Trying to get my head around mortal sin

[JRKH]

I think very few people willingly reject God when sinning. Most people still believe that they have a relationship with God even when they sin

This is the thing. What people believe they have, and what they actually have can be two different things. Whether they think they are rejecting God is not as important as the fact that they are objectively rejecting God.
Here I am speaking ONLY of sin that is committed with full knowledge and consent.

after all, our closest analogy are our own parents or our own children. When they do something naughty (or even terrible), we don’t reject them. I honestly can’t think of a situation I would reject my child or my parent - be they a murderer, I would still stand by them without them having to ask for my help. Of course God is much better, and God is perfect and merciful and omniscient. God also gave us our parents and children and commanded us to love them. Love also emanates from God, as does goodness, and all good things come from God who is the ground of all existence. The state of hell is separation from God and therefore all good. If your parents don’t reject you when you take the family car and crash it, or you don’t reject your child when they were truant and failed a grade, it is less conceivable that God would do so.

Certainly in such cases the Parent does not reject the sinning child, but what about when the sinning child rejects the parent?
Sin does not separate us from God because God rejects us…It is because we reject God…By our thoughts and by our actions.

Now it may be that we are separated from God by the barrier or sin, but to our minds there is still this unfathomable block that since our own parents would not reject us would we even spit in their faces, how can God? I think that is inconceivable for many of us.

Again - the parent might remain “available” to such a child, but this does not mean that the parent would intervene should the child get into trouble…
I remember my dad always telling us as teenagers, if you get picked up by the police, don’t call me to bail you out…
Did he do that because he did not love us…Quite the contrary…

Also we (or at least I) love God not because I am afraid of God, but because God chose to allow me to live and supports my very existence at every moment. No-one else could give me that, and all good things (and all trials which inevitably end in good things anyway) come from God. God is love. And therefore it is especially bad to sin against God because we are spitting in the face of the One who gives us all, and we are nailing Him to the cross each time. There is a dualism of feelings.

Amen to this…The more we grow in Love the more our sin, even small ones, stand out since they are sins against love.

The other problem is that people can become too legalistic. They watch out for sins and do their obligations but have no time to love. If you have no time to love, all of the rest is for nothing.

“And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.”
1 Corinthians 13:2

(A person who regularly attends Mass and goes to confession but has no charity, will also end up in hell?)

Your thoughts? Can anyone comment on the psychology of sin? Does the Church have comments? Thanks.

Any comments I offer would be more a matter of personal understanding. The Church has many comments on sin…the crux of which are in the catechism.
The “psychology” of sin boils down to Pride. IMHO

Peace
James

 

[Tenofovir]

This is the thing. What people believe they have, and what they actually have can be two different things. Whether they think they are rejecting God is not as important as the fact that they are objectively rejecting God.
Here I am speaking ONLY of sin that is committed with full knowledge and consent.

Can you be more definite? What is full knowledge and consent? If you do something bad, you know is bad, you’re sinning. You don’t necessarily need to know the exact name of the sin, do you? Also if you do it, without someone holding a gun to your head, you’re still willingly doing it. You could even say, you should take the bullet rather then sin or starve to death rather than steal a loaf of bread. One can be almost a martyr in such cases. In fact at one time it was fashionable for people to martyr themselves purposefully and the clergy had to step in. You should not lie to a Nazi though the Nazi will kill you and your entire family for hiding a Jew. These strictly speaking are conditions where sin is not permitted, is it? What do you think?

How strictly should we approach the issue of sin? Is it an all or nothing approach or do we permit gradations in our struggle to achieve improvement? A man refuses the advances of his girlfriend to have sex, yet later peeks at her bust. He has committed the same sin even though he fought very much with his instinctive drive to procreate in the first instance and in the latter the offense was virtually over before he could muster the strength to reject it - he was caught in a moment of weakness as many people say, has all his effort gone to waste?

Certainly in such cases the Parent does not reject the sinning child, but what about when the sinning child rejects the parent?
Sin does not separate us from God because God rejects us…It is because we reject God…By our thoughts and by our actions.

But that’s just the point. Most people do not think they reject God. Most kids do not reject their parents when they disagree with them or disobey them. There is a two way relationship with the parent. With God this analogy may break down? Is that so? Obviously the gulf between man and God is infinite. The separation is objectively true, but it is still unimaginable and difficult concept for many to digest. Don’t you think? Hence there is place for psychology of sin, no?

Again - the parent might remain “available” to such a child, but this does not mean that the parent would intervene should the child get into trouble…
I remember my dad always telling us as teenagers, if you get picked up by the police, don’t call me to bail you out…
Did he do that because he did not love us…Quite the contrary…

The point is support. You may argue whether bailing someone out of jail to avoid gang rape by HIV positive men (something which happens where I live frequently) is a valid example of love or not, but the parent should offer support and stand by his child, though the child be Adolf Hitler. Note that the parent need not sin for the child or break the law, but the parent should be the person (if such a person exists) to support the child, maybe emotionally, maybe help get him a better lawyer, maybe even reprimand him but despite the reprimands not abandon him. Note that I’m not suggesting God abandons us in any way, just pointing out the different ways people will think about God. The closest figure we have to God is another human being. And the one we usually feel closest to or love the most is either a child, a parent or a spouse. Hence people visualise God as a “man with a beard” yet God is not a man with a beard in the cloud.
In our relationships we often quarrel with people. We know that these quarrels are insignificant. Sometimes we even go further. Because we know that even when the person finds out, he or she still loves us and knows we are imperfect and forgives us. “My wife will shout at me if I stay out longer than usual playing poker, but she is such a darling that she’ll forgive me anyway.”

Any comments I offer would be more a matter of personal understanding. The Church has many comments on sin…the crux of which are in the catechism.
The “psychology” of sin boils down to Pride. IMHO

I don’t think it’s a simple as that in all cases. There certainly is pride when man rejects God by choosing to deny Him, or hate Him, or do things on his own, but more often than not, people don’t go that far. Perhaps they don’t deny it, but that it’s a faulty understanding of religion which may be to blame. Don’t you think?

I can definitely see the reasons to provide simple and strict rules for if one provides any possible mitigations, people will inevitably take advantage and make these mitigations into outright excuses. People will find loopholes whenever they can. It’s our nature to get the most with the least work. The the issue of Salvation outside the Church. The Catechism says that it’s possible, but even then people may read that and just say “Well, if it’s possible, then I’m sure that all the other things are not that necessary.” And since even a faithful Catholic can’t be assured of union with God after death, people may say something both silly and dangerous - that one need not to do so much and one can do a lot less and get to heaven anyway. Know what I mean? such rationalizations will come.

Please don’t consider this post some sort of endorsement of sin from my side. Never.

 

[JRKH]

Can you be more definite? What is full knowledge and consent? If you do something bad, you know is bad, you’re sinning. You don’t necessarily need to know the exact name of the sin, do you? Also if you do it, without someone holding a gun to your head, you’re still willingly doing it.

This is indeed a good expression of full knowledge and consent - and know, you don’t have to know the name of a sin in order for it to be so. We know when we are acting against Love.
Also - remember that the term used for sin, in both Hebrew and in Greek, does not simply mean crime or disobedience. It means to err, to not have a part in, to choose the wrong path. So sin, in it’s most basic is much more an attitude than an act.

You should not lie to a Nazi though the Nazi will kill you and your entire family for hiding a Jew. These strictly speaking are conditions where sin is not permitted, is it? What do you think?

Such matters always become complicated and should not be approached until one has a good understanding of the foundational principles.

How strictly should we approach the issue of sin? Is it an all or nothing approach or do we permit gradations in our struggle to achieve improvement?

Both. In so far as commitment is concerned, it must be total. “I will not sin”. That is why when we say the act of contrition we include this. “I firmly resolve, with the help of thy grace, to sin no more, and to avoid the narrow occasion of sin.”
To firmly resolve is a commitment.

That said, in practice we can expect to stumble. This is part of growing in holiness.

The best analogy I can think of is diet and exercise. One commits to these things. Goals are set. An Ideal is envisioned. Yet one also recognizes that along the way there will be failures, stumbles, set-backs.

The commitment is total, the journey is a series of steps.

But that’s just the point. Most people do not think they reject God.

When a sin is a “slip up” springing from bad habit, or weakness it’s one thing. Like the dieter who couldn’t quite resist that doughnut at work yesterday but recommits today, the path to holiness is not seriously interrupted. Venial sin.
BUT when one chooses to abandon the diet altogether, or when on claims to be on a diet but “cheats” every day and justifies such cheating - - well, whether they think they are rejecting the diet or not, they in fact are.
Likewise the consistent and unrepentant sinner is rejecting God.

Most kids do not reject their parents when they disagree with them or disobey them. There is a two way relationship with the parent. With God this analogy may break down? Is that so?

No - it does not break down, though I agree that it is a difficult concept to embrace.
The relationship between God and man is also a two way street. God Loves us. Do we Love God? The Prent Loves the child. Does the child Love the parent?
It is through Love that we know the answer.
Consider this. If we Love, then we do not injure the object of our Love.

The point is support. …the parent should offer support and stand by his child, …the parent should be the person (if such a person exists) to support the child, maybe emotionally, maybe help get him a better lawyer, maybe even reprimand him but despite the reprimands not abandon him.

But what if the child abandons the parent…“spits in his eye” is what you mentioned in an earlier post. If the child abandons the parent then the bond of love is broken. The parent loves the child, but the child denies the parent. The Child might take advantage of the parent getting them a better lawyer or whatever, but that is not love, that is usury.
As you say - a relationship is a two way street.

I don’t think it’s a simple as that in all cases. There certainly is pride when man rejects God by choosing to deny Him, or hate Him, or do things on his own, but more often than not, people don’t go that far. Perhaps they don’t deny it, but that it’s a faulty understanding of religion which may be to blame. Don’t you think?

There is pride in every sin because every sin (knowingly committed) is a rejection of God - whether large or small. It doesn’t matter how we try to justify it, objectively we are being disobedient to Him who we are to Love above all things and Love with all our mind heart and strength.

Peace
James

 

[helvetius]

Masturbation is not a sin. It is said to be a special kind of sexual life and quite normal. Also the priests and the monks do masturbation. The testicles are a gland that produces a liquid also the semen bladder. That liquid must com out otherwise you get sick.
When I was 11 or 12 I came by thinking to the idea that masturbation itself is not wrong. When God made me like this i.e. I feel the need for masturbation it is not my fault and I abandoned the feeling of guilt. Because I am protestant I do not know the confession.
Masturbation is a goog remedy against stress and frustration. If you can have relief it is a good thing.
If you can enjoy masturbation it is a good thing too. If it is compulsory i.e. an addiction it is a bad thing.
When you are young you like masturbation every day. When you are older the drive urge lowers. But it is good for a helthy prostate.
So you must not feel guilt or shame when you are masturbating from time to time.
helvetius

 

[Tenofovir]

But what if the child abandons the parent…“spits in his eye” is what you mentioned in an earlier post. If the child abandons the parent then the bond of love is broken. The parent loves the child, but the child denies the parent. The Child might take advantage of the parent getting them a better lawyer or whatever, but that is not love, that is usury.
As you say - a relationship is a two way street.

I don’t think that’s usury. I think we’re commanded to love and so we usually feel obliged to do so, i.e. of course it’s not sentimental love, but charity. So if your child takes an OD of cocaine you warned him about a hundred times and gets a stroke and ends up an invalid, it would be wrong of the parent to abandon the child. The parent should be there to wash the child’s incontinent bowel motions and nurse the child (or similar). Do you not think so? That’s not to say one should tolerate a child’s disobedience, but I think one should stand by even a seemingly unrepentant child. Perhaps, it’s because we never know when someone really is unrepentant and God does. But an unrepentant child can be brought to his senses if he sense the love and it dawns on him. I don’t know about you, but even if my child spat in my eye, I (like to think that I) would do my best to stand by it. That’s not to say I would be a pushover. Perhaps I’m just raised that way, but I got that message from the Church too. Mother Theresa exemplified this attitude, as does Christ.

There is pride in every sin because every sin (knowingly committed) is a rejection of God - whether large or small. It doesn’t matter how we try to justify it, objectively we are being disobedient to Him who we are to Love above all things and Love with all our mind heart and strength.

The issue isn’t justification. Say, I know x is a sin, but I justify it. The issue is my complicated inner experience which shows me a complex picture. I may not even realise I am justifying something.

I agree we are called to love God with all our heart, but the issue may be with that thought gaining attention. You literally would have to have that thought in your head, if you’re not the sort who loves because God loves, 24/7 no? And that can be hard, not because of the content of the thought either but because thinking one thing despite numerous things happening around you can be difficult. If you’re being made not to sin for fear of hell, that fear may get in the way of your love of God and may make you too legalistic. And if a poor priest, pastor or deacon tells you so, or if you perceive politics, that too may cloud your picture. The people who deliver the message are hardly exemplars themselves, with a few exceptions of the Saints and some nameless Saints. People are very sensitive. And that sensitivity is usually irrational. I may for example associate the “Thou” and “Thee” language used in the Bible with imperialism, colonialism or some other form of injustice, and may be put off Church that way. I may have in my head Protestant Puritans when I hear “Thou” and “Thee” and Calvinism. I’m just giving examples here. A perfectly good person, misunderstands, and then despairs. Sure despair is a sin, but then you despair about despair. Right? Or a person who was raised in an (Irish) orphanage where he was beaten? How can he not struggle with the iron fisted approach to Jesus Christ and how can it not lead to some anger or dislike towards aspects of the Church or religion? Sure it’s irrational, but it’s there. What do you think? At the bottom there is pride in some form of another, sure, but if I as a sinner, don’t perceive my sin of pride, I can’t be held guilty of it. If someone hurts but associates Christ with an angry hypocrite of a father who’d take him to church only to beat him for the smallest transgression? I do think the ideal is not wanting to sin because God dwells in you, but that takes much insight in some cases. It gets repeated often, but not everyone realises the significance of it. Right? Hence something which Peter Kreeft said has stuck with me. He gave an example of a Muslim who said he’d never get of his knees if he really believed God was in the Eucharist. Yet all around him were Catholics who were yawning, and pretty much taking things easily.

God Bless!

 

[JRKH]

I don’t think that’s usury. I think we’re commanded to love and so we usually feel obliged to do so, i.e. of course it’s not sentimental love, but charity. So if your child takes an OD of cocaine you warned him about a hundred times and gets a stroke and ends up an invalid, it would be wrong of the parent to abandon the child. The parent should be there to wash the child’s incontinent bowel motions and nurse the child (or similar). Do you not think so? That’s not to say one should tolerate a child’s disobedience, but I think one should stand by even a seemingly unrepentant child. Perhaps, it’s because we never know when someone really is unrepentant and God does. But an unrepentant child can be brought to his senses if he sense the love and it dawns on him. I don’t know about you, but even if my child spat in my eye, I (like to think that I) would do my best to stand by it. That’s not to say I would be a pushover. Perhaps I’m just raised that way, but I got that message from the Church too. Mother Theresa exemplified this attitude, as does Christ.

All that you say above is true…But none of it effects whether the child sins or how that sin might effect the relationship.
Suppose the child you speak of has moved across country, denied you even exist and THEN OD’d on drugs. you might still love him but he has cut himself off from nay help you might be able to offer.
Instead, he will have someone strange, and perhaps less caring, to nurse and bathe and wipe him. Not your choice…Your love remains intact. It was his choice to reject you and to deny you.

The issue isn’t justification. Say, I know x is a sin, but I justify it. The issue is my complicated inner experience which shows me a complex picture. I may not even realize I am justifying something.

If you know something is a sin but you “justify” it, you are just lying to yourself.

I agree we are called to love God with all our heart, but the issue may be with that thought gaining attention. You literally would have to have that thought in your head, if you’re not the sort who loves because God loves, 24/7 no?

And this is the beginning. In truth, as I was thinking about the topic of this thread, and our discussion, it came to me that in order to get your head around mortal sin, you need to start with Love and stay with Love. The more you know and understand Agape Love, the more you will understand what is sin.

And that can be hard, not because of the content of the thought either but because thinking one thing despite numerous things happening around you can be difficult.

Nobody said it was easy…

If you’re being made not to sin for fear of hell, that fear may get in the way of your love of God and may make you too legalistic.

Indeed it could. Truth is though that most everyone begins with “fear of punishment”. This should not be surprised since we begin our journey as spiritual infants. Even the Bible says that “Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom”. The end of wisdom is Love and Love drives out fear.
So - study on Love to understand sin (not love)

Peace
James

 

[Tenofovir]

Suppose the child you speak of has moved across country, denied you even exist and THEN OD’d on drugs. you might still love him but he has cut himself off from nay help you might be able to offer.
Instead, he will have someone strange, and perhaps less caring, to nurse and bathe and wipe him. Not your choice…Your love remains intact. It was his choice to reject you and to deny you.

Of course if he has a court order against me and I end up being arrested and deported, I agree it would be virtually impossible to help him. Although I could still deposit money in his bank account if he needed nursing care and send him messages somehow reminding him I love him. But his actions would be very specific and quite extreme. You really need to go out of your way to obtain a court order. You cannot do so by merely threatening to get one. I get what you’re trying to say but note how extreme our example is and atypical of daily life and what people typically go through.

A new thought:
Unfortunately there is a also tendency to see God as a Grandfather and less so a more strict Father. You know that Grandfathers are typically push-overs.

If you know something is a sin but you “justify” it, you are just lying to yourself.

Agree. But that’s the example of obvious justification I wanted to give.

And this is the beginning. In truth, as I was thinking about the topic of this thread, and our discussion, it came to me that in order to get your head around mortal sin, you need to start with Love and stay with Love. The more you know and understand Agape Love, the more you will understand what is sin.

I agree with that.

Nobody said it was easy…

Yes of course. There are many temptations which are difficult to resist.

Indeed it could. Truth is though that most everyone begins with “fear of punishment”. This should not be surprised since we begin our journey as spiritual infants. Even the Bible says that “Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom”. The end of wisdom is Love and Love drives out fear.
So - study on Love to understand sin (not love)

I of course have to agree with you, because what you say is true, not for any other reason.

So perhaps parents who are too nice to their children can give these children later an incorrect view of God? Do you think there’s some truth here? Of course there is an opposite view, some people contend that many atheists have had missing fathers in their lives. Parents who are also more friendly with their children (and some children are very good and require little intervention) can create a false perception of God, as being more of a “buddy”, than well, a father who is capable of being more strict.

 

[JRKH]

Of course if he has a court order against me and I end up being arrested and deported, I agree it would be virtually impossible to help him. Although I could still deposit money in his bank account if he needed nursing care and send him messages somehow reminding him I love him. But his actions would be very specific and quite extreme. You really need to go out of your way to obtain a court order. You cannot do so by merely threatening to get one. I get what you’re trying to say but note how extreme our example is and atypical of daily life and what people typically go through.

Please read my post again. I said that he moved across country and denies that you exist. How can you help him when you do not know where he is, let alone if he has a bank account.
You can stand ready to help. BUT, He has rejected you, cut you out of his life and so unless he contacts you first, there is nothing you can do…
The same is true with God. He stands ready to help, but unless we keep in touch, there isn’t anything He can do

Yes of course. There are many temptations which are difficult to resist.

Back to, “nobody said it was easy”

I of course have to agree with you, because what you say is true, not for any other reason.

So perhaps parents who are too nice to their children can give these children later an incorrect view of God? Do you think there’s some truth here? Of course there is an opposite view, some people contend that many atheists have had missing fathers in their lives. Parents who are also more friendly with their children (and some children are very good and require little intervention) can create a false perception of God, as being more of a “buddy”, than well, a father who is capable of being more strict.

Yes it is possible for parents to give their children an incorrect view of God. It is also possible for children to grow their own incorrect views even with good parents.

It all goes back to Love.

If you want to understand sin - Study Love.

Peace
James

 

[Brightest_Star]

Re: OP

I am in RCIA as well, hopefully to be Baptised at Easter.
This is what I have learned.

We are all born in sin. That is Original Sin - from Adam and Eve.
As we live, chances are really, really good that we commit more sins.

If you have not been raised in the Catholic faith, you may not have understood completely, exactly how wrong these things are that you were doing. Why wrong? Wrong because doing these things disappoints God. He wants better for you - but no more than you are capable of.

Yes, He has high expectations. But He’s God. We have high expectations of Him as well, no?

Now, as you are being taught, you hopefully will come to understand what God wants, how He hopes you will live your life.
And if you find that you can truly love Him, you’ll find that you do want to please Him. Or at least, not let Him down catastrophically.

When you are baptised, any sins, original and mortal, that you have committed in your entire life, will be washed away. Forgiven. Gone.

This is the gift Jesus gave to you.

A new chance.

All He asks, is that you don’t take it lightly. Appreciate the gift. Love Him back. And try your absolute best, not to fall.
He knows you’re human, we have confession for that.

However, if you take all these gifts, and all this love, and you think to yourself ‘I know better’, ‘I’ll do what I want’, ‘I can’t do that’, etc… if you don’t even try…

Well, it’s hurtful. And wrong. And you’ll be doing wrong by a God who has shown you such love and mercy, has been kind to you…

I would worry less about logistics, rules, priests etc - and worry more about your heart and soul and if you have placed it in His hands.

God wants trust. So trust.
And* try*.
And love.