Mortal Sin

[Zimm3r]

God’s ways our not our ways. He’s the boss, so His rules apply.

He sent His Son and created a Church to teach us the rules. He also gives us infinite chances to repent of our sins before death.

You can literally sin mortally every day of your life and still be saved if you repent and confess and receive absolution before your death. That is God’s infinite Mercy.

If we do not heed God’s word, if we do not avail ourselves of his infinite Mercy, how can we complain if we end up in Hell (which we are all richly deserving of)?

Finally, nice has nothing to do with salvation. Obeying the commandments of God is what matters.

God Bless

For a nice person to burn in hell and a absolute jerk to get heaven isn’t just in any sense. Either they both deserve hell, they both deserve heaven but for the wicked person to be rewarded and the good person to be punished isn’t just.

 

[LilyM]

It was a hypothetical to display how silly it could be for one thing to be venial and one to be mortal the point was not that punching and missing or connecting is bad or worse or better but that two things could be very close in their moral state yet one could be venial the other mortal.

But you are totally wrong. Connecting or not connecting your punch has NO bearing, absolutely none, on the seriousness of the sin of throwing that punch.

If you try to hit someone your sin is, and the Church teaches this, exactly the same. Whether or not the punch connects. The Church does NOT teach that irrelevancies like whether a punch connects affect the seriousness of the sin of trying to hit someone.

I repeat, WHERE do you come up with the idea that it matters morally whether a punch connects or not?

 

[LilyM]

It was a hypothetical to display how silly it could be for one thing to be venial and one to be mortal the point was not that punching and missing or connecting is bad or worse or better but that two things could be very close in their moral state yet one could be venial the other mortal.

Very close is not the same. Obviously there are moral distinctions to be made, and sometimes those distinctions are important.

Remember in the Gospels Jesus spoke about how much better the widow’s small act of charity was because she gave all she had whereas others who gave more gave out of their leftovers? I’m sure at least some who heard Him just didn’t get the importance of distinction and viewed the two gifts as equal or the larger ones from the richer people as better. Doesn’t mean the distinction doesn’t matter or that Jesus wasn’t right to make it.

 

[Zimm3r]

Very close is not the same. Obviously there are moral distinctions to be made, and sometimes those distinctions are important.

Remember in the Gospels Jesus spoke about how much better the widow’s small act of charity was because she gave all she had whereas others who gave more gave out of their leftovers? I’m sure at least some who heard Him just didn’t get the importance of distinction and viewed the two gifts as equal or the larger ones from the richer people as better. Doesn’t mean the distinction doesn’t matter or that Jesus wasn’t right to make it.

Yes but the difference in the moral state of two sins can be that of a pin head and yet that can transfer into a difference of punishment that is a chasm.

 

[LilyM]

For a nice person to burn in hell and a absolute jerk to get heaven isn’t just in any sense. Either they both deserve hell, they both deserve heaven but for the wicked person to be rewarded and the good person to be punished isn’t just.

Someone who commits a mortal sin and refuses to repent by definition is not a nice person. Just like someone who abuses a child even once and refuses to apologise or make amends for it is not a nice person, no matter how many other great things they might have done.

As has been said before, it’s not the sin but the lack of repentance that is the issue.

Define ‘jerk’. I doubt that someone who was, say, habitually and consciously rude and thoughtless

 

[Zimm3r]

Someone who commits a mortal sin and refuses to repent by definition is not a nice person. Just like someone who abuses a child even once and refuses to apologise or make amends for it is not a nice person, no matter how many other great things they might have done.

As has been said before, it’s not the sin but the lack of repentance that is the issue.

Define ‘jerk’. I doubt that someone who was, say, habitually and consciously rude and thoughtless

sure someone who was habitually and consciously rude and thoughtless. They then go to penance and then die of a stroke they would go to purgatory for a very long time and then heaven. Compare that to say a person who is nice, goes to church, is kind to others, volunteers, etc and uses contraception (knowing it is grave matter and freely etc) once and then dies of a stroke so she would automatically go to hell. That is hardly fair or just based on each of their actions.

 

[LilyM]

Yes but the difference in the moral state of two sins can be that of a pin head and yet that can transfer into a difference of punishment that is a chasm.

True. But for a surgeon doing complex surgery sometimes an error the breadth of a hair in where they cut can result in death for the patient.

For an engineer or builder sometimes a hair’s breadth mistake in their calculations can bring a bridge or building crashing down.

For a racing driver a hair’s breadth miscalculation in turning can result in a fatal crash.

As I said, sometimes hair’s breadths are very important and do lead to vastly different outcomes. And it’s not beyond our capability to get those hair’s breadths right, as any surgeon, builder or racing driver can tell you.

 

[JRKH]

But more importantly - as relating to your list - is that it misses the underlying principle of what makes a sin mortal. The rejection of God as Lord of one’s life. There is a huge difference between a person who does not understand the church’s teaching on some matter, but is accepting of it and a person who unrepentantly rejects the Church’s teaching on some matter.

Yes it does and if we allow our small transgressions to pile up and we become callous towards them they will, by a gradually numbing of the spirit become mortal.
Like a man who deeply loves a woman but gradually, over time, takes her more and more for granted, becoming colder and colder toward her until one day she has had enough and “suddenly” (he thinks) he finds himself alone…
Venial sin should not be taken lightly.

But the things that are considered mortal and will therefore damn you are so many as to make it seemingly impossible to not commit one in your life and if you forget to confess it then you are damned.

There are many who share the view and confusion you express here.
However, these people are looking at only the most shallow and legalistic understanding of these matters. I cannot believe, as well as you write, that you cannot look more deeply at this and see the underlying truth.
Certainly several people, myself included, have taken the time to respond with explanations, but unfortunately I haven’t really seen you incorporating those explanations into your responses so far. You seem to want to stick with the shallow view for now.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but It makes me suspect that you are playing “devil’s advocate” a bit here and deliberately not delving into the core issues.

In any event, hang in there…Our God is Just…

Peace
James

 

[Hokomai]

The Church articulates certain standards in order to realize eternal life. If you fall outside of those standards, you come to eternal death. Why is that so hard? Further, read Aquinas: the saints in heaven rejoice in the damnation and eternal torture of souls since this is God’s perfect justice made manifest. Why, therefore, should those of us laboring under the yoke of Christ not also take pleasure from the impending fate of the obstinate sinner?

Because it is mean and downright unpleasant to do so.

 

[IanGE]

No you don’t only God knows who is going to heaven and who is going to hell.
Also I do get your point of when you used the example of the adulterous woman, I do like that story, sadly it is fabrication if you look at most bible’s there is a foot note at Jh 7:53 - :11 stating it isn’t in the oldest manuscripts.
.

Of course God will judge each one of us but until then He gives us every chance to repent, even prodding us when necessary. But I rely on Jesus’ promises: John 10:9&10, "I am the gate; whoever enters through ME will be saved…I have come that they may have life and life to the full."
Mark 16:16 to18. “whoever believes and is baptised will be saved…And these signs shall accompany those who believe.” I guess you won’t accept that last, Zimm3r, cos the footnote dismisses 16:9 to the end. BUT! The Signs of the Believer are alive and well and living in just about every country. I and countless others are witness that the signs accompany us! So I guess that whoever added those words (according to scholars**) 2000 years ago got it right!
Oh, I’m still a sinner, but the Holy Spirit jumps on me at the slightest act of unlove. I cannot, just cannot park on a double yellow line or disabled spot, let alone look lustfully. My wife would clout me as well as the Holy Spirit!
**PS We did Mark’s gospel at Uni and the scholarly approach put me right off. Who was Mark? Why did he write it? Etc etc. I said “Mark didn’t write it: the Holy Spirit did through him.” And was told to belt up: Mark’s gospel in Greek is littered with “eutheos” (immediately) but there are no eutheoses in Chapter 16:9 to the end!

 

[bzkoss236]

sure someone who was habitually and consciously rude and thoughtless. They then go to penance and then die of a stroke they would go to purgatory for a very long time and then heaven. Compare that to say a person who is nice, goes to church, is kind to others, volunteers, etc and uses contraception (knowing it is grave matter and freely etc) once and then dies of a stroke so she would automatically go to hell. That is hardly fair or just based on each of their actions.

Not quite… The person committing the sin needs to actually be sorry, or feel guilt, for what they have done for Reconciliation to be valid. If someone goes into a confessional and says they are sorry for something they are not, they won’t be forgiven that way. Forgiveness works the way Jesus said in the story of the prostitute that was about to be stoned, he said to the people with the stones, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”, then after he said to the prostitute, “Go and sin no more”.

For us to be forgiven, we need to truly be sorrowful for what we’ve done, and we need to actively try not to sin again. It is almost inevitable that we will slip up. Heck, even the Pope slips up from time to time, and he goes to Confession, with a heart sorrowful for what he has done, repents (acknowledges what he did was wrong and will attempt to not do it again), and returns to a state of Grace with God.

You said in an earlier post that “Ignorance is bliss”. I wouldn’t necessarily say bliss, but ignorance (the Church acknowledges) can reduce culpability for your actions. Someone who commits a mortal sin without truly knowing how severe his/her sin is, is less culpable for his actions.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”
1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: “Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother.” The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.
1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.
1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.
1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.”
While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession…

 

[IanGE]

God’s ways our not our ways. He’s the boss, so His rules apply.

He sent His Son and created a Church to teach us the rules. He also gives us infinite chances to repent of our sins before death.

You can literally sin mortally every day of your life and still be saved if you repent and confess and receive absolution before your death. That is God’s infinite Mercy.

If we do not heed God’s word, if we do not avail ourselves of his infinite Mercy, how can we complain if we end up in Hell (which we are all richly deserving of)?

Finally, nice has nothing to do with salvation. Obeying the commandments of God is what matters.

God Bless

I seem to recall being taught catechism in school which spoke of the efficacy of the Act of Contrition or, a deeply repentant “God forgive me my shameful sins!” just as potent at the point of death. There was no confession until the sixth (?) century when someone noticed “whose sins you shall forgive” in the NT and applied it first to Bishops then later to all priests. Jesus says, In John 3:17, “For God did not send His Son to condemn…but to save…” Again, in Luke 6:37: “Do not judge and you will not be judged. Do not condemn and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.”
I yearn for the church, both clergy and laity, to change from condemnatory judgement (mortal sinners are in Hell!) to stressing the positive: "you are saved because Jesus suffered an agonizing death in love for you, to forgive your sins and reconcile you with your father God.