 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1212 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 27th, 2007 10:43 am |
|
| I have a question about mortan/venial sin. Yesterday, at work, the boss told me to tell someone calling on the phone that she was "on another line and couldn't talk" but of course she wasn't. I would have said she was unavailable, but she was in hearing distance. Is this mortal or venial? I knew I was telling a lie when I did it. Today I want to go to mass but am a little worried about receiving the Holy Eucharist without confession. I don't think it was grave matter to anyone except me!
|
|
|
Juan
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 17th, 2006 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 247 |
| First Name: | unregister | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | unregister |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 27th, 2007 11:23 am |
|
I have a question about mortan/venial sin. Yesterday, at work, the boss told me to tell someone calling on the phone that she was "on another line and couldn't talk" but of course she wasn't.
Do you know for certain that she wasn't doing business with someone on hold?
I would have said she was unavailable, but she was in hearing distance. Is this mortal or venial?
In my opinion, it doesn't have to be mortal or venial. In this day and age, "I'm on another line" is euphemism for "I'm busy" or "I'm unavailable". It is essentially, a form of political correctness. Your boss was embarrassed to tell the client that she was of little importance. Therefore, she sought to save her client's feelings by perhaps pretending she was on the line with another client.
I knew I was telling a lie when I did it.
If its a lie, then its a venial sin because it was a lie by another person which was intended to save someone's feelings. Therefore, it was a lie based on good intentions which you were forced to convey against your will. Therefore it is a venial sin, if at all.
Today I want to go to mass but am a little worried about receiving the Holy Eucharist without confession. I don't think it was grave matter to anyone except me!
You may receive the Holy Eucharist even with mortal sin on your soul, as long as you intend to go to confession soon after.
But in my opinion, it is venial sin. The act of participating in Mass cleanses that sin and so does participating in the Eucharist.
I'm sure that God is pleased that you consider Him in all you do. Keep up the good work.
Sincerely,
Juan
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4981 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 27th, 2007 12:14 pm |
|
Credo Catholic wrote: I don't think it was grave matter to anyone except me!
The commandment does not tell us not to lie. It tells us not to bear false witness. In other words, it is a grave sin to testify falsely against someone in court, or to report that someone committed a crime when they didn't. It is a grave sin to withhold evidence that could acquit someone, or to allow another to be punished unfairly.
It is not a grave sin to tell a "white lie". At worst, it is a venial sin. I agree with Juan.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 877 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 28th, 2007 02:44 am |
|
Juan wrote:
You may receive the Holy Eucharist even with mortal sin on your soul, as long as you intend to go to confession soon after.
Juan, I have heard just the opposite on EWTN. Before the Mass, one of the priests says that one must not receive the Eucharist without proper Sacramental Confession if they have committed mortal sin. And in other discussions on this forum, I have read the same thing. It is my understanding that according to Catholic dogma, is a Catholic has committed mortal sin and partakes of the Holy Eucharist, they are taking Communion in an unworthy manner such as Paul the Apostle says in his letter.
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1714 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 28th, 2007 08:41 am |
|
Marsha, first I want to confirm what the others have told you: what you relate is not a grave matter, so it cannot be more than a venial sin on that account. Also, you felt some pressure by your boss’ physical presence to repeat what she said word for word; this means that you were not in complete control of your actions and therefore could not have sinned mortally, even if it had involved grave matter.
It is good that you feel some pangs of conscience. This shows that you have an awareness of sin, which many people today do not have. Yes, you can use this incident as valid matter for confession. Or you can expiate your sin by the other means offered by the Church for venial sin. Participation in the Mass, including especially the penitential rite and communion itself, is one of these means. Private prayer (especially using indulgenced prayers) and small sacrifices and penitential acts, such as fasting or the works of mercy, are other ways to accomplish this.
Darlene, there is a sense in which Juan is theoretically right concerning the reception of communion after committing a mortal sin when one does not have an opportunity to receive the sacrament of penance. But in practical terms, it almost never applies, so I would agree with you and EWTN that it is not sound moral ground to receive communion after committing a mortal sin until one has been to confession.
The reason for this is that if one has committed a mortal sin, this severs the person’s union with God. While it is possible, through the grace of God, to then repent with perfect contrition (out of love for God rather than fear for one’s salvation; this is the condition of forgiveness without first receiving the sacrament of penance), this is of rather difficult and rare occurrence from a state of mortal sin, and to presume that one has in fact fulfilled the conditions for forgiveness may in practice be an exercise in facile self deception. Much better to play it safe and wait, thus avoiding sacrilege.
David
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4981 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 28th, 2007 10:38 am |
|
Darlene wrote: Juan wrote:
You may receive the Holy Eucharist even with mortal sin on your soul, as long as you intend to go to confession soon after.
Juan, I have heard just the opposite on EWTN. Before the Mass, one of the priests says that one must not receive the Eucharist without proper Sacramental Confession if they have committed mortal sin. And in other discussions on this forum, I have read the same thing. It is my understanding that according to Catholic dogma, is a Catholic has committed mortal sin and partakes of the Holy Eucharist, they are taking Communion in an unworthy manner such as Paul the Apostle says in his letter.
Darlene, I agree with both of you and Juan. (Isn't that diplomatic of me?)
In extreme circumstances, Juan is correct. For example, a soldier preparing to go into battle, who is truly contrite for any mortal sins he has committed and who, because of the number of penitents or the lack of time, is unable to receive sacramental absolution prior to the battle, should not refrain from receiving Eucharist. However, he should firmly intend to confess as soon as possible. The same would be the case if a priest happened to be celebrating mass on the deck of the Titanic, or on one of the planes flown by the /11 hijackers, or for a person facing major surgery who is being brought communion by a deacon or EMHC. The four common elements are the immediate danger of death, no opportunity to confess, true contrition, and a firm intention to confess as soon as possible.
In our normal, day to day lives, these situations obviously do not exist. One who has committed a mortal sin should not receive Eucharist without first obtaining sacramental absolution.
God forgives our sins, so it is possible for mortal sins to be forgiven without confession. However, God has also chosen to make confession the [i[normal method of forgiveness. As members of the Catholic Church, we submit to God's will and seek forgiveness from the Church unless it is impossible to do so under the circumstances.
Last edited on Sat Jul 28th, 2007 10:42 am by CajunRick
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Juan
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 17th, 2006 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 247 |
| First Name: | unregister | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | unregister |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 28th, 2007 02:33 pm |
|
Sorry for the confusion. Here's the canon law according to Catholic Answers:
The 1983 Code of Canon Law indicates that the same requirement applies today. "A person who is conscious of a grave sin is not to . . . receive the body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession unless a grave reason is present and there is no opportunity of confessing; in this case the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible" (CIC 916).
http://www.catholic.com/library/Who_Can_Receive_Communion.asp
I guess I focused too much on the last sentence:
the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible"
Thanks for the wonderful support guys. You're statements are correct, but I was essentially wrong. As all of you said, unless there is grave reason, one must not take communion without confession if mortal sin is on their soul.
Sorry,
Sincerely,
Juan
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 4981 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 28th, 2007 04:16 pm |
|
Juan wrote: The 1983 Code of Canon Law indicates that the same requirement applies today. "A person who is conscious of a grave sin is not to . . . receive the body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession unless a grave reason is present and there is no opportunity of confessing; in this case the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible" (CIC 916).
The full canon reads:
916. A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.
I point this out because it also includes a prohibition against a priest celebrating mass in a state of mortal sin. That subject has come up on the forum before. It doesn't invalidate the mass, but it is a sin of sacrilege on his part.
There is a rather obvious omission in that the canon refers only to the Body of the Lord and not to the Precious Blood, which obviously indicates that it is a holdover from the earlier edition of canon law. The absence of the word "Blood" should not be taken to mean that it's OK to drink from the cup.
Also, I don't think the gravity of this situation should be underestimated. In order to receive Eucharist while in a state of mortal sin, one would truly have to be in a situation where confession is impossible and there is a real danger of death. In other threads we have taken the word "grave" to indicate a much lower level of severity but in this case, the gravity cannot be overstated.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Lee
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | Birmingham, Alabama USA |
| Posts: | 65 |
| First Name: | Lee | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Charismatic-nondenom.-Presbyterian-Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26th, 2007 11:06 pm |
|
In your posts, Juan, you always strike me as a very loving, humble guy with a servants heart. It seems as though God has done this by His grace and mercy, and that is wonderfu.
Pax Christi tecum (I think that's right??)
Lee
|
|
|
Current time is 08:17 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
