Why simple fornication cant be a mortal sin

[underacloud]

If I sleep with my boyfriend who I love dearly and am committed to and intend to get pregnant that satisfies the procreative part. I’m in like Flynn correct?

No.

Procreation isn’t merely about creating new life, but the will and capacity to care for it. The Church teaches that marriage is the means to achieve this. It is for the good of the children that their parents are married - committed to each other for life. Yes, some marriages fail, but marriage is nonetheless the model.

If you are commited to your boyfriend, why aren’t you married? Marriage is lifelong commitment, intended that way for the sake of children (as well as the spouses). Anything short of this level of commitment is not suitable.

 

[minkymurph]

I can understand where the OP is coming from. Would anyone here put sexual intercourse between a unmarried couple who are mad about each other, and intend to get married, on par with murder or adultery? If not, is it fair to say it’s not as serious a sin?

 

[AdamP88]

Originally Posted by Irishgal49
The funny part is if the parents told their children they were married and lived that way all their lives and went to Church and everyone thought they were married, no scandal. No one asked for a marriage license when I joined the Church. No one. And you don’t always change your name when married and a court order can change a name without marriage. So…???

Just to address the point about the marriage license, it is actually the state that requires that a couple has legal proof of marriage and provides status to the institution of marriage. The marriage itself is instituted by the man and woman. In effect, Catholics believe that the couple marry themselves to each other and this is merely facilitated by the priest.

 

[underacloud]

I can understand where the OP is coming from. Would anyone here put sexual intercourse between a unmarried couple who are mad about each other, and intend to get married, on par with murder or adultery? If not, is it fair to say it’s not as serious a sin?

Of course it’s not as bad as some other sins.

But this arguments has been had before. eg It is a “mortal sin” (it is grave matter for mortal sin) to miss mass on Sunday without good reason. Of course, no one thinks that missing mass is anywhere near as bad as murder, adultery, and countless other sins.

Mortal sin isn’t merely about how bad a sin something is…it’s about our relatsionship with God. When we skip mass, we effectively decide that God isn’t important enough to us to spare an hour on Sunday. When we commit fornication, we effectively tell God that we think we know better…we do not believe what He has revealed, through Christ, the sccriptures, and His Church, regarding sexual ethics and we will make up our own minds.

While fornication may not be as serious as murder, adultery, etc it is still sufficient to separate us from God, when we tell Him that we know better and don’t want to obey His rules, which He provides for our good.

 

[SonCatcher]

Sorry I’m late to the party. I hope I haven’t missed much (namely, whether my response has already been said).

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.

We require a license to drive a car or purchase a firearm, yet neither driving nor owning are intrinsically evil. Your conclusion is false.

[BIBLEDRB]Mark 7:20-23[/BIBLEDRB]

Jesus explicitly lists fornication (aka sex between unmarried persons) as sinful. I would venture to guess that all these sins, understood and consented to, are even mortal.

 

[minkymurph]

Of course it’s not as bad as some other sins.

But this arguments has been had before. eg It is a “mortal sin” (it is grave matter for mortal sin) to miss mass on Sunday without good reason. Of course, no one thinks that missing mass is anywhere near as bad as murder, adultery, and countless other sins.

Mortal sin isn’t merely about how bad a sin something is…it’s about our relatsionship with God. When we skip mass, we effectively decide that God isn’t important enough to us to spare an hour on Sunday. When we commit fornication, we effectively tell God that we think we know better…we do not believe what He has revealed, through Christ, the sccriptures, and His Church, regarding sexual ethics and we will make up our own minds.

While fornication may not be as serious as murder, adultery, etc it is still sufficient to separate us from God, when we tell Him that we know better and don’t want to obey His rules, which He provides for our good.

I see where you are coming from, in that because one act isn’t as serious as another, that does not make it acceptable. However, correct me if I’m wrong but are forethought and intention not elements of mortal sin? Therefore, is a fair to say a person who has neither the the intention or the forethought to tell God they know better, or He is not important enough to them to spare an hour on Sunday, less guilty than one who does? In which case, can we say their act is less serious, and therefore not mortal sin?

 

[underacloud]

I see where you are coming from, in that because one act isn’t as serious as another, that does not make it acceptable. However, correct me if I’m wrong but are forethought and intention not elements of mortal sin? Therefore, is a fair to say a person who has neither the the intention or the forethought to tell God they know better, or He is not important enough to them to spare an hour on Sunday, less guilty than one who does? In which case, can we say their act is less serious, and therefore not mortal sin?

Yes, definitely. Knowledge and consent are requirements for mortal sin. The sin itself must meet the requirement of grave matter, and then knowledge and consent of the will come into play.

So when way say that fornication, murder, adultery, missing mass, etc are “mortal sins”, what we mean is that they meet the requirement of grave matter. Whether the individual who commits such sins is guilty of personal mortal sin is then a matter of whether knowledge and consent are sufficiently present.

So you might say we have objective mortal sins…sins that by their nature are grave matter…and we have subjective mortal sins…sins that are grave matter and also for the individual involved are mortal sins by nature of their knowledge and consent.

Does that make sense?

 

[WingsOfEagles]

Yes, definitely. Knowledge and consent are requirements for mortal sin. The sin itself must meet the requirement of grave matter, and then knowledge and consent of the will come into play.

So when way say that fornication, murder, adultery, missing mass, etc are “mortal sins”, what we mean is that they meet the requirement of grave matter. Whether the individual who commits such sins is guilty of personal mortal sin is then a matter of whether knowledge and consent are sufficiently present.

So you might say we have objective mortal sins…sins that by their nature are grave matter…and we have subjective mortal sins…sins that are grave matter and also for the individual involved are mortal sins by nature of their knowledge and consent.

Does that make sense?

That’s a good point to keep in mind. If someone was unaware of church teaching on premarital sex, it would not be a mortal sin if they committed. I think the same kind of goes for when a teenager asks on here “How far is too far when kissing. I did X, Y, and z with my bf/gf.” Obviously, if they are asking, they could not have been fully aware of the seriousness of their actions at the time. Therefore, no mortal sin, but perhaps something to still mention in Confession for guidance.

 

[Ignatius]

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.
now a good honest philosopher will try to get to the root of the problem. first we must ask, why is it that the church discourages fornication? the answer is simple, because it can easily lead to selfishness which can easily lead to pride which destroys charity.

HOWEVER, if a person can have sex in a temperant responsible fashion, then it shouldnt be a mortal sin.
ive been studying the buddhist concept of ‘the third way’, and i think it makes more sense than the christian teaching. dont get me wrong, im a christian catholic through and through, but i think the buddhist third way is compatible with a christian lifestyle.
in the bible jesus was mostly silent about sexual morality. i think this was because we cant be too legalistic about these things. he even warned us against being legalistic. which is why i came to the conclusion that simple fornication in a relationship between good friends may not always be a mortal sin.
and please understand, i make my argument in the most respectful way, i do not want to offend anyone, i am honestly just searching for the truth. so i would appreciate anyone’s discourse on this matter.

Sounds like simple rationalization in orderto justify what you want to do rather than what you ought to do.

 

[Corki]

I can understand where the OP is coming from. Would anyone here put sexual intercourse between a unmarried couple who are mad about each other, and intend to get married, on par with murder or adultery? If not, is it fair to say it’s not as serious a sin?

Not on par with murder, but really close when it comes to adultery. And all three are mortal sins. The real categorization for sin is venial and mortal. Once you cross over from venial to mortal, the seriousness of the sin is not the primary concern.

 

[Sister_Terese]

ive been thinking about this for a long time now. i think i figured it out. if we deny that sex is intrinsically evil, then we cannot say that it is always a mortal sin. just think about it, if we need a license to engage in sex (marriage) then that would mean that sex is intrinsically evil.
now a good honest philosopher will try to get to the root of the problem. first we must ask, why is it that the church discourages fornication? the answer is simple, because it can easily lead to selfishness which can easily lead to pride which destroys charity.

HOWEVER, if a person can have sex in a temperant responsible fashion, then it shouldnt be a mortal sin.
ive been studying the buddhist concept of ‘the third way’, and i think it makes more sense than the christian teaching. dont get me wrong, im a christian catholic through and through, but i think the buddhist third way is compatible with a christian lifestyle.
in the bible jesus was mostly silent about sexual morality. i think this was because we cant be too legalistic about these things. he even warned us against being legalistic. which is why i came to the conclusion that simple fornication in a relationship between good friends may not always be a mortal sin.
and please understand, i make my argument in the most respectful way, i do not want to offend anyone, i am honestly just searching for the truth. so i would appreciate anyone’s discourse on this matter.

I believe that you are sincere in your questions. That being said, I would invite you to look at the “fruits” of “simple fornication in a relationship with good friends”. Let’s look at them: abortion, (even partial-birth abortions!), wounded souls from destructive casual sexual encounters, STDs (herpes, clamydia, HIV increasing exponentially) artificial birth control, rampant homosexuality ("same-sex marriages??), divorce, destroyed families–especially the children, unwed mothers, teenagers having babies, and the list goes on. How could anyone consider this to be healthy? God meant for sex to be pleasurable, but this is reserved only for married couples. This is a privilege. Despite the claims of the intelligensia we are not 98% chimpanzees! There is a whole other 2% unaccounted for–at least scientifically. But, in genetics that is a monumental difference.

If you are a "catholic through and through, you would be better served engaging in a good, solid Catholic moral theology or Catholic theology class. Ask a good priest to recommend one to you. There are some excellent books written by very CATHOLIC authors who have written many books on moral theology. Try also reading some of the papal encyclicals on human life (Humanae Vita), and others.

 

[minkymurph]

Yes, definitely. Knowledge and consent are requirements for mortal sin. The sin itself must meet the requirement of grave matter, and then knowledge and consent of the will come into play.

So when way say that fornication, murder, adultery, missing mass, etc are “mortal sins”, what we mean is that they meet the requirement of grave matter. Whether the individual who commits such sins is guilty of personal mortal sin is then a matter of whether knowledge and consent are sufficiently present.

So you might say we have objective mortal sins…sins that by their nature are grave matter…and we have subjective mortal sins…sins that are grave matter and also for the individual involved are mortal sins by nature of their knowledge and consent.

Does that make sense?

Yes it does. It’s kind of like the defense of duress in criminal law. Put simply, the act is a crime and person committed it, but because the person committed it under duress we excuse them - the key word being excuse. The fact a crime has been committed by that person does not change, but they fact it was committed under duress is taken into account, and they are not viewed in law to be as culpable as a person who commits the same crime but not under duress.

 

[minkymurph]

Not on par with murder, but really close when it comes to adultery. And all three are mortal sins. The real categorization for sin is venial and mortal. Once you cross over from venial to mortal, the seriousness of the sin is not the primary concern.

Is it fair to say the line of distinction between a venial and mortal sin can be hard to define? In which case one could argue that in order to sure, it is one’s best interests not to commit either.

In relation to fornication being close to adultery, I’m not sure. There are disagreements concerning the definition of adultery. Some say is the act of sexual intercourse outside marriage - full stop - and some say adultery relates only to married couples?

I would see a difference between cheating on your husband or wife, and a couple who have the intention to marry engaging engaging in sexual activity prior to the event, as the latter distorts carnal love to a greater extent.

 

[underacloud]

I would see a difference between cheating on your husband or wife, and a couple who have the intention to marry engaging engaging in sexual activity prior to the event, as the latter distorts carnal love to a greater extent.

Sorry, but can I assume you meant the former, not that latter? ie adultery is worse than fornication.

 

[minkymurph]

Sorry, but can I assume you meant the former, not that latter? ie adultery is worse than fornication.

Yes you can.

It may be an idea for me to actually read over my posts before I submit them.
It also demonstrates that while assumptions are often inaccurate, it is not always the case.

 

[Irishgal49]

So the Church also teaches that it’s wrong to lie.

I don’t understand your point at all. Are you saying fornication would be OK if a couple lied about their marital status?

Naturally, the part about causing scandal was not the main issue. Note the language: “Moreover, it is a grave scandal…”. Moreover meaning in addition to…the scandal caused is not the primary reason why fornication is wrong.

YOU said it caused scandal, I’m saying if you lied —no scandal.

 

[Irishgal49]

And if they love each other that much, why not get married and do things the right way, the way the Bible spells out? Otherwise, they aren’t ready to be having sex. Personally, if a man can’t wait to sleep with me, I feel he is trying to use me and doesn’t care about me the person all that much.

Let me tell you something, a man NOT marrying can sometimes be the greatest gift you will ever receive. Don’t assume that if he marries you he values you—two divorces and anullments here ok? I know what I"m saying.

The reason they don’t get married is they don’t believe in your Bible, your Church, or your conservative family beliefs. That’s why.

 

[Irishgal49]

No, you are falling for a logical fallacy. Just because there are people who abuse the gift of their sexuality that are both married and unmarried doesn’t mean that the use of sex is morally equal regardless of marital status.

Do you want to say that because some men and women commit the sin of adultery, the sin of fornication shouldn’t “count”?

Do you want to say that because some men and women commit the sin of homosexual acts, the sin of fornication shouldn’t “count”?

Do you want to say that because some married men and women commit sins of impurity and other sexual sins, the sin of fornication shouldn’t “count”?

Non sequitur. They aren’t paying the bills, loving their children and avoiding drugs because they are fornicating. Lots of people do those things in a variety of states of life.

I honestly have never seen any valid detailed explanation of sex outside of marriage being a sin other than the church saying it. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong. I was married to a Jewish man and they told us flat out. No sin if you have sex, only if you commit adultery.

 

[Irishgal49]

Since it has thus far been overlooked, I would like to repeat what I said in my previous post:
**
Sex is the most powerful creative tool God has given us. It gives us the ability to create new life. That possibility is one that carries immense responsibility and must be accounted for by those engaging in the act. If a child is produced, it deserves to have a stable family, and the parents should be prepared to provide that. Marriage is the proper covenant that God has established for that purpose. If you are prepared to have sex, you should be prepared to have children. If you are prepared to have children, you should be prepared to stay with your partner. If you are prepared to stay with your partner, you should be married. Period. **

That is why it is a sin. Fornication ignores or attempts to avoid the inherent responsibilities that come with sexual relations. No matter how much you try to rationalize it, it’s wrong.

The larger the caps, the louder your voice, the bright color and caps say to me you are threatened, insecure, and freaking out. This is a discussion. You will not die if you do not convince someone of your point. Relax, OK?

 

[Irishgal49]

you completely misunderstood my standpoint. i stated that extreme permissivism is a BAD thing. i AGREE with that. but two unmarried people can indeed have a sexual relationship without over indulging.
and i disagree, sex is not something disgusting. this is the problem with extreme sexual repression it makes people fearful and disgusted with what is natural and beautiful.
i never said that morality should be ignored, i am debating about what is the true morality.

The Jewish tradition asserts you are free to have all the sex you want. You can live together, have sex outside of marriage, as long as you both agree. You cannot, however, cheat on a spouse or someone you are living with (in a committed relationship). That is adultery. That’s the religion of Jesus…but, hey, what do they know?