(MERGED) Grave sins or Serious Matter

[steve_b]

Sure:

If we cannot know whether we are saved, it means we cannot know if any of our sins are (or are not) mortal, since this knowledge would allow us to know the state of our salvation.

You make it sound like it’s either impossible to commit a mortal sin, or one has to be a rocket scientist to understand mortal sin. Neither is true. Mortal sin like most sins, are a cinch to commit.

I gave a list of sins #7 . I didn’t make the list up. I didn’t come up with the consequences for those sins. All those sins and consequences technically came from Jesus, through the Holy Spirit through Paul. John 14:25-26 , John 16:12-15

So iow, the judge of the living and the dead, the only one who offers salvation, is telling all of us, how we can screw up our salvation by commiting those mortal sins. No need for Jesus to give the warning and the consequences for those sins if as you say, no body can commit them or that they are sooooo hard to commit nobody qualifies anyway…right?

btw, you’re really not arguing with me. You’re really arguing with those scripture passages I posted and with the Church. I merely quoted those sources and the consequences…

and as for Mortal sin ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=mortal%2C+sin&xsubmit=Search&s=SS the various paragraphs and the language used does not say mortal sin is difficult to commit. And it’s not meant for individuals looking for loopholes to argue down mortal sin to a misdemeanor or no sin at all.

Conditions for a mortal sin

1. 
   *]grave matter
   *]full knowledge
   *]deliberate consent.
   
   What’s the big deal? Pick a sin from the list I gave #7 . It seems sexual sins sort of predominate the list. The only difference between venial sin and mortal sin is “matter”. One is grave matter the other is not.
   
   1. 
      *]By definition because of the consequences for those specific sins mentioned, we know grave matter is involved. It doesn’t matter that one disagrees with the sin or the consequence. One’s disagreement doesn’t change the sin or the outcome.
      *]One can disagree with the list on principle, especially if they want to keep doing the specific sin on the list, but once they learn that the sin is grave matter in God’s view, , they are then knowledgable.
      *]consent. Apart from a gun to someone’s head, it’s presumed consent is there for the act.
      D:
      

      Yup. There is absolutely no such thing as an act which is always mortally sinful, because the act itself is only a third of the equation. For a sin to be mortally culpable we must also take into account the person’s knowledge (of the sinful nature of the act) and intent (to willfully commit the act). If either knowledge or intent is imperfectly formed, the sin is not mortal no matter what it is. God alone knows our hearts (even more than we do) and he alone knows if our knowledge and intent are perfectly formed.

      And God knows the game player.
      
      If a person is mentally challenged, **THEN **intent, and knowledge, etc are diminished. That’s a small fraction of the population.
      
      As far as the issue of mercy, that comes AFTER the sin has been committed providing the person has regret and sorrow for what they’ve done.
      
      With exception of the mentally challenged perhaps, this following sin is certainly an example of an act which when done purposefully, is ALWAYS mortally sinful.
      
      ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=abortion&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

 

[steve_b]

Sure:

For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God. Council of Trent, Seventh Session]

David:

If we cannot know whether we are saved, it means we cannot know if any of our sins are (or are not) mortal, since this knowledge would allow us to know the state of our salvation. In other words, if I could be sure Fred had committed a mortal sin, I would know for sure the state of his salvation. I cannot know that even for myself.

ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

David,

I saw the quote you used from session VI, but I don’t find it saying what you want it to say

 

[CatholicSooner]

You make it sound like it’s either impossible to commit a mortal sin, or one has to be a rocket scientist to understand mortal sin. Neither is true. Mortal sin like most sins, are a cinch to commit.

I gave a list of sins #7 . I didn’t make the list up. I didn’t come up with the consequences for those sins. All those sins and consequences technically came from Jesus, through the Holy Spirit through Paul. John 14:25-26 , John 16:12-15

So iow, the judge of the living and the dead, the only one who offers salvation, is telling all of us, how we can screw up our salvation by commiting those mortal sins. No need for Jesus to give the warning and the consequences for those sins if as you say, no body can commit them or that they are sooooo hard to commit nobody qualifies anyway…right?

btw, you’re really not arguing with me. You’re really arguing with those scripture passages I posted and with the Church. I merely quoted those sources and the consequences…

and as for Mortal sin ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=mortal%2C+sin&xsubmit=Search&s=SS the various paragraphs and the language used does not say mortal sin is difficult to commit. And it’s not meant for individuals looking for loopholes to argue down mortal sin to a misdemeanor or no sin at all.

Conditions for a mortal sin

1. 
   *]grave matter
   *]full knowledge
   *]deliberate consent.
   
   What’s the big deal? Pick a sin from the list I gave #7 . It seems sexual sins sort of predominate the list. The only difference between venial sin and mortal sin is “matter”. One is grave matter the other is not.
   
   1. 
      *]By definition because of the consequences for those specific sins mentioned, we know grave matter is involved. It doesn’t matter that one disagrees with the sin or the consequence. One’s disagreement doesn’t change the sin or the outcome.
      *]One can disagree with the list on principle, especially if they want to keep doing the specific sin on the list, but once they learn that the sin is grave matter in God’s view, , they are then knowledgable.
      *]consent. Apart from a gun to someone’s head, it’s presumed consent is there for the act.
      
      And God knows the game player.
      
      If a person is mentally challenged, **THEN **intent, and knowledge, etc are diminished. That’s a small fraction of the population.
      
      As far as the issue of mercy, that comes AFTER the sin has been committed providing the person has regret and sorrow for what they’ve done.
      
      With exception of the mentally challenged perhaps, this following sin is certainly an example of an act which when done purposefully, is ALWAYS mortally sinful.
      
      ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=abortion&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

1. 1. 
      the lists you have posted are not mortal sins necessarily. THey are sins of grave matter

 

[steve_b]

the lists you have posted are not mortal sins necessarily. THey are sins of grave matter

Why do you say not necessarily?
look at the consequences for these sins #7

Who made that list, & those consequences? I had no part in either, I merely copied from what was there

 

[CatholicSooner]

Why do you say not necessarily?
look at the consequences for these sins #7

Who made that list, & those consequences? I had no part in either, I merely copied from what was there

Just because an act is a sin of grave matter doesn’t make it a mortal sin.

 

[steve_b]

Just because an act is a sin of grave matter doesn’t make it a mortal sin.

That’s not an answer. If something is grave matter and you do it, now you have to explain why it is not a mortal sin?

 

[Jared2914]

That’s not an answer. If something is grave matter and you do it, now you have to explain why it is not a mortal sin?

There are two things here. Whether a sin was committed and then how much culpability the person has for committing that sin. For example, adultery is a mortal sin, but a person that is raped is not culpable for mortal sin. In fact, in that situation they would have no culpability whatsoever as they had no choice in the matter at all. Basically, the full knowledge and full consent parts can limit culpability, but the sin may still be grave.

Culpability matters because it determines our state of grace. If we are not in a state of grace and die, we don’t get to go to heaven. We also can’t receive the Eucharist (an additional mortal sin is committed). Many people find it uncomfortable speaking to someone about their sins. Naturally, they will try to reason whether they are culpable for mortal sin or not. In addition, many live in households with non-believers or lax Catholics, people that may start asking questions if a person suddenly starts going to confession outside the normal times of Advent and Lent.

 

[CatholicSooner]

That’s not an answer. If something is grave matter and you do it, now you have to explain why it is not a mortal sin?

It has probably been stated thousands of times on this site before but grave matter is only 1/3 of the criteria for a sin to be mortal.

So yes it was an answer. Grave matter does not always equal mortal sin but mortal sin always equals grave matter

 

[steve_b]

It has probably been stated thousands of times on this site before but grave matter is only 1/3 of the criteria for a sin to be mortal.

So yes it was an answer. Grave matter does not always equal mortal sin but mortal sin always equals grave matter

You’re playing games with knowledge and intent. We’ve already been over the mentally challenged.

 

[steve_b]

There are two things here. Whether a sin was committed and then how much culpability the person has for committing that sin. For example, adultery is a mortal sin, but a person that is raped is not culpable for mortal sin. In fact, in that situation they would have no culpability whatsoever as they had no choice in the matter at all.

It’s already been discussed. I put it in another post, unless a gun is put to your head…

I was taking the example to the extreme
J:

Basically, the **full knowledge **

Are we negotiating over what FULL means?

I submitted a list of sins from scripture, that have grave consequences to them if one does them and dies in them. Once a person knows this, how much more knowledge does one need for FULL knowledge in your estimation?
J:

and full consent parts can limit culpability, but the sin may still be grave.

I already gave the extreme examples, of a gun to the head, and mentally challenged example. Could you explain how after the extreme examples are removed from consideration, how someone who doesn’t fit into those examples can’t give their full consent such that they are not responsible for what they do?
J:

Culpability matters because it determines our state of grace. If we are not in a state of grace and die, we don’t get to go to heaven. We also can’t receive the Eucharist (an additional mortal sin is committed). Many people find it uncomfortable speaking to someone about their sins.Naturally, they will try to reason whether they are culpable for mortal sin or not.

or try to reason away culpability either before or after the deed.
J:

In addition, many live in households with non-believers or lax Catholics, people that may start asking questions if a person suddenly starts going to confession outside the normal times of Advent and Lent.

That’s talking about AFTER a sin is committed. The person you discribe knows they’ve done wrong that’s why they are going to confession.

 

[CatholicSooner]

You’re playing games with knowledge and intent. We’ve already been over the mentally challenged.

I’m not playing games. I’m giving the definition of mortal sin. You gave example of grave matters that could be mortal sin if they fit the definition.

Do you only think that mentally challenged people are capable of being ignorant?

 

[CatholicSooner]

It’s already been discussed. I put it in another post, unless a gun is put to your head…

I was taking the example to the extreme

Are we negotiating over what FULL means?

I submitted a list of sins from scripture, that have grave consequences to them if one does them and dies in them. Once a person knows this, how much more knowledge does one need for FULL knowledge in your estimation?

I already gave the extreme examples, of a gun to the head, and mentally challenged example. Could you explain how after the extreme examples are removed from consideration, how someone who doesn’t fit into those examples can’t give their full consent such that they are not responsible for what they do?

or try to reason away culpability either before or after the deed.

That’s talking about AFTER a sin is committed. The person you discribe knows they’ve done wrong that’s why they are going to confession.

I’m not even sure of your position anymore. You seem to know what consitutes a mortal sin but fail to admit that lust, murder, adoltary,etc may not be mortal sins in every situation except for mentally challenged and a gun to your head.

Heres a personal example. I slep with my girlfriend before she was my wife. I used condoms with my wife. I didn’t know at the time that these were mortal sins. I knew that the church frowned upon it but didn’t even know what a mortal sin was. I was also taking communion at this time at mass. So I was ignorant that it was grave matter and it didn’t meet all the criteria of a mortal sin

 

[Bookcat]

It’s not just your mind - the Church teaches that we cannot ever know for sure if any particular offense is mortally sinful. Absolutely certainty of this belongs to God alone.

a…yes we can.

I can know for sure I committed a mortal sin. Mortal certainty is yes quite possible.

But yes absolute certainty that is a different matter.

 

[Bookcat]

Thanks. It just seems too subjective for my structured mind. A grave matter for one person could not be a grave matter for another.

A person may be invincibly ignorant that it is a grave matter -sure. But it is still a grave matter. They just lack the knowledge that it is.

 

[Bookcat]

The murder and adultery for example are objectively “grave matters”. Always.

And on the objective level one can even say “murder is a mortal sin”, “adultery is a mortal sin”.

Now if the needed knowledge or consent is lacking - a mortal sin is not “committed” that is one not guilty of committing a mortal sin.

Now granted those two are often quite know to be very serious -via natural moral law - most people would think that such are rather grave. Even if they have no theology or are not Christian…

But if one takes say something less known so easily from natural moral law - then one can see more clearly the principle.

In any case:

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI

---

1. When does one commit a mortal sin?****

1855-1861
1874

One commits a mortal sin when there are simultaneously present: grave matter, full knowledge, and deliberate consent. This sin destroys charity in us, deprives us of sanctifying grace, and, if unrepented, leads us to the eternal death of hell. It can be forgiven in the ordinary way by means of the sacraments of Baptism and of Penance or Reconciliation.
**
396. When does one commit a venial sin?**

1862-1864
1875

One commits a venial sin, which is essentially different from a mortal sin, when the matter involved is less serious or, even if it is grave, when full knowledge or complete consent are absent. Venial sin does not break the covenant with God but it weakens charity and manifests a disordered affection for created goods. It impedes the progress of a soul in the exercise of the virtues and in the practice of moral good. It merits temporal punishment which purifies.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

(Note: mortal sin and grave sin are synonyms in the Church).

 

[steve_b]

I’m not playing games. I’m giving the definition of mortal sin. You gave example of grave matters that could be mortal sin if they fit the definition.

Do you only think that mentally challenged people are capable of being ignorant?

We’ve been over that too. Ignorance isn’t presumed to always be innocent. Especially when a person takes little effort to learn what they SHOULD know. THEN they are guilty of the evil they commit. 1791 , & 1859 feigned ignorance is not ignorance. It actually boosts the wrong being committed. Notice how the Church defines knowledge and consent in this context of mortal sin.

 

[thinkandmull]

is it really a sin to use a condon for pleasure although while taking it off at the end?

 

[steve_b]

I’m not even sure of your position anymore. You seem to know what consitutes a mortal sin but fail to admit that lust, murder, adoltary,etc may not be mortal sins in every situation except for mentally challenged and a gun to your head.

I gave 2 examples where culpability is not there or greatly reduced. A crime on a person where the person is a victim, and someone mentally challanged. Obviously that’s someone who can’t reason properly or at all.

Other than that, I thought I was clear on where the line is drawn for cases of what ifs.

I sense you didn’t open the links I provided
C:

Here’s a personal example. I slep with my girlfriend before she was my wife. I used condoms with my wife. I didn’t know at the time that these were mortal sins. I knew that the church frowned upon it but didn’t even know what a mortal sin was. I was also taking communion at this time at mass. So I was ignorant that it was grave matter and it didn’t meet all the criteria of a mortal sin

I wish you’d given this example sooner no pun intended.

If you knew the Church frowned on what you were doing, why then didn’t you seek to find out why ?

Look at these 2 passages from the CCC. 1791 , & 1859

 

[DavidFilmer]

a…yes we can.

I can know for sure I committed a mortal sin. Mortal certainty is yes quite possible.

But yes absolute certainty that is a different matter.

When I say “for sure” I mean an absolute certantity. Or in the words of Trent (which I quoted), “the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error.”

I don’t know what “mortal certainty” is (I might hazard a guess at the meaning of “moral certainty,” but not “mortal certainty”).

I have accused myself of mortal sin in Confession but have been told that my sin might not be mortal because of certain circumstances. I will add that, in every instance, my Confessor was a Western Provence Dominican priest, who are NOT known for being liberal Catholic wack-jobs who are hesitant to regard any sin as mortal. Fortunately, because this happened within Sacramental Confession, the ultimate truth of the matter is irrelevant. But I have accused myself of mortal sin when my Confessor has had reservations. I don’t dare assert that I am right and my Confessor is categorically wrong. Therefore, I cannot say that I am certain of the veracity of my self-accusation.

 

[steve_b]

When I say “for sure” I mean an absolute certantity. Or in the words of Trent (which I quoted), “the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error.”

And I read the quote and linked it to the context. I didn’t see what you saw in that quote #18 ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

“error” is mentioned once in the entire document.

Chapter IX

But though it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted nor ever have been remitted except gratuitously by divine mercy for Christ’s sake, yet it must not be said that sins are forgiven or have been forgiven to anyone who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins,[47] resting on that alone, though among heretics and schismatics this vain and ungodly confidence may be and in our troubled times indeed is found and preached with untiring fury against the Catholic Church.
Moreover, it must not be maintained, that they who are truly justified must needs, without any doubt whatever, convince themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified except he that believes with certainty that he is absolved and justified,[48] and that absolution and justification are effected by this faith alone, as if he who does not believe this, doubts the promises of God and the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ.
For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God.

For as no pious person ought to doubt the mercy of God, the merit of Christ and the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, so each one, when he considers himself and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension concerning his own grace, since no one can know with the certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God.

I submit, that passage does NOT say what you want it to say.
DF:

I don’t know what “mortal certainty” is (I might hazard a guess at the meaning of “moral certainty,” but not “mortal certainty”).

I have accused myself of mortal sin in Confession but have been told that my sin might not be mortal because of certain circumstances. I will add that, in every instance, my Confessor was a Western Provence Dominican priest, who are NOT known for being liberal Catholic wack-jobs who are hesitant to regard any sin as mortal.

I didn’t see plural here, so does that mean you only go to confession to this one priest?
DF:

Fortunately, because this happened within Sacramental Confession, the ultimate truth of the matter is irrelevant.

After this confession, If you go about thinking based on what that priest told you, that mortal sin is virtually impossible to commit, and you continue to do the same activity thinking it’s not mortal, and you teach others the same, then that is NOT irrelevant.
DF:

But I have accused myself of mortal sin when my Confessor has had reservations. I don’t dare assert that I am right and my Confessor is categorically wrong. Therefore, I cannot say that I am certain of the veracity of my self-accusation.

All I can say is

Ecclesiastes 10:2 A wise man’s heart inclines him toward the right,
but a fool’s heart toward the left.