Would you agree with this

[Luney123]

I just saw an old Reddit post and I was wandering if you would agree on this:

“Some of the best advice I’ve received regarding whether something reached the level of mortal sin is that legitimate wonder/uncertainty almost always indicates venial, since one who sins mortally essentially purposely says no to God. Additionally, while it shouldn’t be used as an excuse, habit can diminish consent. Holding the belief that one may constantly hop “in and out of Grace” between confession and legitimate struggle is a sign of scruples - God loves you and Reconciliation is as much about growing in grace as restoring you to it. The fact that you appear to be so concerned and fearful to me would indicate you have not committed mortal sin (but obviously, none of us even truly know our own hearts and so we need Reconciliation whenever we stumble.)”

Is this true that if you are unsure whether you committed mortal sin then it is most likely not? I’m mainly talking about the sin of lust(like looking at woman)

 

[WillC]

Sin is sin. Mortal sin is mortal. Venial is venial. Just keeps it easy on my tiny brain.

 

[Vico]

I just saw an old Reddit post and I was wandering if you would agree on this:

“Some of the best advice I’ve received regarding whether something reached the level of mortal sin is that legitimate wonder/uncertainty almost always indicates venial, since one who sins mortally essentially purposely says no to God. Additionally, while it shouldn’t be used as an excuse, habit can diminish consent. Holding the belief that one may constantly hop “in and out of Grace” between confession and legitimate struggle is a sign of scruples - God loves you and Reconciliation is as much about growing in grace as restoring you to it. The fact that you appear to be so concerned and fearful to me would indicate you have not committed mortal sin (but obviously, none of us even truly know our own hearts and so we need Reconciliation whenever we stumble.)”

Is this true that if you are unsure whether you committed mortal sin then it is most likely not? I’m mainly talking about the sin of lust(like looking at woman)

No to part of the statement “one who sins mortally essentially purposely says no to God”, because it is not a requirement that “the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present”. (See Catholic Encyclopedia quote below.)

Also, “legitimate wonder/uncertainty almost always indicates venial” qualified with “almost always” which is a statistical analysis for which no basis is provided. Venial is well defined in 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.

So for any grave sin under consideration for which one duly sought to be informed on, does not have full knowledge it cannot be mortal, which also means sufficient reflection. The catechism calls it “a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice”.

Catholic Encyclopedia

From the condemnation of the errors of Baius and Jansenius (Denz.-Bann., 1046, 1066, 1094, 1291-2) it is clear that for an actual personal sin a knowledge of the law and a personal voluntary act, free from coercion and necessity, are required. No mortal sin is committed in a state of invincible ignorance or in a half-conscious state. Actual advertence to the sinfulness of the act is not required, virtual advertence suffices. It is not necessary that the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present, the full and free consent of the will to an evil act suffices.

O’Neil, A.C. (1912). Sin. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm

 

[Luney123]

Yah but I’m not sure if i committed mortal or not. Sometimes when I look at woman I tend to look at her body and don’t know if it’s lust or not

 

[WillC]

Only you and God know what goes on in your heart. I know that I deal with that problem of lust. I am in a state of mortal sin because of my serious issues. I am working on them.

For me, I tend to see a woman and feel a physical attraction. The first thing that comes to my mind is sex. However, this is rather natural.

I’d say the mortal sin would be to actually fantasize about it, think about it, try to get the physical. Because we know that God has made us to want women.

So I think just the “outta nowhere” physical attraction is a temptation. Maybe a venial sin, but I’m not sure if its mortal. Ask your local priest

 

[Luney123]

Okay what about looking at woman on social media and you tend to look at their body and feel an attraction. Would you consider that lust?

 

[WillC]

Not necessarily. Thats natural to have a quick thought of “wow, she’s got a great body”. Its why we want to procreate. God ingrained that in us to multiply.

Its different if you INTENDED to look at a picture to see her body. Or if you focused on it and began to have serious desires that you refused to fight.

If you are focused solely her body instead of anything else. Thats definitely lust. But as I said, only you and God truly know whats in your heart.

 

[redcatholic]

Yes. I personally would consider that lust.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It sounds like the response was directed at a scrupulous person.

While it’s a nice thing to think that if we are worried about our sin it’s probably not mortal, this type of thinking could be used by people to excuse all kinds of stuff they know darn well is greatly sinful.

As for lust, it’s normal to get a biological jolt sometimes when you see an attractive person of the gender you’re attracted to. The momentary feeling is not a sin. However, it could be a sin if

• you seek out such sights, for example by willfully going to a movie or a website or a bar or a beach for the purpose of getting yourself excited, or
• you dwell on the feelings when they happen rather than moving right on to the next thing.

 

[Genesis315]

I would agree with the idea that one will not be unsure if it is mortal, but only for someone who has for a while been striving to live the devout life. But mortal sin does not necessarily mean a fundamental, explicit “no” to God (this kind of fundamental option theory has been rejected by the Church as Vico notes earlier in the thread; of note, it is specifically rejected in JPII’s Veritatis Splendor). For someone with a dulled conscience due to habitual sin, it would not apply:

See the following, from St. Alphonsus Liguori (The Practice of the Love of Jesus Christ):

Here it will be well to remark, what is unanimously admitted by all theologians, even of the rigorist school, that persons who have during a considerable period of time been leading a virtuous life, and live habitually in the fear of God, whenever they are in doubt, and are not certain whether they have given consent to a grievous sin, ought to be perfectly assured that they have not lost the Divine grace; for it is morally impossible that the will, confirmed in its good purposes for a considerable lapse of time, should on a sudden undergo so total a change as at once to consent to a mortal sin without clearly knowing it; the reason of it is, that mortal sin is so horrible a monster that it cannot possible enter a soul by which it has long been held in abhorrence, without her being fully aware of it. We have proved this at length in our Moral Theology. [Lib. 6, D. 476.] St. Teresa said: No one is lost without knowing it; and no one is deceived without the will to be deceived. [Life, addit.]

 

[otjm]

For the life of me, I don’t know what impels so many people to brign their personal actions and choices to the forums with the question (generically) “Did I sin?”.

We are not for the most part ordained priests (there are a couple, but they don’t answer every question).

This is a matter of two issues: 1) you need to grow up spiritually and 2) you need to take these questions to your priest in confession.