Tag Archives: sin

Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as “an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.”

Sin is an offense against God: “Against you, you alone, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight.” Sin sets itself against God’s love for us and turns our hearts away from it. Like the first sin, it is disobedience, a revolt against God through the will to become “like gods,” knowing and determining good and evil. Sin is thus “love of oneself even to contempt of God.” In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.

It is precisely in the Passion, when the mercy of Christ is about to vanquish it, that sin most clearly manifests its violence and its many forms: unbelief, murderous hatred, shunning and mockery by the leaders and the people, Pilate’s cowardice and the cruelty of the soldiers, Judas’ betrayal – so bitter to Jesus, Peter’s denial and the disciples’ flight. However, at the very hour of darkness, the hour of the prince of this world,126 the sacrifice of Christ secretly becomes the source from which the forgiveness of our sins will pour forth inexhaustibly.

There are a great many kinds of sins. Scripture provides several lists of them. The Letter to the Galatians contrasts the works of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.”

Sins can be distinguished according to their objects, as can every human act; or according to the virtues they oppose, by excess or defect; or according to the commandments they violate. They can also be classed according to whether they concern God, neighbor, or oneself; they can be divided into spiritual and carnal sins, or again as sins in thought, word, deed, or omission. The root of sin is in the heart of man, in his free will, according to the teaching of the Lord: “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a man.” But in the heart also resides charity, the source of the good and pure works, which sin wounds.

Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity. The distinction between mortal and venial sin, already evident in Scripture, became part of the tradition of the Church. It is corroborated by human experience.

Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.

Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us – that is, charity – necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation:

When the will sets itself upon something that is of its nature incompatible with the charity that orients man toward his ultimate end, then the sin is mortal by its very object . . . whether it contradicts the love of God, such as blasphemy or perjury, or the love of neighbor, such as homicide or adultery. . . . But when the sinner’s will is set upon something that of its nature involves a disorder, but is not opposed to the love of God and neighbor, such as thoughtless chatter or immoderate laughter and the like, such sins are venial.

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.”

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.

Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

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.

Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.”

While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.

“Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.” There are no limits to the mercy of God, but anyone who deliberately refuses to accept his mercy by repenting, rejects the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit. Such hardness of heart can lead to final impenitence and eternal loss.

Sin creates a proclivity to sin; it engenders vice by repetition of the same acts. This results in perverse inclinations which cloud conscience and corrupt the concrete judgment of good and evil. Thus sin tends to reproduce itself and reinforce itself, but it cannot destroy the moral sense at its root.

Vices can be classified according to the virtues they oppose, or also be linked to the capital sins which Christian experience has distinguished, following St. John Cassian and St. Gregory the Great. They are called “capital” because they engender other sins, other vices. They are pride, avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth or acedia.

The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are “sins that cry to heaven”: the blood of Abel, the sin of the Sodomites, the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt, the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan,142 injustice to the wage earner.

Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:

– by participating directly and voluntarily in them;

– by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;

– by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;

– by protecting evil-doers.

Thus sin makes men accomplices of one another and causes concupiscence, violence, and injustice to reign among them. Sins give rise to social situations and institutions that are contrary to the divine goodness. “Structures of sin” are the expression and effect of personal sins. They lead their victims to do evil in their turn. In an analogous sense, they constitute a “social sin.”

“Take heed that you are not consumed by one another”

Sean Herriott, of Meet Joe Convert, reminded me of an important topic for Christian bloggers that I’ve mentioned before.

"A sense of superiority –my own need to be right — can actually be completely divorced from truth, and still give one the euphoric feeling that God is on their side. I’m sorry to say that I’ve justified things to myself — and to others — that were not only wrong, but harmful and destructive. I’ve tried to persuade myself and people I knew that my way was right, even when it clearly wasn’t."

In response to the increasing influence blogs are having on culture, Christians must be more vigilant of their true motives and the impressions they make on their fellow man. I’ve seen some ugly back-biting on Christian blogs, much of it perpetrated against fellow Christians. What kind of message does this send to nonChristians? Rey, of The Bible Archive, is also concerned about this.

"For some reason, when people go online and put on the veil of anonymity they tend to ignore any of the rules that govern common society. Civility gives way to sarcasm. Patience gives way to brevity. The tongue is fully unleashed through the fingertips and the typist revels in his own wisdom."

"Brothers and Sisters, this should not be the case with we who believe! We are in the world, yes, but we are not of the world. We are to remain different from the world, keeping the flavor of our profession before men — otherwise what use are we? We must not appear like other men, who professing to be wise do horrendous things in the name of their wisdom, following their own so-called knowledge and desires. Let us stand apart from the crowd evidencing the light of the life of Christ within us. This light is not to be hid, but to shine — not so much the light of ‘my-knowledge’ or self-proclaimed wisdom but the love of Christ that abides in those who are saved."

"Fellow brothers and sisters, I beg you, control your tongues in this public forum. Those words you type are your only testimony here in the virtual world. It is your only tangible evidence of Christ in you — why trample it underfoot and unleash all those prohibitions that are so evident in scripture?"

"I don’t speak of ‘testimony’ only towards those who are in the world. I imagine if they stumbled on one of these sites and saw the way that Christians call each other everything from ‘unwise’ to ‘blaspheming heretic worthy of hellfire’ they would sit in their scorn saying ‘ah, they’re no better than me.’ This is sad in itself. Rather I speak of the fellow believers who may not be as strong as the rest of you. Christ spoke of washing each others’ feet not simply in keeping each other’s doctrine or walk pure, but in loving each other as Christ Himself has loved us, set aside the joy that was before Him and humbly gave Himself for us. "

I now humbly request my fellow Godbloggers to write about this serious issue from their own perspectives. My readership is loyal, but small. This issue must be dealt with by all bloggers who call themselves Christians. The more voices denouncing enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy, and the like and enouraging love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control, the better.

Against the Grain

…as well as 2000 years of Church teaching. According to AP, "the spokesman for the Catholic Church in Spain has said it supports the use of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS." Well, doesn't this makes things interesting?

Church officials in Spain are attempting damage control by telling the press, "Contrary to what some have said, it is not true that the Church has changed its position on condoms." I doubt such back-peddling will make this issue go away.

I'm quite curious to see what Rome does about this little rebellion. Some will argue that a bishop has the authority to instruct the members of his diocese however he pleases, so long as he doesn't go against dogma or infallible pronouncements. This is true. Technically, the injunction against artificial contraception was not declared infallibly. However, three popes have declared such an injunction and as St. Augustine said, "Rome has spoken; the case is closed". Papal encyclicals are authoritative and the instructions therein can only be rescinded by a pope. Others will claim that while the Church speaks authoritatively against using condoms as contraceptions, She has not condemned their use to prevent the spread of AIDS and other diseases. This is flawed reasoning. Sex is intended for reproduction within marriage. Sex outside marriage is unaceptable. If people do not have sex with multiple partners, disease cannot spread. What then of babies born to infected parents? Those infected should refrain from all sexual activity and become "eunuchs for the kingdom". If the infected cease sexual activity and everyone ceases extra-marital sexual activity, the disease will not spread further. Using condoms is like covering a bleeding artery with a band-aid.

Continue reading

Disordered Appetites

Pornography rapes the mind.

“Internet pornography is the new crack cocaine, leading to addiction, misogyny, pedophilia, boob jobs and erectile dysfunction, according to clinicians and researchers testifying before a Senate committee Thursday [November 18, 2004].” – Internet Porn: Worse Than Crack?

For those who suffer from sexual addictions, I have good news. The Order of the Legion of Saint Michael (home to blogs Bro. Bubba’s Journal and Catholics in the Know) has reopened the Catholic Support Group for Sexual Addiction Recovery. CSGAR “is a Catholic group of fellow sufferers from addition to pornography, lust, and sins of the flesh”.

“CSGSAR is a safe place (as a computer discussion group can be) where people with the common bonds of being Catholic followers of Christ and being fellow sufferers of sexual addictions may share and seek support for our struggles with this addiction. We offer resources for ‘Tips on How to Avoid Sin’, advice and remedies given by the Church and the saints, and the fellowship of fellow sufferers. You are not alone.”

Other sources for help are Porn-Free.org, Pure Intimacy, Open-Mind.org, Free in Christ, and Covenant Eyes.

Crimethink?

A couple weeks ago I heard about 11 Christians who were arrested while peacefully
protesting Outfest in Philadelphia. I waited for a few MSM outlets to report it,
but they didn’t. Here are two WorldNetDaily articles about it. I wish I had some
less obviously conservative sources. Any suggestions?

11 Christians arrested at homosexual event
Demonstrators spend 21 hours in jail, charged with felonies

Homosexuals planned Christian harassment
‘OutFest’ organizers announced efforts to block protesters now facing prison

More about crimethink:

Criminalized thoughts?
By Amy Doolittle, THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Jokes about political correctness have been around for more than a decade, and many Americans now take for granted conflicts over manger scenes on public property and Christmas carols in public schools. Hostility toward religious expression is no joke, however, to advocates concerned that “hate crimes” laws could be used to rob Americans of religious freedom, which they say is already the case in some parts of Europe.

Sins of the Fathers

There’s been a lot of buzz in the Catholic blogosphere (blogohemisphere? hemiblogosphere?) about a homosexual couple who enrolled their adopted sons into kindergarten at a Costa Mesa Catholic school. Apparently, parents of some of the other students are having a conniption over this and demanding that only Catholics in good standing be allowed to enroll children in St. John the Baptist School.

Not all of the parents oppose the enrollments and one of them, John Stephens, says most of what I’m thinking.

"As for a moral covenant solution, I just think that most parents in school, if not all of them, are sinners in a lot of ways. I certainly don’t want my kids’ admission into the school to be based on my morality."

"These kids are baptized Catholics, so they’re entitled, therefore, to be members of our parish, which includes going to our school. No one suggested the kids did anything wrong, so I don’t see how anyone could exclude them from the school. Even if you took the position that homosexuality is a bad thing, logically you would want the kids to get a good Catholic education so they could eventually get exposure to the faith on the issue of homosexuality."

Let us suppose that the punishment for the sins of the father should be visited upon the son. Is homosexuality more wrong than adultery? Than contraception? Than abortion? Than taking the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin? Homosexual acts are but one small part of the sin of lust. What of the other six capital sins? Surely nearly every parent of a child at that school is guilty of one or more of them. Should their kids be kicked out? Heaven forbid!

However, the truth is that everyone is responsible for his/her own sins. This was established before Jesus came and pointed out the message of love the Jews had been blind to.

"Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is lawful and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." – Ezekiel 18:19-20

These children have a decent chance of learning the teachings of the Church through their Catholic education, perhaps even witnessing to their parents against homosexuality.

Or at least they had a decent chance until their story made news. Heaven only knows how this will scar them. How many reporters will harass them? How many classmates will torment them? How many parents will look down at them? How many lawsuits might they have to endure? May the Lord bless them and keep them.