B
Black_Jaque
Guest
Mine too. It’s in the Catechism if you care to look it up. We are obliged to follow laws made by appropriate authority.
“Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s.”
- Status
“Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s.”
F
fix
Guest
**
**
1952** There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal law - the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.**
All just laws should be obeyed. How culpable we each are would depend on several factors, but intentionally breaking any just civil law is a sin.
Law is a rule of conduct enacted by competent authority for the sake of the common good. The moral law presupposes the rational order, established among creatures for their good and to serve their final end, by the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. All law finds its first and ultimate truth in the eternal law. Law is declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. “Such an ordinance of reason is what one calls law.”
**
1952** There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal law - the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.**
All just laws should be obeyed. How culpable we each are would depend on several factors, but intentionally breaking any just civil law is a sin.
M
MrIrish
Guest
Black Jaque:
You completely missed the point of my post, as another person indicated. To attribute the characteristics you attributed to me is a disgrace. You don’t know the first thing about me or my spiritual state in life.
I’m “astonished” at how quickly you judge one of your fellow men of being guilty of sinful pride and being arrogant. Aren’t you being prideful and arrogant in suggesting that others are sinfully prideful and arrogant? (“I’m not full of pride like those people!”)
You completely missed the point of my post, as another person indicated. To attribute the characteristics you attributed to me is a disgrace. You don’t know the first thing about me or my spiritual state in life.
M
MrIrish
Guest
Black Jaque:
WOW. You may want to check that attitude at the door next time.
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
fix said:
F
fix
Guest
Al Masetti:
Take speeding as one example. That many do it, or that the police look the other way, does not mean one is not committing a sin when they know they are speeding.
I was speaking to the morality of the issue, not how these laws are enforced. I am not saying it is always a mortal sin. I am saying that to intentionally break a just civil law is a sin, perhaps venial, perhaps mortal, depending on factors.
Take speeding as one example. That many do it, or that the police look the other way, does not mean one is not committing a sin when they know they are speeding.
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
If you really believe this, then I think you really need to do some studying… mortal sin or venial sin not withstanding… the definition of sin needs to be understood:
Get the newsletter from Scrupulous Anonymous.
Drop a note to “Scrupulous Anonymous”, Liguori, MO 63057-9999 and include a few dollars to defray printing and postage.
Also visit the Web site:
mission.liguori.org/newsletters/scrupanon.htm
mission.liguori.org/newsletters/scrupulosity.htm
Also buy a copy of “Understanding Scrupulosity” by Fr. Thomas M. Santa, same address.
liguori.org/index.asp?Pa…PROD&ProdID=725
Also, “Why Am I Scrupulous?”:
liguori.org/index.asp?Pa…WPROD&ProdID=87
With respect to the speed limit, for example… if the speed limit is 55 and you are driving at 55… but everyone else is driving 70… and if your legal but slower speed interferes with the free flow of traffic and if you cause an accident, then your concern with not committing a “venial” sin may result in your committing a “mortal” sin.
Speed limits are supposed to be determined by the speed of the 85th percentile of drivers. It’s a tricky statistical point. And it causes a lot of misunderstandings… because human behavior and human ergonomics isn’t black and white.
Similarly, Catholic moral theology isn’t all black and white.
So, I also recommend that folks purchase and read through "Difficult Moral Questions: Vol. 3 (The Way of the Lord Jesus) "by Germain Grisez. It’s available on Amazon.
amazon.com/gp/product/0819909815/qid=1142865435/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8133755-7495805?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
F
fix
Guest
Al Masetti:
Every person should be subject to the governing authorities. For all authority comes from God and the existing authorities have been appointed by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority resists God’s order, and those who resist will bring judgment upon themselves (Rom 13:1-2).
Where do you find we each may decide which just civils laws we are to follow?
Please see this:
You indicated in one of your answers (regarding getting drunk) that breaking a civil law is by definition a sin. Does not the Catholic Church adhere to Aquinas’ discourse that the natural law of God is written on the hearts of men and, therefore, any civil law that transcends it is immoral and ought to be disobeyed. Thus, breaking a civil law does not necessarily mean sin?
…The only case, which even Aquinas’ acknowledges - in which one is not bound to observe a civil law is when that law so violates the purpose of law that it ceases to be law…
Indeed, violating a just civil or criminal law is an immoral act. For it is observation of the civil laws which allows society to function…
dwc.org/questions/Civil_Vs_Divine_Law.shtml
Back to your speeding example. If the particular law includes a provision for exceeding the limit under certain traffic conditions, that is one thing, but to intentionally exceed the limit is another.
1951 Law is a rule of conduct enacted by competent authority for the sake of the common good. The moral law presupposes the rational order, established among creatures for their good and to serve their final end, by the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. All law finds its first and ultimate truth in the eternal law. Law is declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. “Such an ordinance of reason is what one calls law.”
**
1952** There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal law - the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.
Is the CCC only speaking about certain civil laws?
It has nothing to do with scrupulosity.
Every person should be subject to the governing authorities. For all authority comes from God and the existing authorities have been appointed by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority resists God’s order, and those who resist will bring judgment upon themselves (Rom 13:1-2).
Where do you find we each may decide which just civils laws we are to follow?
Please see this:
You indicated in one of your answers (regarding getting drunk) that breaking a civil law is by definition a sin. Does not the Catholic Church adhere to Aquinas’ discourse that the natural law of God is written on the hearts of men and, therefore, any civil law that transcends it is immoral and ought to be disobeyed. Thus, breaking a civil law does not necessarily mean sin?
…The only case, which even Aquinas’ acknowledges - in which one is not bound to observe a civil law is when that law so violates the purpose of law that it ceases to be law…
Indeed, violating a just civil or criminal law is an immoral act. For it is observation of the civil laws which allows society to function…
dwc.org/questions/Civil_Vs_Divine_Law.shtml
Back to your speeding example. If the particular law includes a provision for exceeding the limit under certain traffic conditions, that is one thing, but to intentionally exceed the limit is another.
1951 Law is a rule of conduct enacted by competent authority for the sake of the common good. The moral law presupposes the rational order, established among creatures for their good and to serve their final end, by the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. All law finds its first and ultimate truth in the eternal law. Law is declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. “Such an ordinance of reason is what one calls law.”
**
1952** There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal law - the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.
Is the CCC only speaking about certain civil laws?
M
Margaret_G
Guest
Thank you for all of your replies. During confession on Sat. I asked the Priest about this situation and he told me that it was not a mortal sin.
And I do agree with the posters about not all laws being equal, how can a murder be equal to not giving your dog a rabies shot.
There is alot of greed in the government these days and many of the laws that are comming out are not always to protect us but to protect thier interests or the people they have to repay for contibutions.
Thanks again and God Bless!!!
And I do agree with the posters about not all laws being equal, how can a murder be equal to not giving your dog a rabies shot.
There is alot of greed in the government these days and many of the laws that are comming out are not always to protect us but to protect thier interests or the people they have to repay for contibutions.
Thanks again and God Bless!!!
F
fix
Guest
Margaret G:
I do not think it is about simply stating all laws are equal, or that breaking a law is always a mortal sin. The distinctions involved are more subtle and the topic you raised goes to a bigger issue. Those issues involve our duty as faithful Catholics to understand what our obligations are and why those obligations exist.And I do agree with the posters about not all laws being equal, how can a murder be equal to not giving your dog a rabies shot.
There is alot of greed in the government these days and many of the laws that are comming out are not always to protect us but to protect thier interests or the people they have to repay for contibutions.
M
Margaret_G
Guest
Actually, it is about breaking THIS particular law and mortal sin since that was what my question was titled “Is this a Mortal Sin?” I wasn’t asking about other laws.
The Priest I spoke with said that it wasn’t a mortal sin when I explained the situation with him. He asked me if I thought that this was an unjust law and if that was why I did not want to obey it. I answered yes and he told me that it was not a mortal sin. My intention in asking this forum this question was to seek advice
until I could speak to a Priest.
I thank you for seeking to answer my question and God Bless You.
F
fix
Guest
Margaret G:
As for your particular situation I certainly cannot judge if you are guilty of any sin. What I am a bit curious about is that the priest asked you if you thought the law was unjust intending that if you did it was licit to disobey the law? Do I read that right? I ask because it seems that if we each make a personal determination as to which laws are just or not we can have many conflicting answers and may people breaking the law.
Can you see my point?
Well, I was responding to your other post that mentioned some folks asserted all laws are equal. In that post you mentioned that the government was making many laws for reasons other than the common good. I was responding to those points.Actually, it is about breaking THIS particular law and mortal sin since that was what my question was titled “Is this a Mortal Sin?” I wasn’t asking about other laws.
The Priest I spoke with said that it wasn’t a mortal sin when I explained the situation with him. He asked me if I thought that this was an unjust law and if that was why I did not want to obey it. I answered yes and he told me that it was not a mortal sin. My intention in asking this forum this question was to seek advice
until I could speak to a Priest.
I thank you for seeking to answer my question and God Bless You.
As for your particular situation I certainly cannot judge if you are guilty of any sin. What I am a bit curious about is that the priest asked you if you thought the law was unjust intending that if you did it was licit to disobey the law? Do I read that right? I ask because it seems that if we each make a personal determination as to which laws are just or not we can have many conflicting answers and may people breaking the law.
Can you see my point?
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
It sounds like we have a relativistic view of following laws.
It is a sin to break civil laws, but only if we agree with them or think they are of enough severity?
By that logic, it is never a sin to break a civil law, per se, except that one might also break a moral law in the process. That sets each individual in charge of knowing what laws are for the “greater good” and how they should apply.
In a Christian society, that may not be a bad thing, but even when we are “blatantly” exceeding the speed limit by “only” 1 mph, what does it matter? Sure the cops may not pull us over but that’s using the world’s standards of justice to use to excuse our eternal notion of it.
Precisly how many mph over the speed limit changes it from being “scrupulous?” Again, it would be in the judgment of the sinner – therefore why is the posted speed limit important at all? Why doesn’t one just drive whatever speed feels safe? What if conditions are slippery and 1 mph over the speed limit is twice the safe speed?
My goal here is to have some kind of absolute statement on following the law. Are we to do so, or not? If we are when it doesn’t conflict with moral law, then how can we go around justifying breaking “small” laws arbitrarily?
If lusting after a women in our heart is tantamount to adultery, and if harboring anger against your brother is tantamount to murder, then why is speeding 1 mph as opposed to 30 mph over an issue of “scruples” vs sin? If I said that right now I was imagining myself raping, pillaging, and plundering in a nice quiet, Christian neighborhood, would you say it was “scruples” or sinful? What if I was exceeding the speed limit by 1 mph but wishing I could go another 35?
It’s like we say we hate relativism but when we actually want to embrace it we drag out the “scruples” argument to split hairs over those sins we wish to justify to ourselves and those we don’t.
Alan
It is a sin to break civil laws, but only if we agree with them or think they are of enough severity?
By that logic, it is never a sin to break a civil law, per se, except that one might also break a moral law in the process. That sets each individual in charge of knowing what laws are for the “greater good” and how they should apply.
In a Christian society, that may not be a bad thing, but even when we are “blatantly” exceeding the speed limit by “only” 1 mph, what does it matter? Sure the cops may not pull us over but that’s using the world’s standards of justice to use to excuse our eternal notion of it.
Precisly how many mph over the speed limit changes it from being “scrupulous?” Again, it would be in the judgment of the sinner – therefore why is the posted speed limit important at all? Why doesn’t one just drive whatever speed feels safe? What if conditions are slippery and 1 mph over the speed limit is twice the safe speed?
My goal here is to have some kind of absolute statement on following the law. Are we to do so, or not? If we are when it doesn’t conflict with moral law, then how can we go around justifying breaking “small” laws arbitrarily?
If lusting after a women in our heart is tantamount to adultery, and if harboring anger against your brother is tantamount to murder, then why is speeding 1 mph as opposed to 30 mph over an issue of “scruples” vs sin? If I said that right now I was imagining myself raping, pillaging, and plundering in a nice quiet, Christian neighborhood, would you say it was “scruples” or sinful? What if I was exceeding the speed limit by 1 mph but wishing I could go another 35?
It’s like we say we hate relativism but when we actually want to embrace it we drag out the “scruples” argument to split hairs over those sins we wish to justify to ourselves and those we don’t.
Alan
M
Margaret_G
Guest
What I felt the Priest was determining was if the 3 conditions were present to make this sin mortal. Yes I agree that it would be a terrible thing if we based our own judgements to decide what was moral and what was not to justify which laws to break.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Man-made laws are to be obeyed unless they contradict Divine Law. Romans 13 is one of the classic texts, but the Church has been pretty clear throughout the ages that it is immoral to disobey the government unless bound to do so by higher law.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
While it’s true that it’s not always mortally sinful to disobey legitimate authority, I’ve never been a fan of the “do you seriously think God would send someone to hell for this” line of reasoning. It’s just emotionalism, and it’s entirely subjective. And some things that appear innocuous without reflection can turn out to be very morally weighty. “Do you really think God would damn you to hell because you slept in instead of going to Mass on Sunday?” Hell yes.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Al Masetti:
This is another bad moral standard - it’s okay to break the law so long as no one else is harmed by your disobedience. The duty to obey the civil law is, admittedly, based in large part upon the contribution of civil order to the common good, especially protection of persons. But the duty still remains to obey civil law, whether your speeding claims a victim or not, whether or not the neighbors mind that you’re running a business in a residentially zoned area, etc. St. Paul set the standard by which the Church has lived for millenia; the idea that one may do as one pleases so long as disobedience and risky behavior don’t actually result in harm is a new one.
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
One of the things that makes the topic of Moral Theology so challenging is that not everything is black and white. We might like everything to be totally clear cut … but not everything is.
That’s why Father Grisez’s book, “Difficult Moral Questions” is so thick and the discussions so thorough. He devotes 926 pages to 200 issues… none of which, unfortunately, relates to driving 1 mph over the speed limit.
That’s why Father Grisez’s book, “Difficult Moral Questions” is so thick and the discussions so thorough. He devotes 926 pages to 200 issues… none of which, unfortunately, relates to driving 1 mph over the speed limit.
C
Crumpy
Guest
Excessive use of any punctuation, especially question marks, is a mortal sin.
If you don’t take of your dogs, you are sinning against natural law of improper stewardship of animals.
You are responsible for any damage your animals commit, and I don’t know why you want to take that risk to other human beings and to your own financial security of doing that.
I doubt that there are any side effects of a rabies shot, as so, so many have been administered with no demonstrated ill effects.
You are wrong, wrong, wrong. Can I make this any clearer???
If you don’t take of your dogs, you are sinning against natural law of improper stewardship of animals.
You are responsible for any damage your animals commit, and I don’t know why you want to take that risk to other human beings and to your own financial security of doing that.
I doubt that there are any side effects of a rabies shot, as so, so many have been administered with no demonstrated ill effects.
You are wrong, wrong, wrong. Can I make this any clearer???
F
fix
Guest
Al Masetti:
It is not claiming a simple mindedness on the issue as you imply. Obviously each situation is different, but civil laws are binding as the authority of the State is related to the authority of God.
Does Grisez claim we each may disobey a just civil law and not sin? Does he say that the CCC is wrong on this issue? Does he claim we each are to choose which laws we are to obey?
It is not claiming a simple mindedness on the issue as you imply. Obviously each situation is different, but civil laws are binding as the authority of the State is related to the authority of God.
- Status