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.”

Just How Liberal Are Those Arts?

As a frequenter of the Ryan
Catholic Newman Center
, I’m always happy to pass along information about his
ministry and its continuation. This, however, would warrant posting anyhow. The
sad fact is that some of the abuses reported can be found in Newman Clubs at such
schools as Colorado School of Mines (a non-Catholic school and thus left out of
the study). [It has been brought to my attention that the specific ills mentioned
on the site are not found in the Mines Newman Club. However, my source assured me
that there’s plenty of cafeteria Catholicism to worry a loyal Newmanite.]

Watchdog
group exposes Catholic campus scandals

“Washington, Apr. 30 (CWNews.com) – An independent Catholic group has released a
report of scandals at Catholic colleges in the US, noting that the detailed information
‘is certain to reignite concerns about the colleges’ religious character.'”

Criminalizing Reproval

Do we hate the sin of sodomy? Absolutely. We also hate other sins like pride, greed, envy, wrath, gluttony, and sloth. Will it soon be illegal to call something what it is? Will future Canadians be unable to call a drunkard a drunkard? a murderer a murderer? a corrupt leader corrupt?

Canadian Parliament passes homosexual hate crime bill

"Ottawa, Apr. 29 (LifesiteNews.com/CWN) – On Wednesday the Canadian Senate voted 59-11 for final passage of homosexual hate crime bill C-250 which places the undefined term ‘sexual orientation’ into Canada’s already contentious hate crime legislation. The new provision in the criminal code could readily open up prosecution of individuals and groups who express views considered by courts to be ‘publicly inciting hatred.’"

Go Methodists!

I hope the orthodox/traditional Methodists win out over the heterodox/progressive
elements.

Methodists
Order Review of Lesbian Case

By JOE MANDAK, Associated Press Writer

PITTSBURGH – United Methodists ordered their top court to review the case of a lesbian
pastor after the court ruled Saturday that gay sex violates Christian teaching.

The denomination’s General Conference voted 551-345 to direct the Judicial Council to review the case of the Rev. Karen Dammann, whose avowed homosexuality led to church charges of committing practices “incompatible with Christian teaching.”

Methodist
Court Says Gay Clergy Prohibited

Wash. Pastor Can Remain, for Now
By Alan Cooperman, Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 2, 2004; Page A22

“The highest court in the United Methodist Church ruled yesterday that church law
unambiguously says the practice of homosexuality is ‘incompatible with Christian
teaching’ and a ‘chargeable offense’ for Methodist ministers.”

Bold Voice

Teen
Punished for Speaking Against Homosexuality Wants Apology

By Jim Brown
April 29, 2004

“(AgapePress) – A Christian student is asking his Boone, North Carolina, high
school to apologize for censoring his opposition to a pro-homosexual event on campus.”

Unfortunately for this lad, court precedent says that a public school has the right
to enforce dress codes. His shirt could be construed as being in violation of his
school’s dress code. Besides, the message was a bit harsh. We’re not likely to win
back too many homosexuals to right living by telling them they’re going to hell.
Yes, homosexuality is a sin, but we’re all guilty of sins and some are pretty nasty.
And unless we’re saints, we’re not confessing them all (privately or publicly).
I like the kid’s idea though. Someone should stand up for Christian sexual ethics.
If gays can “speak” their minds during the Day of Silence, we should be
free to “speak” ours, through t-shirts or other means. The trick is to
do so compassionately.

Free Will

Nancy Pelosi has joined John Kerry in his public defiance of the Church, on the
grounds “that every person has a free will and has the responsibility to live
their lives in a way that they would have to account for in the end.” This
is not an untrue statement, but it neglects to mentioned informed conscience and
obedience. Scripture and Tradition are pretty clear on correct response to doctrine.
Here’s a repost of a relevant article. I’ve spewed enough vitriol for now. I’ll
leave it in the hands of the Church and pray.

What
Vatican II did, and didn’t, teach about conscience

Elections and voting booths are never `faith-free’ zones

“Vatican II must be the most widely praised and rarely followed council in
Catholic history – at least when it comes to candidates and voters.”

Catholics who appeal to the “spirit of Vatican II” and claim to be following their consciences when they ignore Catholic teaching on issues of vital public importance would be wise to revisit what the council actually said.