Mortal Sin---What is "Full Knowledge"?

[steve_b]

bobcat:

Such is not the case. No external action is needed for internal consent. Ones internal consent of course is an action too by the way

If I decide to kill my wife…even if I repent before I do it…it is still a mortal sin if chosen with full knowledge and deliberate consent

**1264 **Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, “the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.”

It seems we are negotiating over what

• “wrestle with”
• “resist”
• “competes according to the rules”

means.

The more serious the sin the higher degree of wrestling, & resisting, and competing for good there will be…true?

If you don’t act on the temptation, how much consent do you give to the temptation?

 

[Bookcat]

**1264 **Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, “the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.”

It seems we are negotiating over what

• “wrestle with”
• “resist”
• “competes according to the rules”

means.

The more serious the sin the higher degree of wrestling, & resisting, and competing for good there will be…true?

If you don’t act on the temptation, how much consent do you give to the temptation?

As consent much as you give! If you give complete consent with full knowledge such is mortal sin.

The Church does not say one needs to “act” externally in order to commit a mortal sin. Actually the opposite.

But yes…OF COURSE! as I keep repeating…if one is not giving complete consent…if one is struggling…one may not be committing ANY sin external or internal…but actually increasing in VIRTUE. Ones good habitus may be increasing…

May we all manfully resist by the grace of Jesus Christ! and not sin! but become more like Christ

 

[Bookcat]

**1264 **Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, “the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.”

It seems we are negotiating over what

• “wrestle with”
• “resist”
• “competes according to the rules”

means.

The more serious the sin the higher degree of wrestling, & resisting, and competing for good there will be…true?

If you don’t act on the temptation, how much consent do you give to the temptation?

As much consent as you give! If you give complete consent with full knowledge such is mortal sin.

The Church does not say one needs to “act” externally in order to commit a mortal sin. Actually the opposite.

But yes…OF COURSE! as I keep repeating…if one is not giving complete consent…if one is struggling…one may not be committing ANY sin external or internal…but actually increasing in VIRTUE. Ones good habitus may be increasing…

May we all manfully resist by the grace of Jesus Christ! and not sin! but become more like Christ

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Let’s say I “decide” not to go to Mass. I do not change my mind.
Which of the following scenarios is true?

A.) 2 mortal sins were committed- the first when I DECIDED not to go and the second when I actually missed Mass.
B.) 1 mortal sin was committed- I committed a sin by deciding not to go to Mass. The act of not going to Mass was not a sin.
C.) 1 mortal sin was committed- the sin occurred when I missed Mass.

 

[davidv]

Let’s say I “decide” not to go to Mass. I do not change my mind.
Which of the following scenarios is true?

A.) 2 mortal sins were committed- the first when I DECIDED not to go and the second when I actually missed Mass.
B.) 1 mortal sin was committed- I committed a sin by deciding not to go to Mass. The act of not going to Mass was not a sin.
C.) 1 mortal sin was committed- the sin occurred when I missed Mass.

B and C together.
A sin was committed in thought (B), by the decision and was carried out in C. Since the thought and act went together they are one sin.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

B and C together.
A sin was committed in thought (B), by the decision and was carried out in C. Since the thought and act went together they are one sin.

Then it is pointless to change one’s mind once one has sinned in thought, since it is part and parcel of the same sin and one has essentially already committed that sin mentally.

Apparently, there is no difference between planning a murder and actually carrying it out.

I agree with a previous poster who said that this MUST carry over into virtue as well as vice. If I “decide” to go to Africa and end world hunger, but then change my mind, I must receive all the graces and blessings and growth in virtue that I would have received had I actually done it! Sweet…

 

[davidv]

Then it is pointless to change one’s mind once one has sinned in thought, since it is part and parcel of the same sin and one has essentially already committed that sin mentally.

Apparently, there is no difference between planning a murder and actually carrying it out.

Why? Isn’t they a difference in the gravity of sin committed only in thought versus one which is carried out?

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Why? Isn’t they a difference in the gravity of sin committed only in thought versus one which is carried out?

Supposedly, but both are still mortal sins and a mortal sin is as bad as it gets. Is someone going to go to a worse, more permanent hell for actually acting as opposed to just thinking? IMO, this line of thinking is dangerous and could very well prevent someone from changing their mind and deciding not to put a sin into action.

 

[Bookcat]

Let’s say I “decide” not to go to Mass. I do not change my mind.
Which of the following scenarios is true?

A.) 2 mortal sins were committed- the first when I DECIDED not to go and the second when I actually missed Mass.
B.) 1 mortal sin was committed- I committed a sin by deciding not to go to Mass. The act of not going to Mass was not a sin.
C.) 1 mortal sin was committed- the sin occurred when I missed Mass.

If one has full knowledge and deliberate consent.

One is already committing the a mortal sin when one decides. And since you actually carry it to act it is worse.

Now if you had changed your mind…and decided now to go and went…one would have committed a mortal sin by deciding with full knowledge and complete consent…but it would have been a worse mortal sin if one had not repented and gone to Mass. But thankfully the person is already on the road to conversion instead.

 

[davidv]

Supposedly, but both are still mortal sins and a mortal sin is as bad as it gets. Is someone going to go to a worse, more permanent hell for actually acting as opposed to just thinking? IMO, this line of thinking is dangerous and could very well prevent someone from changing their mind and deciding not to put a sin into action.

Why is the truth dangerous? The Church has constantly taught that the gravity of mortal sins vary. The graver the sin, the harder it will be to repent because it requires a firmer disposition to go against God.

 

[Bookcat]

Then it is pointless to change one’s mind once one has sinned in thought, since it is part and parcel of the same sin and one has essentially already committed that sin mentally.

Apparently, there is no difference between planning a murder and actually carrying it out.

NO! It is not pointless… Yes one should never commit any mortal sin…so as to remain in the life of Christ…mortal sin is “pointless” for it only ends in death…

But if one should fall into mortal sin by in ones choice before action…it is still better to repent!

But by repenting and not acting going as far as external action one is 1. on the road towards repentance and thus to life. 2. One is not making the mortal sin worse! By acting on it. and thus not increasing the effects of the sin…the punishment…and other outward evil effects even for others…

 

[Bookcat]

Supposedly, but both are still mortal sins and a mortal sin is as bad as it gets. Is someone going to go to a worse, more permanent hell for actually acting as opposed to just thinking? IMO, this line of thinking is dangerous and could very well prevent someone from changing their mind and deciding not to put a sin into action.

It is WORSE!!! both in sin against God who loves us and in effects/punishment …and in effects for others.

 

[Bookcat]

Think of it this way. A man decides to go commit a murder. This is done with full knowledge and complete consent. So they are now in mortal sin.

He though in response to grace …repents and does not act upon it. He still needs to go to confession.

But if he did not??

His sin against God would be worse…

He would have the further effects/punishment for actually murdering someone.

He would likely be in prison for a very long time.

The family and the person murdered would be …well effected adversely…

as would his family and society…etc etc

You get the picture.

If he had stopped at the internal mortal sin and repented…all of that would be mostly avoided.

Sins of thought are sins. If carried to action. They are worse.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

OK, so do you agree then that one receives all of the spiritual benefits of “deciding” to do something good (i.e., deciding to become a priest, give all of one’s money away to the poor, etc.) and then changing one’s mind, just as one is subject to the negative spiritual effects of “deciding” to commit a mortal sin and then changing one’s mind?

 

[Bookcat]

OK, so do you agree then that one receives all of the spiritual benefits of “deciding” to do something good (i.e., deciding to become a priest, give all of one’s money away to the poor, etc.) and then changing one’s mind, just as one is subject to the negative spiritual effects of “deciding” to commit a mortal sin and then changing one’s mind?

No it does not work that way.

One can sin in thought…with no action. The Church and moral theology are very clear on this.

But one can not “receive all the spiritual benefits” of deciding to be a Priest etc…but then changing ones mind. But certainly one can receive certain spiritual graces if one was honestly seeking this…but then one found it was not the will of God. Of course God blesses one when one sets ones heart and mind to follow his will etc…

And to choose in ones will to follow what one thinks is the will of God or to do something for God…yes is a good act and can be meritorious.

And it is a sin to choose something sinful …in word or thought…or deed…or omission…or desire…

Of course if ones mortally sinful choice does no go to action than one does not have all the bad effects that would be if one had brought it to action!

 

[Bookcat]

As I noted…this is just simply Catholic Theology …as it has been …

One could refer to various Moral Theology texts on this. Older ones …newer ones…ones from a Hundred years ago…or just a few…

Here is an example:

From the book: “Our Moral Life in Christ” a Basic Course on Moral Theology By Fr James Socias and (Fr?) Aurelio Fernandez with Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat in 1997…

1997 Midwest Theological Forum and Scepter Publishers (who do the Navarre) (Actually this text is now in a new format in the series that Dr. Scott Hahn’s work on Understanding Scripture is in…for the Moral Theology text.)

Forward by Fr. Augustine Di Noia O.P. NCCB Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices and recommendations from well known Fr. Romasus Cessario OP (Professor of Systematic Theology), Dr. William E. May (Professor of Moral Theology ath the John Paul II institute in DC …and member of the International Theological Commission (that advises the Pope…) and Russel Shaw …

Ok …so very very recommended Moral Theology Text.

So here is what it says (I will underline a couple things etc…but read the whole…)

Regarding Sins which are Internal:

"Internal sin is found in thought or desire. Hence, evil thoughts, daydreaming, desires and memories could be mortal sins which need to be confessed. Such sins are found in every matter, and not just in sexual matters.

Some find it hard to admit that man can sin in thought or desire, without sinning in action (Cf Chapter II). Internal sins are clearly condemned by Jesus (Cf. Mk 7:14-23, Mt 5:27-29)." Pg 139

End of quote.

This is just one example.

Again internal mortal sins can happen in just thought or desire…without any action.

But again one MUST distinguish between temptation and consent. And for a mortal sin to take place one needs not only grave matter but full knowledge and deliberate consent.

Not pulling this from a hat.

 

[Shin]

Yes exactly… the Acts of Contrition themselves… ‘I confess to almighty God, that I have sinned, in thought, word and deed…’

‘But since all mortal sins, even those of thought, make men children of wrath Eph. 2:3] and enemies of God, it is necessary to ask pardon for all of them from God by an open and humble confession. While, therefore, the faithful of Christ strive to confess all sins which occur to their memory, they undoubtedly lay all of them before the divine mercy to be forgiven [can. 7]’

• The Council of Trent

‘In order to make a good examination of conscience the penitent should adopt some system; the simplest and easiest method is to go through the commandments of God and of the Church, the various kinds of sins (especially the Seven Capital Sins), and the nine ways of participating in sin; it is also recommended to call to mind particular hours and days. Theologians give many other methods besides for this examination. Reuter recommends the penitent to recall where he was each day, what was done, and what sins were committed by thoughts, wishes, and desires, words, and works ; how he has conducted himself at home, in church, with his neighbors; the author considers that by this means repetition will be avoided.’

• Theory and Practice of the Confessional

 

[jmcrae]

It has nothing really to do with me. Such is simply the case. (the first sentence…not the second!)

So - these rules of yours apply to other people, but not to you, personally?

If you get a craving for chocolate and “decide” to cheat on your diet, but then when mealtime comes, by the force of habit, and lack of any chocolate in the house, you make a healthy meal, you are still a glutton, and still in the state of mortal sin for gluttony, by your rules, are you not?

To my way of thinking, no, because the force of the “decision” was not powerful enough to compel you out to the store to buy some chocolate. But the way you describe it, the mere physical craving and the thought in the mind that results from the craving, counts as a “decision” and thus, a mortal sin.

And again, if you think of passing on some news about your friend, but then later you change your mind because it’s nobody else’s business, really, you are still guilty of the mortal sin of gossip, because you thought of passing on the news, and the thought is the same thing as actually doing it, by your rules.

Which apparently don’t apply to you, yourself - only to other people.

 

[jmcrae]

No it does not work that way.

One can sin in thought…with no action. The Church and moral theology are very clear on this.

But one can not “receive all the spiritual benefits” of deciding to be a Priest etc…but then changing ones mind.

Why is it different for virtue than for sin?

If you can lose all grace merely by thinking of sin, then surely you must be able to gain all grace, merely by thinking of virtue?

 

[Bookcat]

So - these rules of yours apply to other people, but not to you, personally?
:

You are misreading what I said.

They are NOT my creation. This is the understanding in the Catholic Church …the understanding and explaination in Catholic Moral Theology.

I meant that I did not make them up.