amigo2@ihuxq.UUCP (John Hobson) (01/12/84)
Due to several requests that I write something about the degrees of sinfulness (alluded to in my article on St. Augustine), I am posting a summary on the Catholic Church's views on sin (I am writing from a Catholic viewpoint, since that is the church I belong to and was brought up in). Also, they views stated here are not necessarily those of the author, but rather are what I was taught. Catholic theology divides sin into two types: original sin and actual sin. Original sin is the sin that we have inherited from Adam and Eve, and I do not intend to deal with it here. Actual sin is sin that we ourselves commit, and is likewise divided into two types, based on severity--mortal sin and venial sin. Mortal sin is very bad. It "kills" the soul (hence the name). Anyone who dies with a mortal sin on his or her soul goes to Hell (Go to Hell, go directly to Hell, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.) Venial sin is a lesser sin, which "stains" the soul, but does not kill it. According to traditional Catholic doctrine, no number of venial sins can equal one mortal sin, so you don't have to worry about damnation if you just sin venially. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, there are three things that must be done to commit a sin. They are: 1) A serious offense, 2) Sufficient reflection, 3) Full consent of the will. In other words, swiping an apple from the refrigerator of a friend is not sinful, since that is not a serious matter (it may be ill mannered, but not sinful). Also, hitting someone in a sudden fit of rage would also not be sinful, since there is not sufficient time to think about what you are doing; whereas a calculated attack very likely might be. Then again, any action done under duress or when done under a neurotic or psychotic compulsion obviously does not have full consent of the will, and hence cannot be considered sinful. As George Carlin put it so well, "You gotta wanna! In fact, `wanna' is a sin all by itself." Also, if you mistakenly believe that spitting on the sidewalk is sinful, and you do so anyway, then you have committed a sin. Now comes the fun part: what constitutes a mortal sin? Obviously, it must be serious. Furthermore, you must either know or sincerely believe that it is serious. It used to be considered that all sorts of things were mortally sinful--as Carlin goes on to say, "Eating meat on friday used to be a sin, now it isn't any more. But I'll bet there are still people in Hell doing time on the meat rap." Modern Catholic teaching has narrowed mortal sins down to just those which completely and deliberately shut us off from God. If we deny God and everything to do with God, that is mortally sinful (which is why Dave Norris was condemning Tim Maroney to Hell--yes, I know that Dave is not a Catholic). I hope that this brief summary will be helpful. If there are any questions, send them to me, and I will post a follow-up article to the net. John Hobson AT&T Bell Labs Naperville, IL (312) 979-7293 ihnp4!ihuxq!amigo2
amigo2@ihuxq.UUCP (01/23/84)
In answer to several requests that I give the scriptural or other basis for dividing sin into mortal and venial categories, I will endevour to do so here. As I suspected, the real originator of the distinction was St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). He did not base it on scriptural grounds, but rather by analogy to human justice. He started by noting that, in the human world, there is not the same punishment for all crimes. Some are punishable by death, some by imprisonment and/or fines. He considered that this was the way things should be, that there should not be the same punishment for willful murder and for (say) creating a public nuisance. He then went on to say that human justice was a reflection of divine justice, and that God would not punish two sins of obviously different severity in the same way. Hence the differentiation between mortal and venial sin. John Hobson AT&T Bell Labs Naperville, IL (312) 979-7293 ihnp4!ihuxq!amigo2