Knowledge of Sin for others

[dfp42]

My question is on sin. I’ll use an example.

If a fallen away Catholic doesn’t know that missing Mass on Sunday was a mortal sin, and you explain (in love) to them that it is and show them various documents CCC etc, Do they now know? Are they know responsible for this obligation going forward if they continue to miss Mass on Sundays?

I’m having a hard time with this is the answer is “no” because it would seem that then everything educators of the faith teach -by telling and showing could somehow be bliss because that person could get off on the sin by saying they really didn’t understand and have full knowledge. It like saying to someone 1 + 1 = 2 and regardless of what you say that’s the answer. Most people would agree because the truth is what it is. But lets just say there really is someone who thought it was 3 instead. Is it still not their fault because they didn’t really know even if you told them a million times that 1 + 1 = 2?

I think of this also with things written in the natural heart like killing or taking a life. We all know this is wrong don’t we? But say a mental insane person didn’t know, is this a good excuse for killing?

I’m just trying to figure out more about speaking the truth to people when technically the person isn’t held responsible anyway out of their own ignorance.

 

[FNDRB58]

Yes, one is indeed culpable once you have explained it to him. Before he was ignorant and not culpable but now he has full knowledge that it is a mortal sin which is one of the criterion for sin; the others being grave matter and full consent.

If have heard this many times on Catholic Radio.

 

[lynx]

If the church, or Pope, said missing mass is a sin then it’s a sin. No excuses if it’s explained. If a person is not in control of their mental facilities I don’t believe they are sinning. To sin is to understand sin.

 

[nicolep]

There is never a “good excuse” for killing only circumstances that reduce culpability. I agree with others. Once one is told that they are required to do something or not do something, they have the knowledge.

There are a lot of things people do because they don’t believe it’s sinful. If one is Catholic, they agree to the authority of the Church. I might not like something, but I’m still bound to the rules.

 

[vz71]

My question is on sin. I’ll use an example.

If a fallen away Catholic doesn’t know that missing Mass on Sunday was a mortal sin, and you explain (in love) to them that it is and show them various documents CCC etc, Do they now know? Are they know responsible for this obligation going forward if they continue to miss Mass on Sundays?

Do they believe you?

As we see on the forums every day, it is possible to completely thrash the logic someone is using…show it wrong in every possible way, and still not be believed.

It is your obligation to let them know a behavior is sinful.
After that, it is up to God.

 

[peter116]

For me it was a matter of accepting the authority of the Catholic Church. It really doesn’t matter to someone if the truth is being spoken to them if they don’t recognize the authority of the giver of that truth. Truth and authority go hand in hand.

For instance, if someone accepts the authority of secular society to define that sexual acts outside of marriage are not immoral, then hearing the teaching of the Catholic Church will seem strange and backwards until that person accepts the teaching authority of the Church handed down by Christ.

That said, I have heard several times on catholic radio that once the truth has been heard, it’s a hard heart that rejects it, and I agree with that. Perhaps accepting the teaching authority of the church must be included to complete a person’s full knowledge of the truth. Perhaps if that is rejected, then full repsonsibility falls on thier soul.

Just my thoughts while waiting around…

Peace

 

[3DOCTORS]

Matthew
Chapter 20

1
1 "The kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out at dawn to hire laborers for his vineyard.
2
After agreeing with them for the usual daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard.
3
Going out about nine o’clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4
2 and he said to them, ‘You too go into my vineyard, and I will give you what is just.’
5
So they went off. (And) he went out again around noon, and around three o’clock, and did likewise.
6
Going out about five o’clock, he found others standing around, and said to them, ‘Why do you stand here idle all day?’
7
They answered, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You too go into my vineyard.’
8
3 When it was evening the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Summon the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and ending with the first.’
9
When those who had started about five o’clock came, each received the usual daily wage.
10
So when the first came, they thought that they would receive more, but each of them also got the usual wage.
11
And on receiving it they grumbled against the landowner,
12
saying, ‘These last ones worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who bore the day’s burden and the heat.’
13
He said to one of them in reply, ‘My friend, I am not cheating you. 4 Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage?
14
5 Take what is yours and go. What if I wish to give this last one the same as you?
15
(Or) am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?’
16
6 Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last."

I think sometimes it’s we who are afraid that the person has “gotten away with something,” and that if we tell them what they should do and they do start doing it, we will be envious of what they “got away with” up till that point. But that’s a negative way of looking at the whole issue.

By the same token, we are feeling it burdensome ourselves or we would be rejoicing to share it with others and thinking positively about all the blessings we are giving them an opportunity to receive. Instead, we assume we are doing them a disservice. Again, pessimism and negativity, seeing religious duty as a burden rather than a blessing.

Don’t know if I’m really articulating this clearly, but I have had these questions in my own mind many a time. It’s just our human nature. We have to reach that point where, as St. Augustine said, “Our hearts are restless until they rest in Him,” and we have to believe that that is true for others’ hearts as well.

Finally, if we mention it and someone doesn’t accept it right away, we pray for them. So we have to let go of all the baggage and guilt and weird hangups we have. And when I use the pronoun “we,” that’s because I include myself!

 

[VonDerTann]

Let’s worry about the planks in our own eyes first before we worry about the specks in or neighbors’ eyes.

Prased differently – let us worry about our own sin before we act on the compulsion to tell anyone and everyone else how sinful they are.

 

[FNDRB58]

Let’s worry about the planks in our own eyes first before we worry about the specks in or neighbors’ eyes.

Prased differently – let us worry about our own sin before we act on the compulsion to tell anyone and everyone else how sinful they are.

This would apply to the poster if he himself was also missing Mass. Alas, he is not missing Mass and is commanded by God to love his neighbor as the Bible says, “correct your brother with love.” We are indeed suppose to advise our brother when he sins. We do so for the sake of his soul because we love him.

 

[VonDerTann]

I’m sorry FNDRB58, the “look at the plank in your own eye first” applies to everyone. Jesus did not say, for example, “look at the plank in other people’s eyes when your own eye is clear,” becuase no one’s eye is clear. OP may have made Mass…but OP just as surely sinned some other time, since we all do.

Reading this board, I CONSTANTLY see 2 permutations of posters arising over and over:

1. Those who are obsessed with whether they have committed some mortal sin; and
2. Those who are convinced others are sinning and want to say EXACTLY what’s on their mind.

Both create nasty stereotypes…perhaps some of which are accurate, given the # of people on this board who seem to fit.

Do you – or OP – really, REALLY think that citing people to the Catechism, as to why they have allegedly committed some mortal sin, is the best way to bear testimony to Christ’s love for all? I’d say it’d get OP branded a nut, or judgmental, and dismissed. A better way would be to LIVE the gospels – by, for example, simply going to Mass oneself, and having one’s life visibly in order, so that, by one’s life, rather than mere words, they encourage all others to do the same…

 

[dfp42]

I’m sorry FNDRB58, the “look at the plank in your own eye first” applies to everyone. Jesus did not say, for example, “look at the plank in other people’s eyes when your own eye is clear,” becuase no one’s eye is clear. OP may have made Mass…but OP just as surely sinned some other time, since we all do.

Reading this board, I CONSTANTLY see 2 permutations of posters arising over and over:

1. Those who are obsessed with whether they have committed some mortal sin; and
2. Those who are convinced others are sinning and want to say EXACTLY what’s on their mind.

Both create nasty stereotypes…perhaps some of which are accurate, given the # of people on this board who seem to fit.

Do you – or OP – really, REALLY think that citing people to the Catechism, as to why they have allegedly committed some mortal sin, is the best way to bear testimony to Christ’s love for all? I’d say it’d get OP branded a nut, or judgmental, and dismissed. A better way would be to LIVE the gospels – by, for example, simply going to Mass oneself, and having one’s life visibly in order, so that, by one’s life, rather than mere words, they encourage all others to do the same…

Wow. I wonder if fraternal correction is too harsh as well. Seems to me that you are saying we should “never” say anything about sin to others because otherwise we are being judgmental, obsessed with talking about sin, and convinced that people are actually sinning? Yes, we are all sinners. But when did confirming people in mortal sin by silence become charity? It seems to me that we no longer want to talk about sin and live only by the quote of St. Francis “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”

From my understanding we are to do both preach and set example. Again, I ask is it mercy to affirm others in mortal sin for fear of offending? It seems that no matter how much others try to explain sin to others out of love* that something is a sin, it becomes offensive. No wonder the world hates Catholicism, it’s contrary to it’s ways, offensive and talks about sin. No one is saying it’s good to be arrogant and oppressive about faith either. I sometimes wish the Word of God wasn’t a two edge sword that cuts. If we speak the truth we hurt someones feelings one way or another.

 

[DPMartin]

Accusers:…

Jn:8:10: When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11: She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Jesus didn’t come to accuse the world of being the world. He came to save the souls therein from it’s condemned state. Condemning others for not being like you, or not doing what you do, is not the work of the Messiah.

If you want to preach salvation, it’s not sin nor the knowledge of sin that saves you, is it? Every one already has the knowledge of sin with out you teaching it. And it hasn’t saved them yet. They need the answer, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, not your magnification of the problem they already know they have. You nor the Church is the Messiah, only Jesus is the Messiah. If one serves the Messiah then he seek to do as the Messiah. For it is the King of the Kingdom of Heaven that is to be in agreement with.

And when it comes to correcting one another, it is in the assumption that ones brother in Christ is in agreement with Christ. But if one is not in agreement with Christ Jesus then how are they bound or obligated to respond as you expect they should? You don’t condemn others for not being in agreement with the Almighty, the Gospel is that Jesus is the agreement with the Almighty that is the Mercy and Truth of God. After coming into agreement with the Almighty through Jesus Christ because He is the Messiah, and no one else at all, any where. Then God the Father’s Grace is upon that person that he may grow and be proved in the Lord. We who are in agreement with Christ Jesus, answer to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit we agree to God’s Judgement, not our own. And what is God’s Judgement? Isn’t it to deliver the children of men from condemnation?

Just as intercessory prayer is in the Presence of God for the Mercy of God to prevail on the children of men. The accusers of the children of men are kept away from the Presence of God or the intercessory Pray would be none effective. Therefore the Lord is not with those who would accuse the children of men. He who bore the sins of the world, became the sins of the world, now sits at the Right Hand of God. To what value could your judgements of others be to God that He would give any regard to at all, when it was He who forgave the world through His Son?

Instead of the knowledge of their sin, how about the knowledge of their Salvation in Jesus Christ.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Do they believe you?

As we see on the forums every day, it is possible to completely thrash the logic someone is using…show it wrong in every possible way, and still not be believed.

It is your obligation to let them know a behavior is sinful.
After that, it is up to God.

This is an important point.

I’ve read (sorry, can’t remember where) that simply being told that X is a sin or Y is obligatory does not necessarily defeat a person’s ignorance. One has to take into account various factors, not the least of which are that person’s upbringing, religious background, and any prejudices or preconceived notions that must be overcome.

For example, try telling someone who was raised as an anti-Catholic that they must submit to Papal authority. Yes, you have shared the truth with that person, but there clearly are a lot of obstacles in the way of his accepting the truth.

Thus, it is possible that such a person – while committing an act that is objectively sinful, like missing Mass – is less culpable for that sin.

Peace,
Dante

 

[VonDerTann]

OP:

You write:

“Wow. I wonder if fraternal correction is too harsh as well. Seems to me that you are saying we should “never” say anything about sin to others because otherwise we are being judgmental, obsessed with talking about sin, and convinced that people are actually sinning?”
–No, I did not say we should “never” say anything about sin. I said…exactly what I said.
–Do you really think walking up to “fallen away” Catholics, Catechism in hand, and telling them they are in mortal sin is the best way to lead them to Christ? Heck, you don’t have the first clue who a “fallen away Catholic” is (because none of us does), let alone know they are in a state of mortal sin(because only God knows that).

“Yes, we are all sinners. But when did confirming people in mortal sin by silence become charity?”
–Once again, you have zero knowledge about who is in mortal sin.
–The fact that many conflate “missing mass” with “being in mortal sin” rather demonstrates just how ignorant/judgmental many Catholics are. Why? Because the Catholic Church has NEVER said what specific deeds, i.e., missing mass, are “mortal sin.” Keep looking for that list…it doesn’t exist.

"It seems to me that we no longer want to talk about sin and live only by the quote of St. Francis “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”
–St. Francis gave a great example. We should act accordingly.
–You can’t say we “don’t want to talk about sin.” Quite the contrary, I’d say many are OBSESSED with talking about it…problem is, they are obsessed with talking about OTHER PEOPLE’S sins, rather than their own.

“From my understanding we are to do both preach and set example. Again, I ask is it mercy to affirm others in mortal sin for fear of offending?”
–Offending people typically never leads them to Christ. Only LOVE can do that.

“No wonder the world hates Catholicism, it’s contrary to it’s ways, offensive and talks about sin.”
–So you admit that you’d hate being told you were sinning…which is why constantly telling others they are sinning is counterproductive.

“If we speak the truth we hurt someones feelings one way or another.”
–I think that depends on what truth you are telling,** and on how you are saying it**. “Speaking truth” need not include “telling all those around you who you subjective feel are in mortal sin that they ARE in mortal sin.”
–Morality is often very complex…and speaking truth also lies in how you say it. If I miss mass to care for my sick child and some 19 year old comes up to me and says, “you are in mortal sin, and here’s where it says so in the Catechism!” do you really think I am going to be sypathetic? Or believe I’ve heard the “truth?” No, I’m going to say – maybe out loud – “get lost, go have a sick kid and see how often you miss mass.” Alternatively, if he says, “hey, I’ve missed you at mass lately, everything okay?” I may respond very differently.

 

[RosaryFan]

My question is on sin. I’ll use an example.

If a fallen away Catholic doesn’t know that missing Mass on Sunday was a mortal sin, and you explain (in love) to them that it is and show them various documents CCC etc, Do they now know? Are they know responsible for this obligation going forward if they continue to miss Mass on Sundays?

I’m having a hard time with this is the answer is “no” because it would seem that then everything educators of the faith teach -by telling and showing could somehow be bliss because that person could get off on the sin by saying they really didn’t understand and have full knowledge. It like saying to someone 1 + 1 = 2 and regardless of what you say that’s the answer. Most people would agree because the truth is what it is. But lets just say there really is someone who thought it was 3 instead. Is it still not their fault because they didn’t really know even if you told them a million times that 1 + 1 = 2?

I think of this also with things written in the natural heart like killing or taking a life. We all know this is wrong don’t we? But say a mental insane person didn’t know, is this a good excuse for killing?

I’m just trying to figure out more about speaking the truth to people when technically the person isn’t held responsible anyway out of their own ignorance.

Rejecting the truth is not the same as “not knowing”. If you tell someone, then they know. If they don’t believe what you tell them, they still know, but reject it.

 

[FNDRB58]

I’m sorry FNDRB58, the “look at the plank in your own eye first” applies to everyone. Jesus did not say, for example, “look at the plank in other people’s eyes when your own eye is clear,” becuase no one’s eye is clear. OP may have made Mass…but OP just as surely sinned some other time, since we all do.

Reading this board, I CONSTANTLY see 2 permutations of posters arising over and over:

1. Those who are obsessed with whether they have committed some mortal sin; and
2. Those who are convinced others are sinning and want to say EXACTLY what’s on their mind.

Both create nasty stereotypes…perhaps some of which are accurate, given the # of people on this board who seem to fit.

Do you – or OP – really, REALLY think that citing people to the Catechism, as to why they have allegedly committed some mortal sin, is the best way to bear testimony to Christ’s love for all? I’d say it’d get OP branded a nut, or judgmental, and dismissed. A better way would be to LIVE the gospels – by, for example, simply going to Mass oneself, and having one’s life visibly in order, so that, by one’s life, rather than mere words, they encourage all others to do the same…

I never said the plank doesn’t apply to all of us. You took both Jesus and me out of context. Jesus’ words indeed applies to every human. What I did say was that this warning does not apply to the OP in this particular case. Objectively speaking, if the OP doesn’t miss Mass, he may indeed correct his brother in love and charity as the Bible states and Jesus commands. The OP is not judging the person’s soul and he should correct the person in a kind and loving manner. We are indeed commanded to do that as long as we are not being hypocritical and committing that same fault or others like it. If a practicing Catholic in the state of sanctifying grace sees that another of his Catholic brothers is about to commit a mortal sin then he is obligated to point it out to him out of love for him. This is clear biblical teaching.

It sounds like you are assuming the worst of the OP by presuming that he is too much of a sinner to point out the fault of another. Would it be better to let someone receive the Real Presence of Christ in the state of mortal sin? That would not be a loving act at all!

One * should* be “obssessed” with mortal sin. Mortal sin results in damnation! Christ spoke often about mortal sin and said that fornicators, adulterers, theives, etc. will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And don’t forget the ten commandments.

If you see your relative or friend about to do drugs or steal, would you not tell him he is doing wrong? Or do you feel that because you are a sinner you have no right to correct him?

 

[FNDRB58]

Accusers:…

Jn:8:10: When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11: She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

First, they were going to condemn her to death! No one is doing that here. Had they, out of love and kindness, informed the woman that her actions were sinful then that would have been a loving and holy action. So your comments regarding this passage of the Bible does not fit the context of the OP’s question.

Jesus didn’t come to accuse the world of being the world. He came to save the souls therein from it’s condemned state. Condemning others for not being like you, or not doing what you do, is not the work of the Messiah.

Again, no one is condemning. You can correct someone of a fault without condemning them to hell. We are not divinizing ourselves when we do correct someone. Your understanding of this is your crutch.

If you want to preach salvation, it’s not sin nor the knowledge of sin that saves you, is it? Every one already has the knowledge of sin with out you teaching it. And it hasn’t saved them yet. They need the answer, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, not your magnification of the problem they already know they have. You nor the Church is the Messiah, only Jesus is the Messiah. If one serves the Messiah then he seek to do as the Messiah. For it is the King of the Kingdom of Heaven that is to be in agreement with.

Jesus indeed preached about sin, did he not?

And when it comes to correcting one another, it is in the assumption that ones brother in Christ is in agreement with Christ. But if one is not in agreement with Christ Jesus then how are they bound or obligated to respond as you expect they should? You don’t condemn others for not being in agreement with the Almighty, the Gospel is that Jesus is the agreement with the Almighty that is the Mercy and Truth of God. After coming into agreement with the Almighty through Jesus Christ because He is the Messiah, and no one else at all, any where. Then God the Father’s Grace is upon that person that he may grow and be proved in the Lord. We who are in agreement with Christ Jesus, answer to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit we agree to God’s Judgement, not our own. And what is God’s Judgement? Isn’t it to deliver the children of men from condemnation?

No one is condemning. We are informing others of the Scriptures. Jesus told the apostles to go and preach the Word and that extends to each one of us. We are to inform others of the truth. It is up to them to receive it or not. For those who purport to be Catholics yet “unworthily” receive the Eucharist, they are committing a mortal sin. To the extent that they understand this to be Church teaching, they are culpable.

There is indeed a list of mortal sins in the bible:

(1 Corinthians 6:9) 9 Or don’t you know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

This we call mortal sin because it separates us totally from God unless we repent of these sins.

 

[VonDerTann]

I’m sorry, FNDRB58, I think it is 100% wrong to say “One should be “obssessed” with mortal sin,” so much so that I would charitably refer you to the Beatitudes and to

-That sort of thinking leads to warped, overly legalistic theology.
-If you read/listen to the really eminent theologians our day, and/or the paragons of Catholicism - John Paul II, Mother Theresa, etc., do you see a fixation on SIN? No. What you see is an obsession with…

…LOVE.

Heck, Look to Jesus. Look at Mark 12:28. The greatest commandment was to Love.

Look at Mother Theresa. She loved everyone. She condemned no one. And so it should be with us.

“Christ spoke often about mortal sin…”
–False. Please cite one instance where Christ ever spoke the words “MORTAL SIN.” As with that list in the Catechism…you will look for a long time.

–…But what Christ did say was “love your neighbor as yourself.” He didn’t say, “love your neighbor and tell him he’s in mortal sin.” He also told us not to judge others (Matthew, Ch. 7).

"If you see your relative or friend about to do drugs or steal, would you not tell him he is doing wrong? Or do you feel that because you are a sinner you have no right to correct him?
–Saying “you’re wrong,” does not mean saying, “you’re in mortal sin and damned!”

–Now that I have answered your question, please focus on mine:

Do you – or OP – really, REALLY think that citing people to the Catechism, as to why they have allegedly committed some mortal sin, is the best way to bear testimony to Christ’s love for all? I’d say it’d get OP branded a nut, or judgmental, and dismissed. A better way would be to LIVE the gospels – by, for example, simply going to Mass oneself, and having one’s life visibly in order, so that, by one’s life, rather than mere words, they encourage all others to do the same…

Finally, when you write "There is indeed a list of mortal sins in the bible:

‘(1 Corinthians 6:9) 9 Or don’t you know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.’

–…your statement is theologically inaccurate and false, and mishmashes Corinthians with the teachings of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does not define these, or any other acts as “mortal sins” in the sense that they lead to damnation, because the Church has never held that all such acts are always done with, for example, full consent of the will.

—The Catholic Church never says any act - i.e. killing, abortion, etc., whatever, is “always a mortal sin.” The most accurate description is that such acts are described as “grave matter” but “grave matter” is only one aspect of “mortal sin.”
–To the extent Corinthians says what it says, please read the entire thrust of Paul’s message, which was that Christians should give witness by living morally upright lives…not to provide some comprehensive list of mortal sins. Such list simply does not exist.

 

[FNDRB58]

It is evident Von that you take other’s comments in a very literal sense. Did you notice I put the word obsessed in quotations? That means one shouldn’t be obsessed in the clinical definition as you are taking it but one should always be conscious of their mortal state in life.

To answer your question of where in the bible did Jesus say the word mortal…Please cite once where Jesus every said the word Trinity? Just because a word is not explicitly stated in the bible does not make it untrue. Mortal sin is sin that separates us from God and results in damnation if one is unrepentant. The bible says that there are sins worthy of damnation. These sins are what the Church calls mortal sin. This is clear Catholic teaching.

I noticed you again are accusing me and others of damning. No one is doing that. That is left to God. The bible speaks clearly of correcting your brother when he sins. This is your crutch in this discussion. You don’t believe you can inform someone that a sin is so serious that it threatens one’s eternal salvation while not divinizing ourselves.

You missed my point regarding the anology of a person doing drugs. I would not tell someone doing drugs he may go to hell because that is not the issue. The issue is his physical health and getting him sober. This is analogous to telling someone who is receiving the Real Presence of Christ while in the state of mortal sin. We would inform the person that to do so would be gravely sinful. We would do this in love for his spiritual health.

Regarding the Catholic teaching on mortal sin. What you fail to concede is the fact that I am speaking objectively. I never said the word “always” nor does Jesus in that verse. You appear to add presumptions in your arguments. The only presumption we can make of mortal sin is that objectively these inhibit salvation. Of course there may be circumstances in a situation that might reduce one’s culpability. But objectively, murder, fornicators, adulterers, thieves, etc. will “not enter the kingdom of heaven.” If you don’t take my word for it then your are at issue with Jesus because I am quoting Him! What do you think Jesus meant from that the aforementioned scripture passage? He does mean something…what is it?

 

[FNDRB58]

One more thing about mortal sin. The Church does talk about mortal sin in the Catechism…#1456 states…

All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted by them in confession, even if they are most secret and have been committed against the last two precepts of the Decalogue; for these sins sometimes wound the soul more grievously and are more dangerous than those which are committed openly."

#1457 states…

“Anyone who is aware of having comitted a mortal sin must not receive Holy Communion, even if he expericences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution, unless he has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession.”