Mortal sin and full knowledge

[Kathrin]

My question was fortunately not totally serious. Only a little bit.
It could have been though that at least we are expected to have read it… but I guess we learn enough in catechism class or at RCIA etc - those who teach us probably know what we NEED to have heard…

I think the best way to look something up in the catechism is online?

Kathrin

 

[Neil_Anthony]

That makes sense to some extent, except that my understanding is that Catholics have a serious obligation to know what is expected of them, especially when it comes to mortal sins.

The thing is, some catholics learn about these things from a priest rather than looking things up in the catechism or papal encyclicals. And not all priests agree on what is a mortal sin and what isn’t. Not to mention that many sins are rarely if ever brought up in sermons.

So a Catholic with good motives may have made a reasonable effort to learn the faith - childhood religious education, listen to sermons every Sunday, ask the parish priest when a question comes up - and still be misinformed. In that case their ignorance wouldn’t be their fault.

 

[bobzills]

And not all priests agree on what is a mortal sin and what isn’t.

Could you give some examples of sins which some priests say are mortal sins (or grave matter) whereas others say that they would not be mortal sins. And is this all written down someplace or is it entirely word of mouth?

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Could you give some examples of sins which some priests say are mortal sins (or grave matter) whereas others say that they would not be mortal sins. And is this all written down someplace or is it entirely word of mouth?

It’s word of mouth. For example I saw a thread on here about a person who was told by his confessor that masturbation isn’t a mortal sin (in confession). How many couples have been told by their priests that they can form their own conscience about birth control even if their conscience goes against church teaching?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

The thing is, some catholics learn about these things from a priest rather than looking things up in the catechism or papal encyclicals. And not all priests agree on what is a mortal sin and what isn’t. Not to mention that many sins are rarely if ever brought up in sermons.

So a Catholic with good motives may have made a reasonable effort to learn the faith - childhood religious education, listen to sermons every Sunday, ask the parish priest when a question comes up - and still be misinformed. In that case their ignorance wouldn’t be their fault.

This past Sunday was the first time I ever remember hearing a priest mention and suggesting confession in a sermon. To me, it is a staple of our faith.

 

[bobzills]

How many couples have been told by their priests that they can form their own conscience about birth control even if their conscience goes against church teaching?

You said: “And not all priests agree on what is a mortal sin and what isn’t.” But I don;t see anything which supports this other than he said that she said that he heard at work that he said that his friend told him in an RCIA class that the teacher said that a priest said so.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

You said: “And not all priests agree on what is a mortal sin and what isn’t.” But I don;t see anything which supports this other than he said that she said that he heard at work that he said that his friend told him in an RCIA class that the teacher said that a priest said so.

And your point is?

 

[bobzills]

And your point is?

There is no tangible support for your assertion.

 

[SilentKnight]

There is no tangible support for your assertion.

I can assure you, Bob, that Neil is correct. Unfortunately there are plenty of priests out there who break from Catholic doctrine in their advice to others. This why it’s important to recognize that just because someone is told something - even by a member of the clergy - doesn’t mean that what they’ve been told is automatically correct, nor does it mean that they thereby “know truth absolutely” because it has come from the mouth of a priest.

We must all do what we can to learn the faith for ourselves. Generally, priests are a reliable source of information in this regard. But not always. It is only the pope and bishops of the Church in restricted circumstances that are covered by infallibility.

SK

 

[coda]

There is no tangible support for your assertion.

I have personally been given very, very bad advice by members of the clergy— I have also been given very good { although not what I wanted to hear at the time) advice as well, by the same. The catechism however,is a reliable, trustworthy wealth of truth.

 

[bobzills]

I can assure you, Bob, that Neil is correct. Unfortunately there are plenty of priests out there who break from Catholic doctrine in their advice to others. This why it’s important to recognize that just because someone is told something - even by a member of the clergy - doesn’t mean that what they’ve been told is automatically correct, nor does it mean that they thereby “know truth absolutely” because it has come from the mouth of a priest.

We must all do what we can to learn the faith for ourselves. Generally, priests are a reliable source of information in this regard. But not always. It is only the pope and bishops of the Church in restricted circumstances that are covered by infallibility.

SK

Well, I am waiting for a specific instance where a priest said publicly that something is definitely not a mortal sin, but another priest had said that the same thing was a mortal sin. I don;t see where you have anything tangible to back this up except for hearsay.

 

[SilentKnight]

Priests don’t typically say these things “publicly” (e.g. hold literal press conferences) because they know better. So, if you require a newspaper clipping or something of this nature, it’s going to take me a while. (I** will **find it, I assure you.) The instances that I am thinking of have most often occurred “behind closed doors” in the confessional or in a priest’s office, or even, say, in a classroom. Fortunately or un, there is no public record of these other than the testimony of witnesses such as myself and Neil.

It happens. I promise you.

SK

 

[bobzills]

Priests don’t typically say these things “publicly” (e.g. hold literal press conferences) because they know better. So, if you require a newspaper clipping or something of this nature, it’s going to take me a while. (I** will **find it, I assure you.) The instances that I am thinking of have most often occurred “behind closed doors” in the confessional or in a priest’s office, or even, say, in a classroom. Fortunately or un, there is no public record of these other than the testimony of witnesses such as myself.

SK

It’s really not tangible evidence, because, it can always be argued that you have misinterpreted what was said or that you have quoted out of context.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

It’s really not tangible evidence, because, it can always be argued that you have misinterpreted what was said or that you have quoted out of context.

This isn’t about bashing priests, it’s about how sometimes people take advice from a priest and come away with the wrong idea. If someone makes a reasonable good-faith effort to learn the faith, and somehow doesn’t learn about something that is a mortal sin, then they don’t have full knowledge, but they aren’t culpable for it if they made a reasonable good-faith effort to learn the faith.

 

[bobzills]

This isn’t about bashing priests, it’s about how sometimes people take advice from a priest and come away with the wrong idea. If someone makes a reasonable good-faith effort to learn the faith, and somehow doesn’t learn about something that is a mortal sin, then they don’t have full knowledge, but they aren’t culpable for it if they made a reasonable good-faith effort to learn the faith.

It would be more helpful if you had a reference to written sources to support your argument. Oral discussions can be misinterpreted or misquoted easily and are not as reliable for documentation purposes.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

It would be more helpful if you had a reference to written sources to support your argument. Oral discussions can be misinterpreted or misquoted easily and are not as reliable for documentation purposes.

Don’t worry about it, it was a “maybe” or “what if” comment to help the original poster with his question.

 

[OraLabora]

One can always err on the side of caution. If one commits a grave sin and is unable to discern whether all the conditions meet for it to be “mortal”, why not avail one’s self of the healing powers of the Sacrament of Reconciliation regardless? A sin does not have to be “mortal” to go to the confessional!

Never underestimate the power of the confessional, even for trivial sins! A sin no matter how small is an open wound that requires healing. There is no better place for that than the confessional, followed by the Eucharist at Mass.

 

[tominrichmond]

The Church tells us what particular moral faults are mortal, in the external forum, that is, objectively considered. Thus, murder, adultery, masturbation, robbery, etc, are rightly classed “mortal sins.”

The Church assigns the personal imputation of these sins only to those, who in the internal forum, that is, subjective circumstances considered (e.g., in sacramental confession), demonstrate the requisite knowledge and intent to have committed the sin.

Of course, a failure subjectively to know the serious nature of the fault does not render the actor blameless, but guilty only of a venial sin.