Supersizing Venial Sin

[TheUbiquitous]

Reply, with permission, to [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/123731-mortal-sin/"]a Scholar thread[/url].

[quote]

There are three conditions that make an act a mortal sin:[list=1]
[*]An act of grave matter that is...
[*]Committed with full knowledge and...
[*]Deliberate consent.
[/list]
My question: If one believes an act is of grave matter [but actually is not] and commits the act, is it a mortal sin?

[/quote]

I happily admit in advance that all the arguments which follow are [i]ad hoc[/i] arguments, each manufactured simply because of this primary datum: All the priests I know in real life --- that is, all the priests in real life I trust, from their witness on other matters --- take this position:

[indent=1]By intending to mortally sin, you've successfully upgraded your sin to mortal.[/indent]

With this in mind, here are three arguments, which may or may not be aspects of the same argument, and I humbly reserve the right to create more.
[center]
[size=6][b]Argument the First:[/b] [/size][/center]

Ignoring Catholic Answers' reasoning for a moment, there's [url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2088.htm#article5"]Aquinas[/url], emphasis added:

[indent=1]It is, however, impossible for a circumstance to make a venial sin become mortal, unless it adds the deformity of another species. ... Consequently it is evident that a circumstance cannot make a venial sin to be mortal, so long as it remains a circumstance, but [b]only when it transfers the sin to another species[/b], and becomes, as it were, the specific difference of the moral act.[/indent]

Later, Aquinas seems to refer back to the idea that venial sin "can" upgrade to mortal, considering:

[indent=1]But a venial sin can become mortal, as stated above[/indent]

Belief that a thing is grave matter, if done with the full consent of the will and full knowledge of what it means for something to be grave matter, would seem to "transfer the sin to another species." But what species?

[center][size=6][b]Argument the Second:[/b] [/size][/center]

If you know what it means to mortally sin, and you intend to mortally sin, then [b][i]by consciously intending to sin gravely[/i][/b] you have done an act which entails mortally sinning.

Put another way, as the Catechism defines "grave matter" as "specified by the Ten Commandments," if you intend to break the First Commandment, [i][b]that full and concrete act of intending[/b][/i] involves three things:[list=1]
[*]Grave matter, that is, breaking the First Commandment.
[*]Consent, that is, willing to break the First Commandment.
[*]Knowledge, that is, knowing that breaking the First Commandment is grave, what it means to be grave, &c.
[/list]
... and is therefore mortal.
[center]
[size=6][b]Argument the Third: [/b][/size][/center]

Back to Catholic Answers, the argument and counterarguments hinge on proper interpretation of the following paragraphs from the Catechism, emphases added:


[indent=1]1790 [b]A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself.[/b] Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.[/indent]

[indent=1]1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin." In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.[/indent]

[indent=1]1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.[/indent]

[indent=1]1793 [b]If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible[/b], [b]or the moral subject is not responsible[/b] for his erroneous judgment, [b]the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him[/b]. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.[/indent]

Right away, it seems that 1790 through 1792 are tied together, whereas the only escape clause from mortal sin comes in 1793 with that telltale "if." (This is by no means an argument; rather, it's a red flag.) Time, then, to read 1791 and 1792 more carefully.

CCC 1791 says that a man can be culpable for ignorance. It continues with an example, which by no means appears to be an exhaustive or complete list of possibilities. However, the nut of it is something like:

[indent=1]If: Someone's "moral conscience remains in ignorance"
Then: He [b]can [/b]be culpable.[/indent]
[indent=1]This is the case when ...[/indent]

Note that it mentions that a particular case rather than continuing to expound on what it means to be culpable. Indeed, the better half of CCC 1791 is irrelevant to the question at hand. For that matter, the last sentence begins "In such cases," referring back to the second sentence. This takes the form:

[indent=1]If: a man takes little trouble to know good or is blinded by sin
Then: he is culpable.[/indent]

But the hypothetical situation does not meet the "If" condition. Therefore, logically, there is no knowledge about whether the "then" consequence is true.

CCC 1792, on the other hand, is the same substance, in reverse, as applied to what constitutes "erroneous judgment."

[indent=1]Then: These [b]can[/b] be the source ...[/indent]
[indent=1]If: Someone's conscience "makes erroneous judgments."[/indent]

In neither case is this an "exclusive can." In neither case is the subject --- believing a thing to be mortal or not --- written about. Hardly a slam dunk, it instead suggests an inconclusive result as applied to the question at hand. For reference:

[quote]
There are three conditions that make an act a mortal sin:[list=1]
[*]An act of grave matter that is...
[*]Committed with full knowledge and...
[*]Deliberate consent.
[/list]
My question: If one believes an act is of grave matter[but actually is not] and commits the act, is it a mortal sin?

[/quote]

Meanwhile, CCC 1790 suggests "condemnation." But only mortal sins condemn. Therefore, disobeying conscience is more suggested to constitute grave matter than not. From here, given No. 2 and 3, the appellation "mortal sin" follows.

Thoughts?

[emmaberry]

I hope that going against your conscience does not 'upgrade' to a mortal sin, because there are so many times when I'm like, "I should get up and go run this errand for my mom," and I don't. Not grave matter, just grave laziness...but if I go against my conscience, would that make this a mortal sin? I'd hope not.

Then again, this would explain why in Confession, we are not supposed to list mortal sins, but say "I did A, which is a mortal sin." I guess this is because a seemingly venial sin can be mortal and the priest needs to have the correct information for the penance he gives??

[PhuturePriest]

Jimmy Akin actually answered a question on this on Catholic Answers Forums long ago. Here it is: http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=52605#post52605

[PhuturePriest]

Jimmy Akin actually answered a question on this on Catholic Answers Forums long ago. Here it is: http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=52605#post52605

[TheUbiquitous]

[quote name='emmaberry' timestamp='1346911651' post='2479325']
I hope that going against your conscience does not 'upgrade' to a mortal sin, because there are so many times when I'm like, "I should get up and go run this errand for my mom," and I don't. Not grave matter, just grave laziness...but if I go against my conscience, would that make this a mortal sin? I'd hope not.

Then again, this would explain why in Confession, we are not supposed to list mortal sins, but say "I did A, which is a mortal sin." I guess this is because a seemingly venial sin can be mortal and the priest needs to have the correct information for the penance he gives??
[/quote]

To quote Mr. Akin:

[indent=1]One pastoral note in this regard: Sometimes people with a scrupulous conscience get into situations where they feel that they are violating their consciences all the time by what they do. The above account does not always apply in their cases. It applies to a person with a normal or lax conscience. [/indent]

To quote then-Bp. Fulton Sheen:

[indent=1]Hearing nuns' confessions is like being stoned to death with popcorn.[/indent]

So no worries!

[emmaberry]

[quote name='TheUbiquitous' timestamp='1346913854' post='2479329']
To quote Mr. Akin:

[indent=1]One pastoral note in this regard: Sometimes people with a scrupulous conscience get into situations where they feel that they are violating their consciences all the time by what they do. The above account does not always apply in their cases. It applies to a person with a normal or lax conscience.[/indent]

To quote then-Bp. Fulton Sheen:

[indent=1]Hearing nuns' confessions is like being stoned to death with popcorn.[/indent]

So no worries!
[/quote]

But I am definitely not scrupulous, at least not according to confessors. What exactly counts as 'going against your conscience'?

[TheUbiquitous]

In the context of the argument? Going against your conscience when you believe it venial is a venial sin; against it when believed mortally is a mortal sin.

Oh, and FP? Upon further reflection that question-and-answer is not, precisely speaking, the question at hand.

[BarbTherese]

Can I have a try?
To be a mortal sin, it has to be a matter of "gravity" or "grave matter"
If I deliberately commit a venial sin convinced it is mortal, then the act itself remains neither serious nor grave. We cannot "supersize" venial sin or something that is not grave matter become grave matter for the willing of it. What is serious is the willingness to commit mortal sin and turn away from God completely, condemning one's soul.
The willingness in freedom to commit mortal sin and turn away from God, does constitute grave or serious matter and along with the other two conditions present, providing they are present - full knowledge and full consent - constitutes mortal sin.
Only mortal sin per se can condemn a person to Hell. Therefore, to commit a venial sin convinced it is a mortal sin, the soul is not condemned to Hell for the venial sin 'supersized' to mortal sin, but may be so for the willingness to commit a mortal sin in that willingness in freedom to commit mortal sin and turn away from God condemning oneself to Hell is serious and grave matter indeed. In other words, two possible sins are present, the venial sin and the mortal sin of willingness to turn away from God condemning oneself to Hell for eternity.
[quote]

[url="http://mission.liguori.org/newsletters/pdf_archive/november2005sa_web.pdf"]http://mission.liguo...r2005sa_web.pdf[/url]

"[u]Was it a mortal sin[/u]?"

[u]What follows is taken from the above article, and the article in full is worth the read and a very simple read[/u].

[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]........."...........In order for a mortal sin to happen, the[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]sinful act must be serious matter. Something cannot[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]become serious matter just by my thinking[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]that it is or that it might be. Just like I can let any[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]action represent my desire to offend God, I can[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]let even a trivial matter represent my desire to[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]offend God seriously. Remember, though, it is[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[left][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]this desire that is the serious matter. A trivial thing[/color][/font][/color][/font][/left]
[font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20]can never become serious in itself..........."..........[/color][/font][/color][/font]
[font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][font=Times New Roman][color=#231f20][/quote][/color][/font][/color][/font]

Edited September 6, 2012 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

Duplicate post, sorry.

Edited September 6, 2012 by BarbaraTherese

[cappie]

Under the heading “Erroneous Judgment,” the Catechism states, “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed” (1790).

[carmenchristi]

I believe BarbaraTherese already stated what I was going to say: It's not so much an "upgrade" (geez, sounds like we're trying to sell something) of a venial sin, it is a different sin altogether i.e. the act of willfully turning away from God and deliberately doing something that is believed to be a grave offence.

The contrary is also true. If I do not know (honestly, and through no fault of my own) that something constitutes grave matter then I cannot commit a mortal sin.

This is what "obeying the certain judgement of his conscience" translates to.

That said, we also have a moral obligation to educate and form our consciences.

[Slappo]

One does not commit a sin with the intention of committing either a mortal or venial sin. One commits a sin with the intention of doing or not doing a particular act. One does not say "I am going to commit a mortal sin, now what should I do in order to commit mortal sin?" One says "I am going to do X even though I know that it is a mortal/venial sin." Therefore, the intention of the individual does not automatically upgrade a sin from venial to mortal.

Now of course, it is possible that an individual specifically does something because he thinks it is mortal rather than venial. Even in that case I do not think it would be a venial sin that is upgraded to mortal, but an entirely different nature of sin of abandonment of God and breaking the first commandment that would be mortal assuming a mortal sin occured.

An act is either objectively grave matter or not. If it is not grave matter than it can not be a mortal sin. There can be other things occuring within the act that is being commited that might be grave matter, but the nature of the act does not change from non-grave to grave.

[Egidio]

As always, it is not so black and white.

First of all let us deal with the act itself. One must remember that while there are acts which are intrinsically evil, (i.e. there is never a licit reason to carry them out), there are other actions which are sometimes sinful and sometimes meritorious.
An example: to kill a man in cold blood is sinful, to kill a man in order to defend your family (when there is no other option of course), is laudable; or to participate in the conjugal act outside of marriage is sinful, while inside the marital bond, it is holy.

Now for knowledge and consent: if i were to eat a big fat juicy steak on Good Friday, not realising that it was in fact Good friday, would i be sinning? [b]Materially [/b]yes, but [b]Formally[/b] no! If however I thought it was Good Friday, and with full consent i ate another big fat juicy steak, not caring in the least that according to my conscience it was Good friday, even though in actuallity it was not Good Friday, would I be sinning? [b]Materially[/b] no, but [b]Formally[/b] [b]YES[/b]!!!!

And it is the formal sin, and not the material sin, that offends God!

The same kind of thinking can be applied to venial vs mortal sin. If I commit a sin, which by use of my [i]antecedent[/i] conscience, (i.e. knowledge or apparant knowledge of the morality of the act before the act is consented to) I hold as a mortal sin, is it a grave sin? [b]Materially[/b] no, but [b]Formally.[/b]......you guessed it....[b][u][i]YES!![/i][/u][/b] And vice versa.

As has already been stated, this does not apply to those whose reasoning functions are somewhat impaired, eg. a scrupulous person, who often sees sins where there is no sin. There is also the issue of vincible and invincible ignorance, but i'm sure all you theologians already understand all that.

Hope I haven't confused you more than before.

[color=#0000ff][size=5][font=tahoma,geneva,sans-serif]AVE MARIA![/font][/size][/color]

[Jaime]

[quote name='carmenchristi' timestamp='1346941339' post='2479383']
I believe BarbaraTherese already stated what I was going to say: It's not so much an "upgrade" (geez, sounds like we're trying to sell something) of a venial sin, it is a different sin altogether i.e. the act of willfully turning away from God and deliberately doing something that is believed to be a grave offence.

The contrary is also true. If I do not know (honestly, and through no fault of my own) that something constitutes grave matter then I cannot commit a mortal sin.

This is what "obeying the certain judgement of his conscience" translates to.

That said, we also have a moral obligation to educate and form our consciences.
[/quote]


And to add, it needs to be clear that things of grave matter are from the 10 commandments.

[BarbTherese]

No theologian sitting here for sure!
Re formal and material sin, it would be helpful to have a definition. Be this as it may, non grave matter, remains non grave matter under any and all circumstances and if there is no grave matter, there can be no mortal sin; however, the intention of the heart may constitute grave matter. I am presuming only that "material" is the non grave (or grave) matter and "formal" is the intention/motivation etc. involved?
The problem with all branches of theology at times can be is that only theologians can understand leaving the rest floundering and on a subject that may be important, even vital, to all levels and qualifications in The Church. And I am pretty low down on the understanding scale of things most everywhere.

Grave matter is indeed constituted by the 10 commandments and remembering what Jesus has said : Matthew Ch5 " [url="http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=47&ch=5&l=27#x"][27][/url] You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart. " We are called to live in the spirit of The Law in thought, word and deed.

Edited September 8, 2012 by BarbaraTherese