Is putting oneself in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pcg2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is my question about putting oneself in a dangerous position.
It is my feeling that there are important differences.

If one does it due to a willful act relating to the affection for some sin or other then that person is not placing themselves in a “near occasion” but acting upon a sinful desire. Therefore the sin comes first and there is no “near occasion”, there is only sin.

If one finds oneself in an unavoidable situation, either due to their work, or just the “wrong place at the wrong time”, then one has not “Chosen” to put themselves in this situation and no sin has yet occurred.

Anyway - Long story short - I’m going to go with Fr Serpa’s answer (given in the linked thread on the first response here) as the best one for the OP.
Hi,

**A near occasion of sin isn’t a sin **but an occasion where one may be tempted. To put oneself in such a situation is imprudent, but not sinful in itself. However, if one deliberately puts oneself in such a situation in the hope of sinning, one has already sinned by willing to sin. Sin begins with the will to sin.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

Peace
James
 
The response is too broad to be applicable to every case. To put oneself in an occasion of sin in general may not be a sin in itself (e.g., if it’s not a grave sin–we can’t avoid all occasions of venial sin–or if it is a necessary occasion). Near and voluntary occasions of sin must be avoided without exception or else one would be committing a grave sin.

Bookcat, what is the sin if not presumption? Why is it a sin to be in the dangerous occasion other than presumption of the grace to overcome it or the grace to repent after falling into sin?
 
JRKH said:
This is my question about putting oneself in a dangerous position.
It is my feeling that there are important differences.

If one does it due to a willful act relating to the affection for some sin or other then that person is not placing themselves in a “near occasion” but acting upon a sinful desire. Therefore the sin comes first and there is no “near occasion”, there is only sin.

If one finds oneself in an unavoidable situation, either due to their work, or just the “wrong place at the wrong time”, then one has not “Chosen” to put themselves in this situation and no sin has yet occurred.

Anyway - Long story short - I’m going to go with Fr Serpa’s answer (given in the linked thread on the first response here) as the best one for the OP.
Hi,

**A near occasion of sin isn’t a sin **but an occasion where one may be tempted. To put oneself in such a situation is imprudent, but not sinful in itself. However, if one deliberately puts oneself in such a situation in the hope of sinning, one has already sinned by willing to sin. Sin begins with the will to sin.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
Father here is not correct *fully…for yes it can be a sin (as he even notes in the second part --on of the aspects of how it can be)… and one can even say it can also be a “sin of imprudence” …

…Fr. was just giving a quick answer…and people can make mistakes in not saying it all…or enough…

This is simply how such has been understood in the Church. Go to the other sources that go into more detail…and you will find they are saying what I have been saying here.
 
IntegraCatholic said:
The response is too broad to be applicable to every case. To put oneself in an occasion of sin in general may not be a sin in itself (e.g., if it’s not a grave sin–we can’t avoid all occasions of venial sin–or if it is a necessary occasion). Near and voluntary occasions of sin must be avoided without exception or else one would be committing a grave sin.
Click to expand...
And the OP’s question was too broad to try and answer in any specific way either. You see that is where this has gotten off topic.
The OP asked a very clear and general question. The answer given by Fr Serpa, whom I presume would be knowledgable on these things, says it is not.

Now - some are muddying the waters by saying - well - sometimes, it can be if we intend to or deliberately etc…
These lines of thinking only serve to confuse the issue.
The simple fact is that, something that is a “near occasion of sin”, cannot, at the same time be a sin. It’s either sin or not. Jeesh - how much more clear can it be??

I’m not arguing here about specific situations but only about what is actually asked and answered. What is actually said and what the terms used obviously mean. “Near occasion” means am near the swimming pool (for whatever reason) which may not be a good idea, but cannot ever be confused with actually being in the pool.

In the end, as I said earlier, I’ll go with the guidance of the Priest in answering the general question “near occasion of sin” is not sinful in itself.

Peace
James
 
The response is too broad to be applicable to every case. To put oneself in an occasion of sin in general may not be a sin in itself (e.g., if it’s not a grave sin–we can’t avoid all occasions of venial sin–or if it is a necessary occasion). Near and voluntary occasions of sin must be avoided without exception or else one would be committing a grave sin.

there can be more to this last part…for example one source notes that … if a person judges that it is would not probabaly be an “overwhelming likelyhood that one will fall” it is a venial sin…for he is not exposing himself to what will “almost inevitably” cause a fall into a particular mortal sin…

…though he notes that if he is morally certain (he is “sure” that he will fall despite the fact that once and awhile one has not fallen…) that exposing oneself to something will be result in a serious fall then this would be grave matter for mortal sin (my words but content from Rev. Kucharek… To settle…OSV 1977)

Bookcat, what is the sin if not presumption? Why is it a sin to be in the dangerous occasion other than presumption of the grace to overcome it or the grace to repent after falling into sin?

like I noted presumption can be part of it…but most are not going to realize this…but it can though simply be a sin to expose oneself to such danger without good reason…
 
JRKH said:
And the OP’s question was too broad to try and answer in any specific way either. You see that is where this has gotten off topic.
The OP asked a very clear and general question. The answer given by Fr Serpa, whom I presume would be knowledgable on these things, says it is not.

Now - some are muddying the waters by saying - well - sometimes, it can be if we intend to or deliberately etc…
These lines of thinking only serve to confuse the issue.
The simple fact is that, something that is a “near occasion of sin”, cannot, at the same time be a sin. It’s either sin or not. Jeesh - how much more clear can it be??

I’m not arguing here about specific situations but only about what is actually asked and answered. What is actually said and what the terms used obviously mean. “Near occasion” means am near the swimming pool (for whatever reason) which may not be a good idea, but cannot ever be confused with actually being in the pool.

In the end, as I said earlier, I’ll go with the guidance of the Priest in answering the general question “near occasion of sin” is not sinful in itself.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
Again…the other answer of the other Priest and countless other priests and moral theologians…will tell you YES one can sin by remaining in or going into a near occasion of sin…it can be a in “in itself” again Fr. here was just addressing it quickly and not fully…
 
Q: Is putting oneself in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It can be.
 
JRKH said:
I’m not arguing here about specific situations
Click to expand...
Generally, it is a sin. There are exceptions when it may not be. That is the difference.

Bookcat, so ultimately, it comes back to the sin of presumption, but the person may not recognize it as such?
 
IntegraCatholic said:
Generally, it is a sin. There are exceptions when it may not be. That is the difference.

Bookcat, so ultimately, it comes back to the sin of presumption, but the person may not recognize it as such?
Click to expand...
I do not think it is “only presumption…but can be”
 
Simple q and a:

Q: Is putting oneself in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It can be.
 
There are three fonts of morality. You cannot determine if choosing to put one’s self in a near occasion of sin is itself a sin without considering the three fonts.
  1. intention – if you enter a near occasion of sin because you intend to sin, then the intention is immoral; you sin even by the intention, prior to the sinful act you intend to commit.
  2. moral object – entering a near occasion of sin is not generally an intrinsically evil act, if it were then it would be a misnomer to call it a near occasion; the act would be a sin in itself.
  3. Circumstances – generally, choosing to enter a situation that is a near occasion for sin will have the bad consequence of a certain degree of likelihood that you might sin. The moral weight depends on how likely and how serious the sin. If the good consequences of entering that situation of near occasion for sin outweighs the bad consequnces, then the third font would be good.
Example: There is a likelihood that you will commit a venial sin at work by getting angry at your boss. However, if you don’t go to work, you will lose your job and be unable to support your family. In this case, going to work is a near occasion for venial sin, but going to work is still moral.
 
Simple q and a:

Q: Is putting oneself in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It can be.

Q: Is remaining in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It can be

Q: Can there be good reasons to be in a near occasion of sin?
A: There can be

Q:Are we obliged to avoid near occasions of mortal sin?
A: Generally yes

Q: Can there be necessary near occasions of mortal sin where it is not a sin to be?
A: Yes there can be

Q: Can there be unavoidable near occasions of sin and still no sin?
A: Yes
 
Ron_Conte said:
CatholicPlanet.com - my work in theology
CatholicPlanet.net - my discussion group for faithful Catholics
Q and A on Marital Sexual Ethics
CPDV - my translation of the Bible from the Latin
Reply With Quote
Click to expand...
Readers please note:

These web pages above are not recommended sources for Catholic sexual ethics…other areas too are of private opinion or are problematic or incorrect from a theological or canonical view.

Instead seek out sources such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church and books for sale from Catholic Answers.
 
Is a near occasion like a “near miss” in FAA terminology?

Is “near miss” any different from near “hit”? 😉

I’d say that purposely putting one’s self in the path of an oncoming train is a very bad idea, even though one could argue that they can and would jump out of the way in plenty of time not to get hit…
 
Simple q and a:

Q: Is putting oneself in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It can be.

Q: Is remaining in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It can be

Q: Should one presume one has sinned in some way cause one was in a near occ?
A: No …temptations can come…near occasions can come…and still no sin…

Q: Can there be good reasons to be in a near occasion of sin?
A: There can be

Q:Are we obliged to avoid near occasions of mortal sin?
A: Generally yes

Q: Can there be necessary near occasions of mortal sin where it is not a sin to be?
A: Yes there can be

Q: Can there be unavoidable near occasions of sin and still no sin?
A: Yes it is possible…(one should try to make it more remote)
 
Well for all the discussion I have yet to hear anyone explain, clearly and succinctly, how something can be an object (sin) AND, at the same time, a near occasion of an object.

“Near occasion” indicates a circumstance where sin has not yet occurred therefore “near occasion” is not, in itself a sin. If and when sin has occurred we’ve passed teh “near occasion” aspect. Then the situation becomes a contirbuting factor to the committed sin and not the sin itself.

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
Well for all the discussion I have yet to hear anyone explain, clearly and succinctly, how something can be an object (sin) AND, at the same time, a near occasion of an object.

“Near occasion” indicates a circumstance where sin has not yet occurred therefore “near occasion” is not, in itself a sin. If and when sin has occurred we’ve passed teh “near occasion” aspect. Then the situation becomes a contirbuting factor to the committed sin and not the sin itself.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
👍
 
JRKH said:
Well for all the discussion I have yet to hear anyone explain, clearly and succinctly, how something can be an object (sin) AND, at the same time, a near occasion of an object.

“Near occasion” indicates a circumstance where sin has not yet occurred therefore “near occasion” is not, in itself a sin. If and when sin has occurred we’ve passed teh “near occasion” aspect. Then the situation becomes a contirbuting factor to the committed sin and not the sin itself.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
They are different sins…look we can stack up sins leading to each other all day long…

It is a near of occasion for George to go to a particular bar …for he (to make it very clear) always gets drunk when he goes there…this can already be a sin for him…and then he knows that getting drunk there almost always leads him to sexual sins…so the very mortal sin of drunkeness is also a near occasion of sexual sin for him…

(so actually in his case his near occasion of sin…is already a sin on two counts…but anyhow…even a mortal sin can be then a near occasion of another mortal sin…)

as to circumstance…yes a bad circumstance can make an act into an evil act…

CCC: 1755 A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together.
 
Remember:

Q: Is putting oneself in a near occasion of sin a sin in and of itself?
A: It* can* be.

Q: Does being in a near occasion of sin necessarily mean I sinned?
A: No
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top