Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO
Recent Posts
In a Quodlibetal question St Thomas says,A poorly formed conscience does not excuse from sin.
"sometimes an erroneous conscience does not absolve or excuse from sin, namely when the error itself is a sin, proceeding from ignorance of that which someone is able to and obliged to know, as for example, if someone believed fornication to be simply a venial sin, and then, [if he committed fornication], although he would believe that he was sinning venially, he would not be sinning venially, but mortally" (Quodlibetal 8, q. 6, a. 5)
:quality(100)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/lescoopsdelinformation/VVFLECS3CJF5JKHS3TBPQU7S3U.jpg)
No, it's completely out of context. Read St. Thomas above. For the poster to try to parlay this into the notion of there being such a thing as involuntary sin is utterly absurd. Sometimes I feel like I find myself in a cult freakshow among some Trads.Thanks for you answers, I am the one who posted the drunkenness example earlier. The clarification is helpful. Though I still don't have a full understanding on this.
There's literally no reason not to do so. People should be making yearly general confessions anyway, but instead they're reluctant to do it once after a supposed conversion from a lax Novus Ordo life. Ridiculous.I fear that I will become scrupulous if I make general confessions more, so far I have only done it once since my conversion, and everytime I remember a past mortal sin I make sure to confess it at the next confession.
General confessions should be made:
1) before receiving the sacraments of confirmation and matrimony
2) at any important spiritual junction or when turning over a new leaf after a period of sin
3) periodically (St. Francis de Sales says yearly) to reflect on your past life and ensure the validity of your confessions.
Priests should recommend general confessions regularly instead of thwarting them.
I haven’t seen any announcements or posts from Torba apologizing and begging people to come back.Nor I. Apparently it was a low key announcement. Too embarrassing for him to admit he over-played his hand.
Wrong. The act can be mortally sinful (i.e. a pagan who makes fun of Catholicism or is blasphemous), while the culpability/guilt can be non-existent (because the person didn't know any better).
oh, for crying out loud. You don't seem to understand the basic distinction. If "culpability/guilt" is non-existent then the sin is not MORTAL. You seem to be completely unable to distinguish between "grave matter" and "mortal sin". MORTAL SIN (as also mis-used often by the Dimonds Brothers), is called mortal specifically because it extinguishes grace in the soul, i.e. it speaks to the subjective (culpability/guilt) aspect of the sin. To the point of this thread, actions that entail grave matter but of which the individual is not culpable or guilty need not be confessed in the Sacrament of Confession.So you're assuming internal forum guilt of a mal-formed conscience. Got it. Most people growing up in the NO don't now anything else. I grew up thinking simply that this is a Catholic Mass. I could discern bad practices in the NOM, in which I would refuse to participate, i.e. Communion in the Hand, etc., but that's it. I was nearly 30 years old before even the internet was a "thing".
I wrote quite clearly above, that that there could be some culpability (known in most cases only to God) with regard to whether or not the individual sufficiently informed himself.
To extend my example of the $100 bill above. I take $100 off a table (and pocket it), thinking it's mine, though in reality it belongs to someone else. Maybe I should have investigated, or asked around first, but heck if I didn't just have a very similar $100 bill a few minutes earlier, so it never even occurred to me that it just might belong to someone else rather than being my own.
BOTTOM LINE: You cannot commit a grave sin without knowing it to be a grave sin and willing it anyway. Nobody commits a grave sin without knowing it. This is utterly absurd and people have to stop trying to spread that crap. Natural law is known in written in men's hearts and is knowable there, just like the existence of God, and the only way one doesn't know it is by drowning it out. But positive law, such as the requirement to fast on Fridays, or questions like whether the NOM is displeasing to God, those are not. Very many sincere individuals have concluded that the NOM is not offensive to God. I could sit here myself and make a convincing devil's advocate case for the NOM myself, reducing the evils we see to "abuses" of the "pure" NOM.