Was Peter’s denial a mortal sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ioana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Ioana

Guest
So hypothetically if a pregnant woman were to take a pill that she didn’t know was an abortion pill (ignore the improbability of this) we’d all agree it was an unfortunate accident. Similarly if Saint Peter didn’t realize that he was denying Jesus whilst he was denying Jesus wouldn’t that make him less culpable? It seems he got a sort of “aha” moment when the crook crooked and Jesus looked at him suggesting that maybe he did not realize what he was doing before. Do you think that the above reading would be giving him too much of the benefit of the doubt?
 
We cannot know.

Peter’s denial was objectively grave matter, but that’s only one of three components of mortal sin. We do not know how culpable he was in terms of full knowledge (that denying Jesus is gravely sinful) or complete consent (he was, after all, fearful and caught flat-footed).
 
Peter was shown how little he knew about what he was made of. I’m sure he was resolved to stand up for Christ at the cost of his life. His spirit was willing but his flesh was weak. God let Satan sift Peter to reveal Peter to himself. I personally think it could have become mortal but Jesus prayed for Peter and the cock crowed.
 
Peter’s denial is a lesson for both Peter and us that we can be fallible and weak even when we fully intend and plan on doing “the right thing”. Peter went from insisting he would never deny Jesus, and even attacking the arresting officers with a sword (in all four gospels), to denying he knew Jesus, all in the space of a few short hours. We cannot know if this was a mortal sin because as someone said above, we don’t know Peter’s full state of mind and it seems likely he was under great strain because he was afraid for his life.

In any event it doesn’t matter because he repented of it as soon as he realized he did it - he went outside and wept. Going forward he affirmed after the Resurrection three times that he loved Jesus (John 21:15-19) and did eventually accept imprisonment and martyrdom for Jesus’ sake, so it’s a moot point.
 
In any event it doesn’t matter because he repented of it as soon as he realized he did it - he went outside and wept. Going forward he affirmed after the Resurrection three times that he loved Jesus (John 21:15-19) and did eventually accept imprisonment and martyrdom for Jesus’ sake, so it’s a moot point.
Indeed. His martyrdom alone assured him of a place amongst the saints.
 
Jesus warned Peter that Satan has demanded to sift him like wheat, but Peter reassured the Lord that he was prepared for imprisonment and death. Jesus then foretold Peter’s denial - that Peter himself will not escape Satan’s snare. This test was meant to strengthen Peter who must in turn strengthen his brothers. Lk21:32 After the cock crowed, Peter wept bitterly and went away. He was repentant. Peter realized that by human strength alone, it is not enough to resist all temptations, endure all trials and tribulations. With great faith and great humility, Peter gained great strength, the Rock on which the Lord builds His Church.
 
So hypothetically if a pregnant woman were to take a pill that she didn’t know was an abortion pill (ignore the improbability of this) we’d all agree it was an unfortunate accident. Similarly if Saint Peter didn’t realize that he was denying Jesus whilst he was denying Jesus wouldn’t that make him less culpable? It seems he got a sort of “aha” moment when the crook crooked and Jesus looked at him suggesting that maybe he did not realize what he was doing before. Do you think that the above reading would be giving him too much of the benefit of the doubt?
This question casts into a slippery slope. Apparently by difference.

The ontological and holistic manner that Saint Peter denied Jesus three times was much more severe. As it was saying he denied he was even the Pope (the Rock.) For by saying “I do not know this man.” He denied the body, blood, soul, and divinity. He denied every word Christ ever said, out of fear.

But, Jesus told him beforehand, knowing his sins. And Christ did not banish Saint Peter either. Consider when he slit the ear of the priest servant. Jesus stated “those who live by the sword…” He healed the ear of the priest servant. That’s mercy.

Jesus told all the Apostle’s what was going to happen, because the only thing which would endure, was Christ’s mercy. His love which abounds forever.

So was Saint Peter’s denial a mortal sin? Yes, it was. He knew the degree, extent, and what he did by denying Jesus three times. He denied the Blessed Sacrament which He and the Twelve were conferred.

Now, as for the mistaken use of a pill not knowing it would abort. Say for whatever reason it was a mistake out of ignorance. They had no knowledge. However, when they have knowledge later that it was a grave sin. That it was moral (i.e. the degree and nature of the sin.) They should still go to Confession. God would allow for purgatory as the last possibility of Salvation in His Mercy. Just by the fact it wasn’t in fully knowledge and will. Just the knowledge. Or it was just without knowing. And that would still be the necessity of that person’s Salvation. Who would then in Purgatory say they are sorry, they didn’t know. And God knows that. No matter how big, grave, deep, and small one’s sin is, it’s all going to be made known at the end of life. And, God still will have a recounting of them. For our good. For our Salvation. So Purgatory is the answer for something that is not full in case mortal (i.e. knowledge, will, and matter.) All three have to exist to be mortal. And that would mean Confession, Penance, and Reconciliation.
 
Last edited:
There is an obsession on this forum with mortal sin .

I am not in the least bit interested in knowing whether Peter’s denial was a mortal sin or not .

“As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.” (Psalm 103:12)

Please leave them there .
 
Last edited:
In any event it doesn’t matter because he repented of it as soon as he realized he did it - he went outside and wept. Going forward he affirmed after the Resurrection three times that he loved Jesus (John 21:15-19) and did eventually accept imprisonment and martyrdom for Jesus’ sake, so it’s a moot point.
I second that. And to me, the main lesson is that Peter said to Jesus: 'Even though they all fall away, I will not". He was overconfident of his own strength. So he was knocked down from that pedestal for a hard lesson in humility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top