I would say no. Don’t write an unnecessary essay on the Lords day, but copying down a few prayers is not only acceptable, but commendable.

 

[jimmy]

I am curious, what does it mean to rest? Am I supposed to lay in bed all day? Would that satisfy the sabbath?

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

I am curious, what does it mean to rest? Am I supposed to lay in bed all day? Would that satisfy the sabbath?

No, it means to abstain from all unnecessary strenuous or servile labor.

 

[superamazingman]

If you are scrupulous and worried that you will commit a mortal sin then the ONLY advice for you is to seek professional help. A priest can guide you spiritually or a lawyer can guide you through the byzantine copyright laws that we have in this nation. You are not doing yourself any good for your disease by asking random strangers on a random Internet board about random questions about random sins. It is that simple: scrupulous? Ask a professional. Healthy conscience? Follow it.

I strongly second this.