Using a neighbor's wireless internet-mortal or venial?

[KathleenElsie]

Before you comment, yes, I believe it is wrong. Yes, I will be confessing it this saturday and no, I do not plan on doing it again. My question is whether this would be a mortal or venial sin.

With or without permission? If the owner lets you use his system and it is paid for then I personally see no harm unless his contract says no sharing.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

With or without permission? If the owner lets you use his system and it is paid for then I personally see no harm unless his contract says no sharing.

Ah but if his contract says no sharing and he choses to share who sins? Is it the guy who is allowing his friend to share or is it his friend how shares or is it both?

 

[Orionthehunter]

Go back to the 3 conditions necessary for a mortal sin:

1. Serious matter.
2. Full knowledge.
3. Full consent.

The crux of whether or not it’s objectively a mortal sin lies in condition # 1: serious matter.

It is debatable whether or not it constitutes serious matter. Most people, if they are honest with themselves, acknowledge that it is stealing. However, it would have to be a serious amount of money to be considered serious matter, or for the amount that is stolen to be considered serious by the victim (e.g., stealing $5.00 from a beggar is more serious than stealing $5.00 from a millionaire).

According to the Catechism, theft is always grave matter. So is fraud.

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.

Granted, stealing 10 seconds from an ISP is not as serious as stealing lunch money from a senior citizen, it is still grave matter. If one knew using another’s internet wireless connection was stealing and did so willingly, one has committed a mortal sin.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Ah but if his contract says no sharing and he choses to share who sins? Is it the guy who is allowing his friend to share or is it his friend how shares or is it both?

In this case both.

 

[Matt_Collins]

According to the Catechism, theft is always grave matter. So is fraud.

Are you saying that stealing a penny from a millionaire is a mortal sin?

 

[drafdog]

I go over to my son-in–law’s house to use his high speed internet connection when I’m doing some research. It’s faster and more convenient and gives me an excuse to play with my grandson.
Using someone else’s connection is morally neutral as far as I am concerned.

Matthew

PS: I’m certain that your question arises out of conditions which are not specified in your original posting.

 

[Orionthehunter]

Are you saying that stealing a penny from a millionaire is a mortal sin?

By your question, are you asserting that taking a lolipop from Walmart (a multi-billion dollar corporation) is not stealing? If so, I don’t want you to be moral teacher of my children.

To answer your question directly, stealing is always is grave matter. The other conditions of mortal sin may or not be in place.

Life as a Christian is really a narrow path. We aren’t given latitude to determine exceptions or extenuating circumstances. This is a matter for God.

CC1858 doesn’t say it is ok to steal a little from someone who has alot. It says clearly that stealing is always grave matter.

 

[Mike_Olson]

Personally I would tell your neighbor that his network is insecure, a malicious person might use it to bounce off his ISP to do anything he/she wants and it could be traced back to him. I would appreciate it if my neighbor would tell me if my wireless was open to the world for that reason. Do unto others… I know this is off topic and I apologize for that.

 

[Matt_Collins]

By your question, are you asserting that taking a lolipop from Walmart (a multi-billion dollar corporation) is not stealing? If so, I don’t want you to be moral teacher of my children.

Of course it’s stealing, and it’s a sin. It’s just not a mortal sin. As I said above, using the neighbor’s internet connection without the permission of the ISP is stealing, too. I just don’t think it’s grave matter.

Please answer my question: Is stealing a penny from a millionaire a MORTAL sin, or a VENIAL sin?

 

[Kevin42]

Not only is it sinful, it is quite annoying. I actually just secured our wireless connection because this keeps happening to us. It is incredibly aggravating because it noticeably slows our connection and also because they did not even ask us if we minded them using it. To me, that is not how a good neighbor is supposed to act.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Are you saying that stealing a penny from a millionaire is a mortal sin?

Theft is theft. It is not relative.

 

[mattkubes]

Taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The sin of theft is of itself grievous, because it violates the great virtues of justice and charity. St. Paul (1 Corinthians 6:10) enumerates it as one of the transgressions which bars the offender from the kingdom of heaven. Still, as happens with regard to other delinquencies, its guilt may often be venial. This is particularly true when the value of what is filched is inconsiderable, or as the theologians say, is not grave matter. The determination of what is grave matter, whose taking, namely, is prohibited under pain of mortal sin, is beset with great difficulties and has offered room for widespread difference of opinion. It is agreed, however, that a distinction is to be drawn between relatively and absolutely grave matter.

I’ve heard this point of view described by many priests and theologians alike - some set a monetary value as to where theft becomes absolutely grave (I’ve seen anywhere from $10 to around $20), but none of these claims can be described as infallible. I guess the best rule of thumb is to avoid stealing in all cases - luckily we know God agrees with this point

 

[Orionthehunter]

Of course it’s stealing, and it’s a sin. It’s just not a mortal sin. As I said above, using the neighbor’s internet connection without the permission of the ISP is stealing, too. I just don’t think it’s grave matter.

Please answer my question: Is stealing a penny from a millionaire a MORTAL sin, or a VENIAL sin?

I don’t know if it is a mortal sin. However, I want to make it clear that the idea that there is a magnitude of taking illigitimately from another that is ok. I ask the rhetorical question, is it ok to shoplift a mini-tootsie roll from the check-out counter of Walmart? Below I lay out why it is objectively grave matter.

First of all, I think we agree without a source it is a sin to steal.

Second of all, the 10 Commandments and Catechism specicifically say to steal is grave matter. See CC 1858 of the Catechism which says: "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.”

Third, according to the Catechism 1857, “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.””

Fourth, according to the Catechism 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.” This reinforces the point that in this case it is a matter of knowledge and consent. The first criteria between venial and mortal (grave matter) is already established.

Unless I am the thief, I do not know the extent of knowledge or deliberate consent of the theif and so I am unable to competently determine if it is a mortal sin. Determining whether the knowledge and consent is sufficient for it to be mortal is a perogative of God and revealed to the theif in their conscience by the Holy Spirit during a sincere and thorough examination of conscience prior to confession.

 

[Bridget07]

By your question, are you asserting that taking a lolipop from Walmart (a multi-billion dollar corporation) is not stealing? If so, I don’t want you to be moral teacher of my children.

To answer your question directly, stealing is always is grave matter. The other conditions of mortal sin may or not be in place.

Life as a Christian is really a narrow path. We aren’t given latitude to determine exceptions or extenuating circumstances. This is a matter for God.

CC1858 doesn’t say it is ok to steal a little from someone who has alot. It says clearly that stealing is always grave matter.

I thought theft of small and inexpensive things were venial.From an Examination of Conscience booklet that has a Nilhil Obstat and Imprimatur…or maybe that doesnt’’ matter; I would think that popping on the neighbor’s wireless once for a short period would not constitute grave matter. But a sin just the same and I would confess it.

 

[Matt_Collins]

I don’t know if it is a mortal sin. However, I want to make it clear that the idea that there is a magnitude of taking illigitimately from another that is ok.

I never said that taking a penny from a millionaire is OK. I only said that it is not grave matter, and therefore cannot be a mortal sin. It is a venial sin, and like all sin, both mortal and venial, it is to be avoided.

First of all, I think we agree without a source it is a sin to steal.

Agreed.

Second of all, the 10 Commandments and Catechism specicifically say to steal is grave matter. See CC 1858 of the Catechism which says: "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.”

This must be taken in context. We agree that stealing is sinful. We also agree that for any sin to be mortal, it must be grave matter. Stealing a penny from a millionaire is simply NOT grave matter. See your own point # 4: “One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law…”

Third, according to the Catechism 1857, “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.””

Agreed.

The first criteria between venial and mortal (grave matter) is already established.

I disagree that the issue of grave matter is already established. You are taking the Catechism’s point that “Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments…” out of context, ignoring the obvious fact that a penny is of inconsequential value.

The Catechism’s statement that grave matter is determined by the 10 Commandments can be applied to all the commandments. Yet solid, orthodox moral theologians recognize that the commandment against false witness is not broken MORTALLY when the matter of the lie is inconsequential. To say that Sally has red hair when her hair is actually blonde, is not grave matter, and cannot be a mortal sin, even if done with full consent and full knowledge that her hair is blonde and that it is a sin to lie. There may be extenuating circumstances, such as lying under oath in a criminal trial where the outcome of the trial depends on whether Sally’s hair is red or blonde, but under normal circumstances, it simply is not grave matter, even though it directly contradicts the commandment against lying.

I suppose there could be circumstances that would make stealing a penny from a millionaire a mortal sin, such as if I did it as part of teaching my child how to pickpocket. But we’re obviously talking about normal circumstances.

If stealing a penny from a millionaire is a mortal sin, then there can be no such thing as venial sin, and every sin is mortal. And that is contrary to Catholic dogma.

Unless I am the thief, I do not know the extent of knowledge or deliberate consent of the theif and so I am unable to competently determine if it is a mortal sin…

We’re not discussing whether or not a particular person acted with full knowledge and deliberate consent. That’s assumed for the sake of the discussion. You can judge the objective morality of the act. That’s what we’re talking about.

I agree 100% that stealing a penny from a millionaire is stealing and is a sin. Let’s not beat that dead horse.

What I’m saying is that it defies common sense to say that stealing a penny from a millionaire, even if done with full knowledge and full consent, would send someone to hell, because a penny simply is not grave matter. I agree it’s wrong and shouldn’t be done, and I have taught my children not to do it. But I have also taught them to distinguish between grave matter and matter that is not grave. And common sense has a lot to do with that.

When discussing how much money would constitute grave matter, it is not always clear where the line is crossed from non-grave matter to grave matter. It is open to discussion, and is a matter of conscience. And conscience must be formed well.

I gotta go now…

 

[Orionthehunter]

From Matt Collins: I never said that taking a penny from a millionaire is OK. I only said that it is not grave matter, and therefore cannot be a mortal sin. It is a venial sin, and like all sin, both mortal and venial, it is to be avoided.

The Ten Commandments and Catechism clearly say it is grave matter. Those are the direct words and there is no qualifier. You are not the Magisterium who determines what is grave matter.

From Matt Collins: This must be taken in context. We agree that stealing is sinful. We also agree that for any sin to be mortal, it must be grave matter. Stealing a penny from a millionaire is simply NOT grave matter.

Then it is definitely not grave matter to steal a lollipop from a multi-billion dollar corporation like Walmart? Additionally, we are not to covet another’s goods or spouse. It doesn’t say it less serious to covet items of inconsequential value. This commandment speaks to envy and desire and entitlement. The minute we determine we are willing to covet or steal something knowing it is wrong, it becomes about the value we have placed on it and possibly the lack of value we put on the other person.

From Matt Collins: See your own point # 4: “One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law…”

I guess in the magisterium of one of Matt Collins who defines what is grave matter and not the Catechism

From Matt Collins: I disagree that the issue of grave matter is already established. You are taking the Catechism’s point that “Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments…” out of context, ignoring the obvious fact that a penny is of inconsequential value.

What context? Does it say that a little bit of gossip (false witness) is not grave matter? Does it say that stealing small items are not grave matter? Does it say that a little bit of dishonor to your parents is not grave matter?

From Matt Collins: The Catechism’s statement that grave matter is determined by the 10 Commandments can be applied to all the commandments. Yet solid, orthodox moral theologians recognize that the commandment against false witness is not broken MORTALLY when the matter of the lie is inconsequential.

Lying requires an intent to decieve for it to be sinful. This is spelled out in the Catechism. There is no such qualification in the Catechism about theft and coveting.

From Matt Collins: I suppose there could be circumstances that would make stealing a penny from a millionaire a mortal sin, such as if I did it as part of teaching my child how to pickpocket. But we’re obviously talking about normal circumstances.

This is the slippery slope of relativism. Some things are ok or less serious if we sin against someone who deserves it in our own mind. Hey, take a buck, a hundred bucks, a thousand. The rich man won’t miss it.

From Matt Collins: If stealing a penny from a millionaire is a mortal sin, then there can be no such thing as venial sin, and every sin is mortal. And that is contrary to Catholic dogma.

This logic of materiality is how people end up justifying their little white lies and their petty gossip. “Its inconsequential” or “it didn’t hurt anybody.”

I’ve provided direct quotes from teh Catechism for my support. You have provided the “moral interpretations of Matt” as yours. You are not my magisterium.

From Matt Collins: What I’m saying is that it defies common sense to say that stealing a penny from a millionaire, even if done with full knowledge and full consent, would send someone to hell, because a penny simply is not grave matter.

The determination of Eternal Mercy or Eternal Justice is the exclusive perogative of God. It is His sense that matters and not that which is “commonly” understood. He is the Judge exclusively.

In a way, the introduction of “common sense” relates to full knowledge.

From Matt Collins: I agree it’s wrong and shouldn’t be done, and I have taught my children not to do it. But I have also taught them to distinguish between grave matter and matter that is not grave. And common sense has a lot to do with that.

Is it consequential to download a song from the internet w/o paying the royalty? The record company can’t miss something they don’t have. Frankly that is a rhetorical question. I’m not confident that your interpretation would be correct.

From Matt Collins: When discussing how much money would constitute grave matter, it is not always clear where the line is crossed from non-grave matter to grave matter. It is open to discussion, and is a matter of conscience. And conscience must be formed well.

Kinda depends on whether you really want it and if the person/company won’t miss it? Is that the test?

 

[Geremia]

Trying to crack into an encrypted wireless network would definitely be stealing, but using another’s unencrypted wireless connection is not necessarily stealing since often free wireless connections are provided for people to use, such as at coffee shops.

 

[VociMike]

Trying to crack into an encrypted wireless network would definitely be stealing, but using another’s unencrypted wireless connection is not necessarily stealing since often free wireless connections are provided for people to use, such as at coffee shops.

I think if you look over this thread you’ll see that the ISP will have different contracts with home users and public locations such as coffee shops. If it’s OK with the ISP (read their terms of use) and OK with the neighbor then it’s not stealing. If it’s not OK with either of those other parties then it is stealing.