The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that three conditions must exist for a sin to be mortal.

1859 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.

Now my question is, what constitutes "Full Knowledge," with regard to sin as state above?

Does full knowledge require understanding?

In other words, a Catholic tells another Catholic who has left the Church, that it is a mortal sin for him to leave the Church for another denomination.

Does this equate full knowledge and presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act?

Thanks in Advance.

Jim

Hi Jim,

Good to see you posting here again.

My understanding of "full knowledge," here, is that it means one knows something is gravely wrong or evil. Presumably, this would also entail a personal understanding of this matter -- why it is wrong or harmful, rather than just accepting that it is wrong because someone else (even the Magisterium or Scripture) says so. Some would disagree with the latter point, but, to me, this is entailed in any act of full-hearted and full-minded rejection of God.

Keep in mind, however, that knowledge of grave matter and full consent of the will do not fully qualify an act as a mortal sin. Situation must also be considered. E.g., it's considered a mortal sin to kill another person, though doing so in self-defense is not a mortal sin. Same goes for missing Mass on Sunday if one is sick. Circumstance and situation must also be considered when someone leaves the Catholic Church (or resists becoming part of it, as the case may be).

Hope this helps.

Phil,
your explanation is pretty much what I've been coming to the more I've been studying it.

The enternal truths given in the Ten Commandments are not difficult to understand, for I beleive they're written on the hearts of men.

This question all came up in another Catholic forum, in a debate about when a Catholic leaves the Catholic Church, but finds Christ in another, is still in mortal sin.

My arguement is that it would not necessarily constitute mortal sin, because that person would not have full knowledge that the Catholic Church is the one true Church established by Jesus Christ, despite being told so. Unless he is able to understand it and see the truth in it, his culpability would be less than what mortal sin would require.



Thanks
Jim

That makes sense, Jim.

I found this article, which addresses the very question you raised. See what you think.

Thanks Phil, the article says a lot


Jim

BTW Phil, do you have information on who
Red de la Rosa is?

The link only says he teaches philosophy at a universiity.

Jim

I don't know, Jim. Maybe it's a pseudonym? Hard to say. His little essay is well-done, however.

Jim, Phil,

I don’t know whether I agree with you that God cannot be grasped except through love.

A lot of guys in foxholes have grasped God --with love not being the predominant or prevalent motivator nor cognitive understanding of the soldier regarding the nature of God.

Also, the church acknowledges imperfect contrition (I believe meaning fear- based) as viable contrition --- thereby a viable grasping of God.

While certainly God is love and the FULLNESS of understanding will cast out all fear. (Perfect love casts out all fear). There is a growth in that understanding that occurs. St. Bernard, in his 83rd sermon on the Song of Songs describes the difference between the love of a servant, the love of an obedient son and the mystical love of a bride.

Also, there is a culpability to not opening one’s self to growth in that understanding. One can reject the Gospel and be considered accountable-- can he not?

Therein lies the judgment-- the light came into the world but men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were wicked.

‘Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom’ in my mind implies that there is a growth process applicable and an openness to that process applicable. We indeed have free will. To excuse or deny the culpability of sin until one FULLY realizes the goodness of God is incorrect.

Natural law itself has bearing on the morality of one’s actions whether or not the fullness of the nature of God‘s love is currently realized.


I haven’t taken the time to pursue catechetical sources but the above is top of my head.

Pop-pop

p.s. to Phil; Pop-pop-pop is for great grandfathers. That was how my dad was called. And regarding the local realization in my parish of the Yahweh thing (I hope I have not offended any Jewish readers by not writing YHWH) I don’t know what the music ministers in my parish know or not about the ruling -- and I won’t be informing them. Who knows-- maybe they like You Are Near enough to commit venial sin. Or would that be serious enough matter to be mortal? Are they fully grasping that God is love and the fullness of God‘s PC thoughts?

p.s. to all: St. Bernard’s 83rd Sermon is SUPER beautiful and inspiring. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT

Hi Pop-Pop.


The term, "God can not be grasped, except through love," comes from the book, "The Cloud of Unknowing."

What you describe in foxhole conversions are toward belief, but not necessarily revelations of faith, which come from God himself.

The term from the Cloud, is about those who grow in faith and develope a relationship with God in contemplation.

St. John of the Cross describes God wounding our souls with love.

"Where have you hidden,

Beloved, and left me moaning?

you fled like the stag

after wounding me;

I went out calling you, but you were gone. "

The Saint says that as a lover takes on the characteritics of the one he loves, so too does the one who enters into a relationship with Christ take on the characteristics of loving as He does.

Whatever we receive from God is through love. Without love, we do not have faith in God, regadless of how much religion we devote ourselves to.

Jim

Jim,

I really like the Cloud and SJOC & STA.

I agree with what you have posted regarding love and contemplation.

What you state is the cream, the essence. But, to my thinking it is subset of the fullness of the Gospel. The best of it surely.

But, the fullness of the Gospel allows for lesser degrees of knowledge and love of God being possible and acceptable for salvation. Even predominantly fear-based. Again, St. Bernard expounds on this beautifully in his 83rd Sermon on Song of Songs. He too, like St. John of The Cross, expounded on the Song of Songs.

STA in her Interior Castle differentiates a first mansion stage of growth from a seventh.

Infused contemplation attends growth beyond the third mansion, nevertheless folk in the first three mansions, and perhaps therefore not contemplatives, are viable members of the mystical body and no less participants in its life force and no less citizens of the kingdom of God.

I am uncomfortable with neglecting to express fullness. Not all readers and posters are at equivalent places in their prayer life / spiritual growth.

Pop-pop (OCDS-ish)

quote:

But, the fullness of the Gospel allows for lesser degrees of knowledge and love of God being possible and acceptable for salvation.

Of course.

Infused Contemplation is the most we can achieve here on earth, but as St Teresa of Avila and St John of the Cross state, few reach spiritual union with God in this life.

I believe Pope Benedict's latest statements on purgatory, show that it's not a state, but a process.

So, for me, it's continued growth toward union with Christ for those who still had impediments to union here in this life.

Jim

quote:

Originally posted by pop-pop:
... Again, St. Bernard expounds on this beautifully in his 83rd Sermon on Song of Songs.

For those who are interested, here is a copy:

http://www.pathsoflove.com/ber...fsongs/sermon83.html

Thanks Pop-pop.