Not Recycling - Mortal or Venial Sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Neil_Anthony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Neil_Anthony

Guest
Today at the UN a Church representative said that "“My delegation wishes to stress the underlying moral imperative that everyone, without exception, has a **grave **responsibility to protect the environment,”

ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=82301

Because he used the word grave, does that mean that not recycling is a mortal sin?

Sometimes I’ve thrown recyclable things in the garbage either because a recyling bin wasn’t nearby, or because it just seemed like too much trouble to clean the empty can and remove the paper label. 😊
 
We don’t have a recycling center in our area. How could I do this?
 
Responsible stewardship of the earth’s resources is not limited to recycling. Until the science is in on whether or not man is causing climate change, don’t sweat it. If you’re intentionally throwing away bottles to destroy the earth, you might be in sin (as well as a passive aggressive moron) but other than that, i wouldn’t say you’re in any kind of sin for not recycling like the fascists want you to.
 
I do agree that we have a requirment to be stewards of the earth. Our duty began with Adam. I think that the level of culpability in this varies based on our own situation. A company owner has more than I do, and I have more than someone with no ability to recycle. But, and let me be clear, in no way and at no point in time will I ever, and I do mean ever, take faith and moral advice from the UN!! Let them get their own house in order before telling me about mine.
 
No, Neil, it is not a sin (mortal or venial) if you do not recycle.
 
No, Neil, it is not a sin (mortal or venial) if you do not recycle.
I second this. Certainly we are to be good stewards of the earth, but unless you are purposely pouring poison into the waters or committing some other terrible crime, it is not a sin. Global warming (along with anti-smoking) is the religion of liberals who neither have nor want any other religion.

Mary
 
Because he used the word grave, does that mean that not recycling is a mortal sin?
What the %&*^! Are you being serious? Not recycling a mortal sin? Come on; this is true of a mortal sin, according to the Catechism:

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.” The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

Do you really think, in any world, that Christ’s redemption on the cross would not be sufficient to excuse you from not recycling? Give Jesus’ work on the cross a little more credit than that!
 
Think about the choice to not recycle. It’s a conscious decision to value your own convenience and laziness above God’s creation and the future of mankind. We choose to destroy the earth in order to continue in laziness. To use our wealth to destroy God’s gift to everyone, especially the poor: the earth.

That’s pretty nasty looked at that way. And we know that missing Sunday mass once is a mortal sin.

So yes, I’m serious. Especially when the church uses the word grave.
What the %&*^! Are you being serious? Not recycling a mortal sin? Come on; this is true of a mortal sin, according to the Catechism:

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.” The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

Do you really think, in any world, that Christ’s redemption on the cross would not be sufficient to excuse you from not recycling? Give Jesus’ work on the cross a little more credit than that!
 
responsible stewardship for the earth is about a lot more than recycling, riding a bike instead of driving, or installing solar panels. It is about changing minds and hearts, placing life and respect for all humans on this planet as creatures in God’s image and likeness, and loving our neighbor as ourself. The biggest environmental activist is a pro-life activist. Right to life is the only moral stance and starting point that makes concern for the environment and human impact on the environment logical. One can honestly differ about the science of ecology (even the scientists disagree), or about political, social, governmental and private actions which will damage or protect the environment, but that is not the issue. There is a political and social framework to study and argue those things. The role of the Church and those who teach in her name is to foster that concern, and concern for social justice issues in general, in the name and light of Christ and his commandments, within the framework of the gospels.

we were big into recycling and re-using from the earliest days of our marriage, 70s era (there is nothing new under the sun) but for the last 20 years have almost abandoned it, in favor of a policy of drastic reduction of purchasing consumables. Rather than buying foods in recyclable containers and conscientiously driving the 17 miles to the recycling center, I take the same cleaned sanitized glass jar I have been using for years to the whole foods market and have it filled with fresh ground peanut butter, or fresh ground whole wheat flour, shelled nuts or whatever staple I am buying.

I buy used clothing and household furnishings and items whenever possible, used cars, when possible, etc. Read newspapers and magazines on-line, when possible, get taken of bulk mail marketing lists so I don’t receive the paper hogs in the mail. and so on. We just don’t drink soft drinks (or water) that come in cans and bottles so we don’t have a recycling bin for them. We filter drinking water at the source, into reusable pitchers, and make fresh lemonade or tea to drink.

I am on a “lean cuisine” type diet, but for the most part (there are exceptions and times when it is not possible) I make my own and freeze in reusable containers. No we don’t live this 100% of the time or in all circumstances, but it is an underlying goal. I have a continual battle with grocery store clerks to keep them from putting foods in plastic bags before they go in my canvas bags, but they are getting the message. Now our market sells canvas shopping bags. I do have 2 of their insulated plastic containers for meats and frozen foods, so that does keep the cloth bags cleaner.

A challenge is buying products I need, that come in mega-packaging safe from terrorist attack: bottle, wrapped in plastic, in a complicated box 4x its size, shrink wrapped, which takes longer to open than it takes to use the actual product. what is that about?
 
40.png
puzzleannie:
puzzleannie it sounds like you go above and beyond, thats amazing and great. It’s very motivating.

My recycle bins end up full of cat food tins. I don’t like the dry food because it’s not as good for them, but I go through probably 6 small tins of wet cat food every day. That really piles up.

I think Benedict XVI is preparing us for some more specific moral guidance on the environment. A few weeks ago he said we have to “listen to the voice of the earth” now the Vatican delegate to the UN is using the word grave. Maybe the next catechism will list which ecological sins are mortal and which are venial, who knows 🙂

I get my recyclables picked up at the curb in front of my house every week with the garbage. You’re very dedicated to drive so far to a recycling facility 🙂 The initial assumptiob behind my question was that most people live in an area with a recyling program, but I guess that’s not true.
 
Just an aside- I remember my Chemistry professor at Yale explaining how recycling isn’t better for the environment. He said it takes way more energy to change recycled materials into usable products than it does to get them from scratch, and so there was no net benefit to the environment. What is definitely better for the environment is reusing, cutting down on packaging, using cloth instead of paper products, etc.
 
He said it takes way more energy to change recycled materials into usable products than it does to get them from scratch, and so there was no net benefit to the environment.
But the amount of energy used isn’t the only concern. There is also the problem of where to put the waste, plastics that take hundreds of years to decompose, etc. It may not be energy-efficient to recycle, but that doesn’t mean there’s no net benefit to the environment as a whole.
 
The Church generally does not get terribly specific in defining which specific actions constitute grave matter and which don’t. Rather, the Church may propose general principles like “concern for the environment is a grave matter,” but it is unlikely ever to say “therefore, you must recycle, and if you don’t you’re committing a mortal sin.”

Generally speaking, there has to be room for varying circumstances, individual judgment, and even changes in scientific knowledge.

The Church, for example, may say that it is a mortal sin to miss Mass on Sunday without a “serious reason,” and may even give several examples of what it considers to be “serious reason.” But it is impossible, and inadvisable to attempt to define a comprehensive list of valid “serious reasons” for missing Mass on Sunday. We are adults, and we must learn to apply the Church’s moral guidance to our own lives with generosity and sincerity. That’s what Christian maturity is.

With regard to the Church’s guidance on care for the environment, I don’t see it ever becoming much more specific than the command we received in Genesis to “tend the garden.” There may be further development of understanding, and a renewed emphasis on our obligation to tend the garden, but the Church is infallible only in matters of faith and morals. Whether the specific practice of recycling is the best, or even a necessary, method for “tending the garden” is outside the competence of the Church to define. It is a scientific and political question.
 
Show me in scripture or the catechism where it says this.
2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor.119 Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a **grave **sin.

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."131
 
But the amount of energy used isn’t the only concern. There is also the problem of where to put the waste, plastics that take hundreds of years to decompose, etc. It may not be energy-efficient to recycle, but that doesn’t mean there’s no net benefit to the environment as a whole.
His point was that it took so much more energy that it negated the other concerns. He was talking about how much pollution (also with the chemicals involved) the recycling process causes. I don’t know if it’s true or not, just something to think about.
 
His point was that it took so much more energy that it negated the other concerns. He was talking about how much pollution (also with the chemicals involved) the recycling process causes. I don’t know if it’s true or not, just something to think about.
He may be right. My point was simply that energy efficiency isn’t the only concern.

But your post brings up an important point: It is the domain of science, not theology, to determine the best ways of protecting the environment.

Theology can only instruct us in the moral consequences of failing to protect the environment. The pope could never say, ex cathedra, that failing to recycle is a mortal sin.

He could say, however, that serious neglect of, or injury to, the environment is grave matter, where “grave” is used in the sense of a mortal sin.
 
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."131
Neil, this needs addressed first. Just because something is a GRAVE MATTER does not in and of itself mean it’s a mortal sin…it’s not ONE of the Three conditions that must be met, but ALL THREE must be met for sin to be mortal.

On to the post…without trying to insult anyone or belittle their concern to not offend God I am DEEPLY CONCERNED that we as practical Catholics as questions such as “Not Recycling - Mortal or Venial Sin?”

In my opinion this is becoming overscrupulous.

Just because a church leader states that the environment and recycling are “grave” matters doesn’t automatically make them grave SINS. If you feel God is calling you to steward the earth by recycling, then by all means do so, but unless one is willfully and intentionally harming the environment, sin really doesn’t enter in to this discussion other than personal obedience to the direction God is leading you. Not all can recycle, not all think it’s a good idea…
 
Hi Yerusalyim,

Why does the concern you? We have to know which sins are mortal so we know which sins to bring up in confession. The lineups at confession are long and we can’t take all day. Also I have to prioritize the things I’m going to try to fix in my life.

I think there’s a big difference between how people from different areas and lifestyles view recycling. I know when I moved from the country where we didnt have recycling programs to the city, I horrified some people when I would throw cans in the garbage. And this was from university students who saw nothing at all wrong with fornication and using drugs. Just goes to show it’s not always clear to us which things are the big issues that need working on.

I was kind of hoping people would say that yes, this can be a serious sin, because it would show that the church is keeping up with the issues of today.
Neil, this needs addressed first. Just because something is a GRAVE MATTER does not in and of itself mean it’s a mortal sin…it’s not ONE of the Three conditions that must be met, but ALL THREE must be met for sin to be mortal.

On to the post…without trying to insult anyone or belittle their concern to not offend God I am DEEPLY CONCERNED that we as practical Catholics as questions such as “Not Recycling - Mortal or Venial Sin?”

In my opinion this is becoming overscrupulous.

Just because a church leader states that the environment and recycling are “grave” matters doesn’t automatically make them grave SINS. If you feel God is calling you to steward the earth by recycling, then by all means do so, but unless one is willfully and intentionally harming the environment, sin really doesn’t enter in to this discussion other than personal obedience to the direction God is leading you. Not all can recycle, not all think it’s a good idea…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top