7. Evil Acts: Sin
The mystery of sin reveals itself as often as man forgets divine love. Personal experience tells us—ahead of revelation—about our impotence to accomplish the good to which we aspire and are called, according to God’s plan. Man is free; thus, he can sin. But by committing sin, he places himself in a situation of helplessness from which he cannot escape unless Christ—the Redeemer—frees him. The need of redemption is a universal experience.
52. False Ideas of Sin
Nonbelievers are aware of most of the phenomena that Christians regard as sin. The evidence for sin can hardly be denied. But some do not believe in free choice; they deny that there is such a thing as self-determination. So they offer deterministic accounts of moral evil, in an attempt to argue that sin is not moral evil.
Some treat sin as a kind of immaturity (“We are not well adjusted,” they say), or as a sickness (“We cannot control our abnormally strong drives”), or as an imperfect stage in the evolutionary process (“We are not so far removed from our subhuman ancestors”), or as ignorance (“We need more education about the consequences of our behavior”). Some others (Nietzsche and Heidegger, for instance) see immorality as a lack of creativity (“We are stodgy”). All these ways of interpreting sin assume that people cannot choose freely.1
53. The Notion of Sin
In order to understand what sin is, one must first recognize the profound relation of man to God. It is only in this relationship that the evil of sin is revealed in its true identity as humanity’s rejection of God and opposition to him, which weighs heavy on human life and history. Only the light of divine revelation clarifies the reality of sin, particularly the sin committed at mankind’s origin: the original sin. Only in the knowledge of God’s plan for man can we grasp that sin is an abuse of the freedom that God gives to created persons so that they might be capable of loving him and loving one another.2 Thus, Sacred Scripture describes sin as an abuse of free choice. For example:
Do not say, “Because of the Lord I left the right way”;
for he will not do what he hates.
Do not say, “It was he who led me astray”;
for he has no need of a sinful man.
If you will, you can keep the commandments,
and to act faithfully is a matter of your own choice (Sir 15:11–12, 15).
Sins are wrong choices; thus, Sacred Scripture adds that sin is primarily in the heart, not in external behavior: “What comes out of a man is what defiles a man.… All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man” (Mk 7:20, 23).
To sin is to do something that one knows one ought not to do, and to do it willingly. It follows that sin is not irrational or compulsive. In order to do anything willingly, one must have an attractive good in view, something that one cares about and deems worth pursuing. A sin is thus an act directed to some real or apparent good. Yet, the sinner’s will is not in line with integral human fulfillment—that is, fulfillment in respect to all the goods in an ideal human community. Instead, the sinner settles for some more limited good; he makes do with what is less, and that is not fully reasonable.
Sin lies in choosing something humanly good in a way that is detrimental to other goods or other persons, instead of in a way that is open to one’s integral human fulfillment. Feelings, not reasons, lead a person to sinfully prefer this good or that, to his real good or ours. Instead of choosing in accord with his knowledge and truth, he chooses against them. He violates conscience. Violation of conscience opens a gap—a lack of correspondence—between choice and the moral truth that is presented by conscience.
It is primarily this privation that is sin’s evil. The privation lies in the lack of agreement between the sinner’s awareness of moral truth and his choice. It is the absence of something that ought to be present. Since the privation is evil, the choice is likewise mutilated and evil.
Because sin is privation, it cannot be overcome by an act of destruction, nor by ignoring it or wishing it away. It can be overcome only by God’s act of re-creation. God must bring something into being—new hearts in those who were sinners and new life in those who were spiritually dead. This is not work that we can do. Yet God makes us cooperators in this work by allowing us to help prepare the ground for it and follow up on it.
Faith is a commitment to cooperate with God in redeeming us. God involves us in our redemption, because he is trying to foster a personal relationship with us, a two-sided relationship that is real communion. That is why he made us free and why he does not simply wipe out our sin without repentance on our part. If our freedom was not engaged, we would be mere objects.
God is not like a foolish, indulgent father who spoils his children by constantly intervening to shield them from the natural consequences of their wrongdoing. On the contrary, respecting our dignity, he lets us bear the consequences of our sins. But because he loves us, he offers us redemption and the chance to cooperate with him in bringing it about. In order to be redeemed from sin, moreover, we must freely accept this opportunity to cooperate with God in his saving work. This requirement is not an imposition by God; it, too, is for the sake of our dignity as free and intelligent beings.
Being a voluntary act, sin can be committed only when one is aware of the evil of the action (at least indirectly), and consents to it (at least indirectly). If a person is not in the least aware that the action is bad, no sin is committed. But there would be sin if the ignorance were due to culpable negligence, as we saw when we studied human acts.
St. Augustine provides two definitions of sin. The first is that sin is a voluntary act contrary to the law of God. Sin implies an infraction of the order that was established by God.3 This infraction harms the sinner first of all, and also harms others. By freely choosing (willing) what one knows to be contrary to God’s loving plan, the person gives to himself the identity of one opposed to this plan, i.e., that of a sinner.
St. Augustine’s second definition of sin is that it is a “turning away from God and veering toward a creature.” Sin implies (at least indirectly) a voluntary separation from God (aversio a Deo), which can be considered as its formal element, and a disorderly conversion to creatures (conversio ad creaturas), which would be the material element. In the case of mortal sin, the first element is punished in hell with the pain of loss, which is the compulsory continuation of that separation, while the second is punished with the pain of sense.
53a) Sin: An Offense Against God
One can sin against other people, but every sin is also against God: “Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in thy sight” (Ps 51:4). Even so, sinners do not harm God. They harm themselves, and they are fools to do so: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction” (Prv 1:7).
God offers us a covenant of salvation, for our good, and for the sake of our human well-being. Thus, sin offends God because, by committing sin, man rejects this salvation and destroys himself. When we do moral evil, we act against God’s good plan for us. In that sense, sin is contrary to his wisdom, his love, and his will.
Even apart from the covenant, one who sins sets aside reason and so implicitly sets aside God, the source of meaning and value. Sinners, as it were, declare their independence of anything beyond themselves, including God. In that sense, too, sin is an offense against God.4
Some suppose that, in order to sin, one must really choose a limited human good over the infinite goodness of God. No one does that—it seldom happens—and so it is easy for some sinning Christians to suppose that they never commit sin. But that is an illusion; it is rationalization and self-deception. Man can choose only among possibilities for human fulfillment. Sin lies in choosing some human good in a way that is detrimental to other goods or persons instead of in a way that is open to true integral human fulfillment.
Very often, when Christians sin, they do not really choose between God and a human good. Rather, they choose here and now to be unfaithful to their covenant relationship with God by choosing a created good in a disorderly manner. When tempted, Christians do not say, “I must either give up what I want or give up God.” Instead they say in effect, “This is what I want right now. Excuse me, God—I’ll be back later.” They experience temptation as an incitement not to reject God entirely but to set aside their relationship with him temporarily. And in a situation of temptation, not even this relationship seems unqualifiedly good.
Like the first sin, every sin is disobedience, a rebellion against God. Sin is thus love of oneself even if it always entails contempt of God. St. Augustine says that this “love of oneself” is a false self-love; true self-love is not in conflict with love of God. If one loves oneself properly, one loves God more, and one who loves God above everything loves himself more than those who love only themselves.
Sin is also a fault against reason, truth, and right conscience. It is a lack of true love of God and love for our neighbor resulting from a perverse attachment to some goods.5
54. Losing the Sense of Sin
Recent popes have denounced the decline or darkening of the sense of sin in some sectors of Christian culture. The causes can be summarized thus:
· Cultural and ethical relativism
· False accusations from a sector of contemporary psychology (the awareness of sin traumatizes people, they say)
· Confusion between morality and legality
· Secularism or lack of religious sense
· Certain trends in the Church, such as the reaction against the unreasonable rigorism of the past and the unwarranted emphasis on eternal damnation, which has encouraged some people to not see sin anywhere or to ignore the punishment for sin6
55. Kinds of Sins
Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault that was freely committed by our first parents. Thus, original sin is that privation of original justice inherited at birth. Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. In that sin, man preferred himself to God. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his status as creature and, therefore, against his own good. As a result, Adam and Eve immediately lost the grace of original holiness. The whole human race is in Adam as one body of one man. All men are implicated in Adam’s sin because of the unity of the human race. “Sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom 5:12). Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. Original sin is transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature that is deprived of original holiness and justice. That is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense. It is a sin “contracted” and not “committed”—a state and not an act.7
All subsequent sin is personal disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness. Personal sin is an offense against God that is committed by the deliberate will of the individual.
The Old Testament—for example, Leviticus in many places—distinguishes between faults, for which expiation is possible, and crimes against the covenant community and its God, which cannot be expiated. The New Testament does not use the words mortal and venial either, but it makes the same distinction even more clearly. Jesus tells his disciples to ask the Father’s forgiveness for their daily trespasses (cf. Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4), but he warns that other transgressions lead to everlasting punishment (cf. Mt 23:33) and seems to speak of some sins as unforgivable (cf. Mt 12:31).8
Sin can be mortal (also called serious or grave) if it destroys sanctifying grace in the soul, taking away its supernatural life. Sin is venial (or light) when it does not destroy sanctifying grace. Thus, it can be forgiven through good actions, which are still possible because the soul is still in the state of grace.9
Sin may be committed against God, against one’s neighbor, or against oneself; although any sin ultimately goes against God and, as a consequence, also against one’s neighbor and self.
There are sins of thought, word, deed, and omission. It can be committed out of (culpable) ignorance, out of weakness (under the influence of a passion that diminishes voluntariness), or out of malice (sheer evil intention, without ignorance or passion: the desire to cause harm).
Sin may be formal (sin proper) or material (done out of invincible ignorance, or under such violence that internal consent is destroyed; in these cases the act is not voluntary and, therefore, not imputable).
Some special sins are grouped under the following names:
· Sins against the Holy Spirit: These sins imply the refusal to accept the salvation that God offers to man through the Holy Spirit, or the radical refusal to accept God’s forgiveness. It is the sin that is committed by the person who claims to have a “right” to persist in evil.10 They include the presumption of being saved without merits, desperation, opposition to Catholic truths known as such, obstinacy in sin, and final impenitence.
· Sins crying to heaven: Their deleterious effects on the social order demand vengeance from above. Included under this heading are homicide (cf. Gn 4:10), sodomy (cf. Gn 18:20; 19:13), the oppression of the weak (cf. Ex 3:7–10; 22:20–22), and withholding of workers’ wages (cf. Dt 24:14–15; Jgs 5:4).11
· Capital sins: These sins are so called because the other sins stem from them, and they are like the heads (capita) of all the other sins.12 The classical enumeration, with very few variations, lists seven capital sins: pride (or vainglory), avarice (or greed), envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth (or acedia).13
56. Mortal Sin
Sacred Scripture clearly states that there really are mortal sins, and that they can be committed without special malice, that is, without explicitly wanting to offend God (cf. Mt 5:22; Rom 6:23; 8:13; 1 Cor 6:9ff; Jas 1:15). The Magisterium of the Church has often referred to them as well.14
Mortal sin (or grievous sin) is the act through which the soul gives itself to creatures to the point of separating completely from its objective last end (God). Man separates himself from God, his ultimate happiness, preferring an inferior good.
The offense that is made to God is grave, the inclination toward the creatures is gravely culpable, and the harm caused to the social order and to oneself is also grave. The consequences are likewise grave: The sinner deserves eternal damnation. Mortal sin destroys charity, a vital principle in us. It needs a new initiative of God’s compassion and a conversion of the heart; this is normally done within the Sacrament of Reconciliation.15 “God created us without us; but he did not will to save us without us.”16 To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults.
Every mortal sin is extremely serious, but not all mortal sins are equally grave. Those opposing the most important goods or virtues are more serious (for example, sins against the love of God and of neighbor). Sins of malice are more serious than sins of weakness. The moral circumstances of the sinner may also affect the gravity of the sin.
For a sin to be mortal, the matter of the transgression must be grave and the act must be fully human. Thus, the following three conditions must be simultaneously met:
i) Serious matter: If the matter is not serious, there is no radical separation from God as last end. For some sins, the matter is always light in itself. For other sins, the matter is serious, but can become light when it is small (for example, the theft of a small amount). For other sins, like lust or blasphemy, the matter is always serious (ex toto genere suo). These sins can be venial only when one of the other two conditions is not present. The Church declares some kinds of acts grave matter; we learn to discern what acts are at odds with faith by listening to the Church.
ii) Full knowledge and advertence: The agent must be fully aware of both the act and its seriously sinful nature. If the ignorance or actual inadvertence is voluntary in its cause, and therefore culpable (because of negligence, a passion willingly followed, or a sinful habit that is not recanted), it does not excuse from mortal sin. A confused advertence is enough for the sin to be mortal; that is, there is no need to clearly foresee all the implications or evil consequences of the act.
iii) Full consent: Full consent exists whenever there is full knowledge and advertence, and one is not subject to violence.
57. Venial Sin
The existence of venial sins is attested in Sacred Scripture (cf. Mt 23:24; Lk 6:41; Jas 3:2; 1 Jn 1:8). The Magisterium of the Church has often referred to venial sin as well.17
Venial sin is essentially a disorder that does not bring man to a total separation from the objective last end.18 It is thus so different from mortal sin that the term sin can be applied to both only in an analogical way. A mortal sin is not a big venial sin; neither can many venial sins add up to a mortal sin.
An action that would be a venial sin in itself can become mortal in the following cases:
· One thinks that it is a mortal sin and still does it, as we saw when we explained the erroneous conscience.
· A seriously evil purpose is sought.
· There is a repetition of venial sins whose matter accumulates (such as when one commits many small thefts, the total amount stolen becomes serious and the sin becomes mortal).
· There is formal contempt.
· It is foreseen that serious harm will arise from the venial sin.
An action that would be a mortal sin in itself can become venial in the following cases:
· The agent acts with an inculpable erroneous conscience.
· The matter is light in itself (like a lie to avoid embarrassment in a trivial situation).
· The matter is light because of its quantity (like a small theft).
· The act is not perfectly human (either full consent or advertence is lacking).
58. Specific Distinction of Sins
Aside from their gravity, sins can be classified according to their kind (species). Sins offend God by breaking different precepts, and are opposed to different aspects of human behavior. Sins are classified into different species in the following cases:
· They are opposed to different virtues or different kinds of obligations. At times, one action is opposed to several virtues and constitutes several sins. Thus, adulterers sin against chastity and justice.
· They are opposed to the same virtue in different ways. Theft and calumny, for example, are opposed to justice in very different ways, and fall into different species.
· They go against formally different commandments, that is, commandments given for different reasons. Thus, a parish priest who fails to say Mass on Sunday would commit a sin against the Sunday precept and another against the commandment to say Mass for his parishioners.
59. Numerical Distinction of Sins
Sins of different species are also numerically different. Thus, robbery with murder would be two sins even if committed at the same time.
The distinction between sins of the same species is not so easy, especially in the case of complex sinful actions. If a thief steals a truck, breaks a store open, and carts away some TV sets, does he commit one sin or three? There are three distinct actions, all with a sinful purpose. If he steals ten sets, does he commit one sin or ten? And if he goes back ten times, stealing one set each night before the robbery is discovered, does he commit one sin or ten?
Since the decision of the will is what constitutes the sin, in principle there will be as many sins as distinct sinful decisions. The following rules can be used to determine the number of decisions:
· There are as many sins as morally distinct objects, even if these correspond to the same decision and are performed in the same action. If a terrorist kills three persons with the same bomb, there are three sins.
· There are as many sins as morally interrupted acts of the will. The act of the will is interrupted when the decision is revoked. If our TV thief repents while on his way to the store, and returns home or goes somewhere else, the act of the will is interrupted. If, later on, he decides to go ahead with the robbery anyway, these are already two different decisions. Voluntarily discontinuing an action is equivalent to a revocation. The act of the will is also considered as morally interrupted if a long time is allowed to elapse before carrying out the action.
In any case, some of these distinctions are not really that useful. At times, it is difficult to analyze actions in this way, especially internal acts. In some cases, these distinctions do not offer an accurate picture of the situation. A typical example would be that of consented bad thoughts repeatedly interrupted by acts of repentance. The repetition of bad thoughts can be interpreted as contempt for the actual graces moving to repentance, and thus it would be more serious than if the bad thoughts had not been interrupted at all. But the moments of repentance can also be considered as showing a certain spirit of struggle, albeit weak, and thus the total gravity would be lesser than for a long uninterrupted bad thought.
Therefore, in practice, these criteria are to be followed:
· At any moment during the performance of the action, one must realize that going ahead would only make things worse.
· During confession, it is better to simply describe things as they happened, and avoid detailed analysis of the actions, which could lead to more temptations—this is the best way to say the exact number.
60. Causes of Sin
The only cause of the sin is the will of the sinner, since a sin is a voluntary act.19 Since the will, by definition, cannot be moved from the outside, the devil can never be the real cause of sin.20 God could certainly move the will of man, but it would be completely impossible for God, who directs everything to himself as to its last end, to cause somebody to deviate from that end.21
The sinful action, insofar as it is something, is caused by God just as any other being. But a sinful action is always a deficient action (the choice of a partial or apparent good); it lacks ordination toward God. Sin is precisely that lack, and it is caused by man. Therefore, God is the cause of the defective action, but not of the sin.22
61. Temptations to Sin
Temptation, in the original sense of test, can be produced by God, as when he tested the obedience of Abraham (cf. Gn 22:1ff).
In the sense of enticement to sin, temptation can never come from God. It always comes from any of the following three causes: the world, the devil, and the flesh.
The world refers here to men and society in general, insofar as they are organized or act without regard for God.
The flesh refers to the internal disorder in man, caused by original sin and aggravated by personal sins. Its main manifestations, as described by St. John, are: “the lust of the flesh,” which encourages man to impurity, intemperance, etc.; “the lust of the eyes,” which encourages him to greed; and the “pride of life,” which is the beginning of all sins (cf. 1 Jn 2:16).
The devil encourages us to sin with strength and skill. We should neither ignore nor be surprised at his action (cf. 1 Pt 5:8; Jas 4:7).
Feeling a temptation is not a sin. Consenting, that is, giving the assent of our will, is.
It is not lawful to arouse a temptation willfully. Putting oneself in danger of committing a mortal sin without serious cause—for example—will already be a serious sin, even if the sin is eventually not committed. It shows that one does not mind seriously offending God, and this is a serious sin in itself.
62. The Effects of Sin
Generally speaking, sin renews and aggravates the four wounds left by original sin: ignorance in the intellect, malice in the will, weakness in the irascible appetite, and disorderly desires in the concupiscible appetite.
Venial sin diminishes the beauty of the soul, makes the practice of charity and the other virtues more difficult, prevents the reception of many actual graces, predisposes man to mortal sin, and brings upon him temporal punishments to be endured in this life or in purgatory.
Mortal sin causes the loss of sanctifying grace. As a consequence, it causes the loss of the infused virtues (faith and hope may remain, but formless and dead), the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and all previously acquired merits (which, however, are recovered with grace when the sin is forgiven). Sin spreads not just within the psyche, but through the whole self. It produces a certain deformity of the soul and remorse of conscience. In addition, man is condemned to eternal punishment. Sin also has an impact on human products—art, technology, even language. It runs through the whole person and, eventually, through society and culture. Sin cannot be kept isolated.
Especially in St. Paul’s and St. John’s writings, sin is often treated not just as a particular act but as an ongoing condition of alienation from God.
Sin is not a passing event. It lasts. Sin is primarily a choice, and choices are spiritual acts that determine the persons who make them. Our choices cause us to be, in moral terms, the kind of persons we are. Thus, sins persist—not just in external consequences but in us.23 The state of sin in which the soul remains after a mortal sin is sometimes called habitual sin.
Guilt is the persistence of sin, not a matter of feelings. It persists until sinners change their minds and hearts—themselves—by repenting. Repenting means a great deal more than simply not repeating sinful behavior.
Sinful choices have further consequences. People who have chosen to do what is wrong find it harder to see what is right. They fail to foresee things that they might and should have anticipated. Their duties are less clear to them. Since the truth is not flattering, they begin to make up stories in its place. The more that intelligent individuals systematically engage in this pastime, the more elaborate their stories become. Ordinary people produce fairly simple-minded rationalizations, but subtle and reflective people living sinful lives have been known to spin out a whole metaphysics or theology to keep the truth at bay.24
62a) Social Sin
Sin turns people into accomplices of one another’s sins. It makes concupiscence, violence, and injustice prevail among men. Sins induce social situations and institutions to run contrary to divine goodness. These structures of sin are the expressions and effects of personal sins; they induce their victims to commit more sins. In an analogical sense, these structures constitute a social sin. Ultimately, social sin is the result of the accumulation and concentration of many personal sins.25
Thus, “social sin” is a reality. It is a mistake, however, to think of social evil, any more than evil on the individual level, as a positive reality to be destroyed by the violent overthrow of the institutions that embody it. Evil as such is privation, which has to be overcome by repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation—emerging from redemptive suffering.
It is also a mistake to displace individual responsibility onto society, and do nothing about it. To deal with this sin rightly, we must repent of our own sins and also do what we can to change the structures and institutions in society that extend sin beyond our individual lives. It is not an either/or situation, as if individual conversion and social reform were alternative options. Christians should have both: the attitude of a devout person who examines his conscience and that of the socially conscious person who tries to make a better world. There is more to Christian life than either “individualistic devotionalism” or one-dimensional “social activism.”26
63. Internal Sins
Internal sins are those sins that do not show externally, except for some effect that accidentally follows from it.
Internal sins are really sins (cf. Mt 5:28). They are not merely spontaneous feelings or ideas that, once rejected, remain simply as temptations, but imply the choice of lingering on these feelings or thoughts. They could be even more dangerous than external sins, because they are more easily committed, are more difficult to avoid, and receive less attention. It is thus interesting to study them more in depth.27
There are three kinds of internal sins: deliberate pleasure (delectatio morosa), sinful joy (gaudium peccaminosum), and evil desire (desiderium pravum).
i) Deliberate pleasure (or “bad thought”) is the complacency in an evil object presented by the imagination without any desire for the object (it is often referred to as “consented bad thoughts” or “imaginations”). The Latin adjective morosa, “lingering,” does not refer to the duration of the complacency, but to the voluntary delay in rejecting the sinful representation.
If the pleasure of “lingering” is produced by the skillful way in which a bad action is done, the delight is about something good, and there is no sin. This is the case of an ingenious robbery or of a “perfect crime” in a detective novel. In some especially slippery or sticky matters, like impurity, this pleasure, though not a sin, is especially dangerous. This is the case of certain off-color jokes.
Deliberate pleasure in a seriously evil action that is represented by the imagination is a mortal sin of the same species as the represented act (even including the circumstances). In confession, however, there is often no need to go into specifics; it may be enough to say that one consented to bad thoughts against charity or chastity.
ii) Sinful joy is the deliberate complacency in some evil action that is really performed by oneself or by others (often referred to as “willfully recalling sinful actions”). It is much more serious than deliberate pleasure, since it implies approving an actual sin. In other respects, the same considerations can be applied to both.
Nevertheless, it is licit to rejoice in the good that may have resulted from a bad action. Thus, one may rejoice in the triumph of a martyr, even if it is a consequence of the bad action of the persecutor, but one cannot rejoice in the evil act itself.
iii) Evil desire is the deliberate complacency in an evil act one intends to do. If the desire is effective or absolute, that is, if there is a real and firm desire to perform the act, it is a sin of the same species and gravity as the sin intended. If the desire is ineffective, that is, without a firm resolve or subject to a condition:
· it is always unwarranted and sometimes dangerous;
· it is not a sin if the condition removes the malice of the act: “I would take this if it were not somebody else’s”;
· it is a sin—venial or mortal depending on its object—if in spite of the condition the desire is still unlawful: “I would steal this if I had not been expressly forbidden to do so.”
64. The Danger of Internal Sins
Internal sins are especially dangerous. As we said before, they are easier to commit and more difficult to avoid. Furthermore, it is easier to conceal them from oneself and from others.
Because of that, a person who refuses to take notice of his internal sins will easily end by deforming his intellect’s moral appreciation. A soul who gives in to critical judgments, lack of charity, reactions of pride, sensuality, envy, or vanity without starting a resolute struggle becomes used to insincerity. Little by little, the soul refuses to acknowledge that these internal sins are the cause of his external reactions of self-centeredness, touchiness, disproportionate fits of anger, indifference for others, or lack of spirit of sacrifice. This path may even lead to committing serious sins, which are not clearly acknowledged because of a habitual lack of sincerity.
65. The Capital Sins
A capital sin (or capital vice) is one that is the source of other sins and vices. These sins—except lust—can be mortal sins but admit of slight matter.28
65a) Pride
Pride (or vainglory) is an inordinate desire for one’s own excellence. The proud person evaluates himself excessively; he demands from others the recognition of his alleged superiority. The pride of a person who admits no subjection to God is called complete pride; it is a mortal sin. In other cases, this sin admits of slight matter.
Pride leads to other vices: presumption, ambition, boasting, hypocrisy, and disobedience.
The remedy for pride is humility. The means to be humble are:
· consideration of our divine filiation,
· meditation on Jesus’ humility,
· contrition,
· sincerity in Confession and spiritual direction,
· self knowledge.
65b) Avarice
Avarice (greed or covetousness) is the inordinate desire of having possessions or riches. There is avarice when the person covets to have more possessions for dishonest purposes or using unlawful means, has an excessive worry to conserve riches, or becomes stingy.
Greed produces the ensuing vices: hardness of heart; disordered anxiety; and use of violence, fraud, and deceit.
The remedies for greed are:
· detachment from earthly goods,
· generosity,
· temperance,
· love for poverty acquired by meditating on Jesus’ poverty,
· considering ourselves the administrators of the goods that God gives us.
65c) Lust
Lust is the inordinate desire for sexual pleasure. God has linked—in human persons—the use of sex and the transmission of life in matrimony. There, man and woman cooperate with the creative love of God in bringing new life to the world. Inordinate use of sex results in loss of the capacity to love. Lust is a mortal sin that admits of no slight matter.
The vices that follow lust are mental blindness, precipitance (acting too rashly), inconstancy, too much attachment to present life and fear of the future, and hatred for God.
The remedies for lust are:
· humble and frequent prayer (having a life of piety),
· frequent reception of the sacraments,
· sincerity in Confession and spiritual direction,
· devotion to our Lady,
· living well the details of temperance and modesty,
· being busy, and working with the right intention,
· avoiding occasions of sin,
· fighting with humility and promptness at the moment of temptation,
· not being scandalized at seeing one’s own miseries.
65d) Envy
Envy is sadness on account of the goods possessed by another, which are regarded as harmful since they diminish one’s own excellence or glory. It is opposed to charity.
The ensuing vices are hatred, slander, detraction, gossiping, reluctance to praise someone when it is due, material discrimination (for instance, in granting a position), and sadness.
The remedies for envy are:
· fraternal charity,
· humility,
· consideration of the evils that result from envy.
65e) Gluttony
Gluttony is an inordinate desire for food and drink. It is usually a venial sin, but may become mortal if the person places himself in grave corporal danger.
The ensuing vices are laziness, mental dullness, excessive talking, and uncleanness of every kind.
The remedies for gluttony are:
· practicing mortification in eating and drinking (temperance),
· presence of God,
· concern for the others,
· avoiding the occasions of sin.
65f) Anger
Anger (or wrath) is that lack of moderation in rejecting things we consider bad that moves us to the inordinate desire for revenge.
The ensuing vices are revenge, malicious thoughts and indignation, abusive speech and quarrels, and even blasphemy.
The remedies for anger are:
· patience, especially considering our Lord’s example,
· having the right intention,
· charity.
65g) Sloth
Sloth (also called acedia) is sadness or sorrow in the face of the effort that is needed to do good. As a consequence of this sin, man tends to evade the demands of work and his duties toward men and God. It is called tepidity or lukewarmness when referred to the effort needed in the ascetical struggle.
Sloth consists in the lack of interest for doing good and regret for having received spiritual gifts (faith, or vocation) because of the effort they entail.29 In a broader and less accurate sense, sloth can be, and is at times, identified with laziness or procrastination.
The ensuing vices are tepidity, negligence in the fulfillment of one’s duties, faint-heartedness when facing a good that is difficult to obtain (like that of the servant who buried the talent [cf. Mt 25:18ff]), despair of salvation, and seeking unlawful compensations.
The remedies against tepidity are:
· intensifying the love of God, and of our Lady,
· a joyful struggle to practice all virtues,
· meditation on man’s eternal reward.
The remedies against laziness are:
· diligence and industriousness (living well the demands of one’s work and practicing good deeds),
· mortification (taking care of the “little things” and setting the “last stones”).
Footnotes:
1. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 159.
2. Cf. CCC, 385–387.
3. Cf. Ibid., 1846–1876.
4. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 154.
5. Cf. CCC, 1849–1850.
6. Cf. John Paul II, Enc. Veritatis Splendor, 53, 55, 88, 98.
7. Cf. CCC, 1852–1853.
8. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 176.
9. Cf. CCC, 385–409.
10. Cf. John Paul II, Enc. Dominum et Vivificantem, 46; CCC, 1864.
11. Cf. CCC, 1867.
12. Cf. Ibid., 1866.
13. Cf. ST, I-II, q. 84, a. 4; CCC, 1866.
14. Cf. DS 780, 1544.
15. Cf. CCC, 1854–1861.
16. St. Augustine, Sermo 169, 11, 13.
17. Cf. DS 228–229, 1536–39, 1573.
18. Cf. CCC, 1862–1863.
19. Cf. ST, I-II, q. 80, a. 1.
20. Cf. Ibid., I-II, q. 80, a. 1.
21. Cf. Ibid., I-II, q. 79, a. 1.
22. Cf. Ibid., I-II, q. 79, a. 2
23. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 152–153.
24. Cf. Ibid., 153.
25. Cf. John Paul II, Ex. Reconciliatio et Poenitentia, 16; CCC, 1869.
26. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 159.
27. Cf. CCC, 1456.
28. Cf. Ibid., 1866.
29. Cf. ST, II-II, q. 35, a. 1.
52. False Ideas of Sin
Nonbelievers are aware of most of the phenomena that Christians regard as sin. The evidence for sin can hardly be denied. But some do not believe in free choice; they deny that there is such a thing as self-determination. So they offer deterministic accounts of moral evil, in an attempt to argue that sin is not moral evil.
Some treat sin as a kind of immaturity (“We are not well adjusted,” they say), or as a sickness (“We cannot control our abnormally strong drives”), or as an imperfect stage in the evolutionary process (“We are not so far removed from our subhuman ancestors”), or as ignorance (“We need more education about the consequences of our behavior”). Some others (Nietzsche and Heidegger, for instance) see immorality as a lack of creativity (“We are stodgy”). All these ways of interpreting sin assume that people cannot choose freely.1
53. The Notion of Sin
In order to understand what sin is, one must first recognize the profound relation of man to God. It is only in this relationship that the evil of sin is revealed in its true identity as humanity’s rejection of God and opposition to him, which weighs heavy on human life and history. Only the light of divine revelation clarifies the reality of sin, particularly the sin committed at mankind’s origin: the original sin. Only in the knowledge of God’s plan for man can we grasp that sin is an abuse of the freedom that God gives to created persons so that they might be capable of loving him and loving one another.2 Thus, Sacred Scripture describes sin as an abuse of free choice. For example:
Do not say, “Because of the Lord I left the right way”;
for he will not do what he hates.
Do not say, “It was he who led me astray”;
for he has no need of a sinful man.
If you will, you can keep the commandments,
and to act faithfully is a matter of your own choice (Sir 15:11–12, 15).
Sins are wrong choices; thus, Sacred Scripture adds that sin is primarily in the heart, not in external behavior: “What comes out of a man is what defiles a man.… All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man” (Mk 7:20, 23).
To sin is to do something that one knows one ought not to do, and to do it willingly. It follows that sin is not irrational or compulsive. In order to do anything willingly, one must have an attractive good in view, something that one cares about and deems worth pursuing. A sin is thus an act directed to some real or apparent good. Yet, the sinner’s will is not in line with integral human fulfillment—that is, fulfillment in respect to all the goods in an ideal human community. Instead, the sinner settles for some more limited good; he makes do with what is less, and that is not fully reasonable.
Sin lies in choosing something humanly good in a way that is detrimental to other goods or other persons, instead of in a way that is open to one’s integral human fulfillment. Feelings, not reasons, lead a person to sinfully prefer this good or that, to his real good or ours. Instead of choosing in accord with his knowledge and truth, he chooses against them. He violates conscience. Violation of conscience opens a gap—a lack of correspondence—between choice and the moral truth that is presented by conscience.
It is primarily this privation that is sin’s evil. The privation lies in the lack of agreement between the sinner’s awareness of moral truth and his choice. It is the absence of something that ought to be present. Since the privation is evil, the choice is likewise mutilated and evil.
Because sin is privation, it cannot be overcome by an act of destruction, nor by ignoring it or wishing it away. It can be overcome only by God’s act of re-creation. God must bring something into being—new hearts in those who were sinners and new life in those who were spiritually dead. This is not work that we can do. Yet God makes us cooperators in this work by allowing us to help prepare the ground for it and follow up on it.
Faith is a commitment to cooperate with God in redeeming us. God involves us in our redemption, because he is trying to foster a personal relationship with us, a two-sided relationship that is real communion. That is why he made us free and why he does not simply wipe out our sin without repentance on our part. If our freedom was not engaged, we would be mere objects.
God is not like a foolish, indulgent father who spoils his children by constantly intervening to shield them from the natural consequences of their wrongdoing. On the contrary, respecting our dignity, he lets us bear the consequences of our sins. But because he loves us, he offers us redemption and the chance to cooperate with him in bringing it about. In order to be redeemed from sin, moreover, we must freely accept this opportunity to cooperate with God in his saving work. This requirement is not an imposition by God; it, too, is for the sake of our dignity as free and intelligent beings.
Being a voluntary act, sin can be committed only when one is aware of the evil of the action (at least indirectly), and consents to it (at least indirectly). If a person is not in the least aware that the action is bad, no sin is committed. But there would be sin if the ignorance were due to culpable negligence, as we saw when we studied human acts.
St. Augustine provides two definitions of sin. The first is that sin is a voluntary act contrary to the law of God. Sin implies an infraction of the order that was established by God.3 This infraction harms the sinner first of all, and also harms others. By freely choosing (willing) what one knows to be contrary to God’s loving plan, the person gives to himself the identity of one opposed to this plan, i.e., that of a sinner.
St. Augustine’s second definition of sin is that it is a “turning away from God and veering toward a creature.” Sin implies (at least indirectly) a voluntary separation from God (aversio a Deo), which can be considered as its formal element, and a disorderly conversion to creatures (conversio ad creaturas), which would be the material element. In the case of mortal sin, the first element is punished in hell with the pain of loss, which is the compulsory continuation of that separation, while the second is punished with the pain of sense.
53a) Sin: An Offense Against God
One can sin against other people, but every sin is also against God: “Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in thy sight” (Ps 51:4). Even so, sinners do not harm God. They harm themselves, and they are fools to do so: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction” (Prv 1:7).
God offers us a covenant of salvation, for our good, and for the sake of our human well-being. Thus, sin offends God because, by committing sin, man rejects this salvation and destroys himself. When we do moral evil, we act against God’s good plan for us. In that sense, sin is contrary to his wisdom, his love, and his will.
Even apart from the covenant, one who sins sets aside reason and so implicitly sets aside God, the source of meaning and value. Sinners, as it were, declare their independence of anything beyond themselves, including God. In that sense, too, sin is an offense against God.4
Some suppose that, in order to sin, one must really choose a limited human good over the infinite goodness of God. No one does that—it seldom happens—and so it is easy for some sinning Christians to suppose that they never commit sin. But that is an illusion; it is rationalization and self-deception. Man can choose only among possibilities for human fulfillment. Sin lies in choosing some human good in a way that is detrimental to other goods or persons instead of in a way that is open to true integral human fulfillment.
Very often, when Christians sin, they do not really choose between God and a human good. Rather, they choose here and now to be unfaithful to their covenant relationship with God by choosing a created good in a disorderly manner. When tempted, Christians do not say, “I must either give up what I want or give up God.” Instead they say in effect, “This is what I want right now. Excuse me, God—I’ll be back later.” They experience temptation as an incitement not to reject God entirely but to set aside their relationship with him temporarily. And in a situation of temptation, not even this relationship seems unqualifiedly good.
Like the first sin, every sin is disobedience, a rebellion against God. Sin is thus love of oneself even if it always entails contempt of God. St. Augustine says that this “love of oneself” is a false self-love; true self-love is not in conflict with love of God. If one loves oneself properly, one loves God more, and one who loves God above everything loves himself more than those who love only themselves.
Sin is also a fault against reason, truth, and right conscience. It is a lack of true love of God and love for our neighbor resulting from a perverse attachment to some goods.5
54. Losing the Sense of Sin
Recent popes have denounced the decline or darkening of the sense of sin in some sectors of Christian culture. The causes can be summarized thus:
· Cultural and ethical relativism
· False accusations from a sector of contemporary psychology (the awareness of sin traumatizes people, they say)
· Confusion between morality and legality
· Secularism or lack of religious sense
· Certain trends in the Church, such as the reaction against the unreasonable rigorism of the past and the unwarranted emphasis on eternal damnation, which has encouraged some people to not see sin anywhere or to ignore the punishment for sin6
55. Kinds of Sins
Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault that was freely committed by our first parents. Thus, original sin is that privation of original justice inherited at birth. Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. In that sin, man preferred himself to God. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his status as creature and, therefore, against his own good. As a result, Adam and Eve immediately lost the grace of original holiness. The whole human race is in Adam as one body of one man. All men are implicated in Adam’s sin because of the unity of the human race. “Sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom 5:12). Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. Original sin is transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature that is deprived of original holiness and justice. That is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense. It is a sin “contracted” and not “committed”—a state and not an act.7
All subsequent sin is personal disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness. Personal sin is an offense against God that is committed by the deliberate will of the individual.
The Old Testament—for example, Leviticus in many places—distinguishes between faults, for which expiation is possible, and crimes against the covenant community and its God, which cannot be expiated. The New Testament does not use the words mortal and venial either, but it makes the same distinction even more clearly. Jesus tells his disciples to ask the Father’s forgiveness for their daily trespasses (cf. Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4), but he warns that other transgressions lead to everlasting punishment (cf. Mt 23:33) and seems to speak of some sins as unforgivable (cf. Mt 12:31).8
Sin can be mortal (also called serious or grave) if it destroys sanctifying grace in the soul, taking away its supernatural life. Sin is venial (or light) when it does not destroy sanctifying grace. Thus, it can be forgiven through good actions, which are still possible because the soul is still in the state of grace.9
Sin may be committed against God, against one’s neighbor, or against oneself; although any sin ultimately goes against God and, as a consequence, also against one’s neighbor and self.
There are sins of thought, word, deed, and omission. It can be committed out of (culpable) ignorance, out of weakness (under the influence of a passion that diminishes voluntariness), or out of malice (sheer evil intention, without ignorance or passion: the desire to cause harm).
Sin may be formal (sin proper) or material (done out of invincible ignorance, or under such violence that internal consent is destroyed; in these cases the act is not voluntary and, therefore, not imputable).
Some special sins are grouped under the following names:
· Sins against the Holy Spirit: These sins imply the refusal to accept the salvation that God offers to man through the Holy Spirit, or the radical refusal to accept God’s forgiveness. It is the sin that is committed by the person who claims to have a “right” to persist in evil.10 They include the presumption of being saved without merits, desperation, opposition to Catholic truths known as such, obstinacy in sin, and final impenitence.
· Sins crying to heaven: Their deleterious effects on the social order demand vengeance from above. Included under this heading are homicide (cf. Gn 4:10), sodomy (cf. Gn 18:20; 19:13), the oppression of the weak (cf. Ex 3:7–10; 22:20–22), and withholding of workers’ wages (cf. Dt 24:14–15; Jgs 5:4).11
· Capital sins: These sins are so called because the other sins stem from them, and they are like the heads (capita) of all the other sins.12 The classical enumeration, with very few variations, lists seven capital sins: pride (or vainglory), avarice (or greed), envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth (or acedia).13
56. Mortal Sin
Sacred Scripture clearly states that there really are mortal sins, and that they can be committed without special malice, that is, without explicitly wanting to offend God (cf. Mt 5:22; Rom 6:23; 8:13; 1 Cor 6:9ff; Jas 1:15). The Magisterium of the Church has often referred to them as well.14
Mortal sin (or grievous sin) is the act through which the soul gives itself to creatures to the point of separating completely from its objective last end (God). Man separates himself from God, his ultimate happiness, preferring an inferior good.
The offense that is made to God is grave, the inclination toward the creatures is gravely culpable, and the harm caused to the social order and to oneself is also grave. The consequences are likewise grave: The sinner deserves eternal damnation. Mortal sin destroys charity, a vital principle in us. It needs a new initiative of God’s compassion and a conversion of the heart; this is normally done within the Sacrament of Reconciliation.15 “God created us without us; but he did not will to save us without us.”16 To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults.
Every mortal sin is extremely serious, but not all mortal sins are equally grave. Those opposing the most important goods or virtues are more serious (for example, sins against the love of God and of neighbor). Sins of malice are more serious than sins of weakness. The moral circumstances of the sinner may also affect the gravity of the sin.
For a sin to be mortal, the matter of the transgression must be grave and the act must be fully human. Thus, the following three conditions must be simultaneously met:
i) Serious matter: If the matter is not serious, there is no radical separation from God as last end. For some sins, the matter is always light in itself. For other sins, the matter is serious, but can become light when it is small (for example, the theft of a small amount). For other sins, like lust or blasphemy, the matter is always serious (ex toto genere suo). These sins can be venial only when one of the other two conditions is not present. The Church declares some kinds of acts grave matter; we learn to discern what acts are at odds with faith by listening to the Church.
ii) Full knowledge and advertence: The agent must be fully aware of both the act and its seriously sinful nature. If the ignorance or actual inadvertence is voluntary in its cause, and therefore culpable (because of negligence, a passion willingly followed, or a sinful habit that is not recanted), it does not excuse from mortal sin. A confused advertence is enough for the sin to be mortal; that is, there is no need to clearly foresee all the implications or evil consequences of the act.
iii) Full consent: Full consent exists whenever there is full knowledge and advertence, and one is not subject to violence.
57. Venial Sin
The existence of venial sins is attested in Sacred Scripture (cf. Mt 23:24; Lk 6:41; Jas 3:2; 1 Jn 1:8). The Magisterium of the Church has often referred to venial sin as well.17
Venial sin is essentially a disorder that does not bring man to a total separation from the objective last end.18 It is thus so different from mortal sin that the term sin can be applied to both only in an analogical way. A mortal sin is not a big venial sin; neither can many venial sins add up to a mortal sin.
An action that would be a venial sin in itself can become mortal in the following cases:
· One thinks that it is a mortal sin and still does it, as we saw when we explained the erroneous conscience.
· A seriously evil purpose is sought.
· There is a repetition of venial sins whose matter accumulates (such as when one commits many small thefts, the total amount stolen becomes serious and the sin becomes mortal).
· There is formal contempt.
· It is foreseen that serious harm will arise from the venial sin.
An action that would be a mortal sin in itself can become venial in the following cases:
· The agent acts with an inculpable erroneous conscience.
· The matter is light in itself (like a lie to avoid embarrassment in a trivial situation).
· The matter is light because of its quantity (like a small theft).
· The act is not perfectly human (either full consent or advertence is lacking).
58. Specific Distinction of Sins
Aside from their gravity, sins can be classified according to their kind (species). Sins offend God by breaking different precepts, and are opposed to different aspects of human behavior. Sins are classified into different species in the following cases:
· They are opposed to different virtues or different kinds of obligations. At times, one action is opposed to several virtues and constitutes several sins. Thus, adulterers sin against chastity and justice.
· They are opposed to the same virtue in different ways. Theft and calumny, for example, are opposed to justice in very different ways, and fall into different species.
· They go against formally different commandments, that is, commandments given for different reasons. Thus, a parish priest who fails to say Mass on Sunday would commit a sin against the Sunday precept and another against the commandment to say Mass for his parishioners.
59. Numerical Distinction of Sins
Sins of different species are also numerically different. Thus, robbery with murder would be two sins even if committed at the same time.
The distinction between sins of the same species is not so easy, especially in the case of complex sinful actions. If a thief steals a truck, breaks a store open, and carts away some TV sets, does he commit one sin or three? There are three distinct actions, all with a sinful purpose. If he steals ten sets, does he commit one sin or ten? And if he goes back ten times, stealing one set each night before the robbery is discovered, does he commit one sin or ten?
Since the decision of the will is what constitutes the sin, in principle there will be as many sins as distinct sinful decisions. The following rules can be used to determine the number of decisions:
· There are as many sins as morally distinct objects, even if these correspond to the same decision and are performed in the same action. If a terrorist kills three persons with the same bomb, there are three sins.
· There are as many sins as morally interrupted acts of the will. The act of the will is interrupted when the decision is revoked. If our TV thief repents while on his way to the store, and returns home or goes somewhere else, the act of the will is interrupted. If, later on, he decides to go ahead with the robbery anyway, these are already two different decisions. Voluntarily discontinuing an action is equivalent to a revocation. The act of the will is also considered as morally interrupted if a long time is allowed to elapse before carrying out the action.
In any case, some of these distinctions are not really that useful. At times, it is difficult to analyze actions in this way, especially internal acts. In some cases, these distinctions do not offer an accurate picture of the situation. A typical example would be that of consented bad thoughts repeatedly interrupted by acts of repentance. The repetition of bad thoughts can be interpreted as contempt for the actual graces moving to repentance, and thus it would be more serious than if the bad thoughts had not been interrupted at all. But the moments of repentance can also be considered as showing a certain spirit of struggle, albeit weak, and thus the total gravity would be lesser than for a long uninterrupted bad thought.
Therefore, in practice, these criteria are to be followed:
· At any moment during the performance of the action, one must realize that going ahead would only make things worse.
· During confession, it is better to simply describe things as they happened, and avoid detailed analysis of the actions, which could lead to more temptations—this is the best way to say the exact number.
60. Causes of Sin
The only cause of the sin is the will of the sinner, since a sin is a voluntary act.19 Since the will, by definition, cannot be moved from the outside, the devil can never be the real cause of sin.20 God could certainly move the will of man, but it would be completely impossible for God, who directs everything to himself as to its last end, to cause somebody to deviate from that end.21
The sinful action, insofar as it is something, is caused by God just as any other being. But a sinful action is always a deficient action (the choice of a partial or apparent good); it lacks ordination toward God. Sin is precisely that lack, and it is caused by man. Therefore, God is the cause of the defective action, but not of the sin.22
61. Temptations to Sin
Temptation, in the original sense of test, can be produced by God, as when he tested the obedience of Abraham (cf. Gn 22:1ff).
In the sense of enticement to sin, temptation can never come from God. It always comes from any of the following three causes: the world, the devil, and the flesh.
The world refers here to men and society in general, insofar as they are organized or act without regard for God.
The flesh refers to the internal disorder in man, caused by original sin and aggravated by personal sins. Its main manifestations, as described by St. John, are: “the lust of the flesh,” which encourages man to impurity, intemperance, etc.; “the lust of the eyes,” which encourages him to greed; and the “pride of life,” which is the beginning of all sins (cf. 1 Jn 2:16).
The devil encourages us to sin with strength and skill. We should neither ignore nor be surprised at his action (cf. 1 Pt 5:8; Jas 4:7).
Feeling a temptation is not a sin. Consenting, that is, giving the assent of our will, is.
It is not lawful to arouse a temptation willfully. Putting oneself in danger of committing a mortal sin without serious cause—for example—will already be a serious sin, even if the sin is eventually not committed. It shows that one does not mind seriously offending God, and this is a serious sin in itself.
62. The Effects of Sin
Generally speaking, sin renews and aggravates the four wounds left by original sin: ignorance in the intellect, malice in the will, weakness in the irascible appetite, and disorderly desires in the concupiscible appetite.
Venial sin diminishes the beauty of the soul, makes the practice of charity and the other virtues more difficult, prevents the reception of many actual graces, predisposes man to mortal sin, and brings upon him temporal punishments to be endured in this life or in purgatory.
Mortal sin causes the loss of sanctifying grace. As a consequence, it causes the loss of the infused virtues (faith and hope may remain, but formless and dead), the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and all previously acquired merits (which, however, are recovered with grace when the sin is forgiven). Sin spreads not just within the psyche, but through the whole self. It produces a certain deformity of the soul and remorse of conscience. In addition, man is condemned to eternal punishment. Sin also has an impact on human products—art, technology, even language. It runs through the whole person and, eventually, through society and culture. Sin cannot be kept isolated.
Especially in St. Paul’s and St. John’s writings, sin is often treated not just as a particular act but as an ongoing condition of alienation from God.
Sin is not a passing event. It lasts. Sin is primarily a choice, and choices are spiritual acts that determine the persons who make them. Our choices cause us to be, in moral terms, the kind of persons we are. Thus, sins persist—not just in external consequences but in us.23 The state of sin in which the soul remains after a mortal sin is sometimes called habitual sin.
Guilt is the persistence of sin, not a matter of feelings. It persists until sinners change their minds and hearts—themselves—by repenting. Repenting means a great deal more than simply not repeating sinful behavior.
Sinful choices have further consequences. People who have chosen to do what is wrong find it harder to see what is right. They fail to foresee things that they might and should have anticipated. Their duties are less clear to them. Since the truth is not flattering, they begin to make up stories in its place. The more that intelligent individuals systematically engage in this pastime, the more elaborate their stories become. Ordinary people produce fairly simple-minded rationalizations, but subtle and reflective people living sinful lives have been known to spin out a whole metaphysics or theology to keep the truth at bay.24
62a) Social Sin
Sin turns people into accomplices of one another’s sins. It makes concupiscence, violence, and injustice prevail among men. Sins induce social situations and institutions to run contrary to divine goodness. These structures of sin are the expressions and effects of personal sins; they induce their victims to commit more sins. In an analogical sense, these structures constitute a social sin. Ultimately, social sin is the result of the accumulation and concentration of many personal sins.25
Thus, “social sin” is a reality. It is a mistake, however, to think of social evil, any more than evil on the individual level, as a positive reality to be destroyed by the violent overthrow of the institutions that embody it. Evil as such is privation, which has to be overcome by repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation—emerging from redemptive suffering.
It is also a mistake to displace individual responsibility onto society, and do nothing about it. To deal with this sin rightly, we must repent of our own sins and also do what we can to change the structures and institutions in society that extend sin beyond our individual lives. It is not an either/or situation, as if individual conversion and social reform were alternative options. Christians should have both: the attitude of a devout person who examines his conscience and that of the socially conscious person who tries to make a better world. There is more to Christian life than either “individualistic devotionalism” or one-dimensional “social activism.”26
63. Internal Sins
Internal sins are those sins that do not show externally, except for some effect that accidentally follows from it.
Internal sins are really sins (cf. Mt 5:28). They are not merely spontaneous feelings or ideas that, once rejected, remain simply as temptations, but imply the choice of lingering on these feelings or thoughts. They could be even more dangerous than external sins, because they are more easily committed, are more difficult to avoid, and receive less attention. It is thus interesting to study them more in depth.27
There are three kinds of internal sins: deliberate pleasure (delectatio morosa), sinful joy (gaudium peccaminosum), and evil desire (desiderium pravum).
i) Deliberate pleasure (or “bad thought”) is the complacency in an evil object presented by the imagination without any desire for the object (it is often referred to as “consented bad thoughts” or “imaginations”). The Latin adjective morosa, “lingering,” does not refer to the duration of the complacency, but to the voluntary delay in rejecting the sinful representation.
If the pleasure of “lingering” is produced by the skillful way in which a bad action is done, the delight is about something good, and there is no sin. This is the case of an ingenious robbery or of a “perfect crime” in a detective novel. In some especially slippery or sticky matters, like impurity, this pleasure, though not a sin, is especially dangerous. This is the case of certain off-color jokes.
Deliberate pleasure in a seriously evil action that is represented by the imagination is a mortal sin of the same species as the represented act (even including the circumstances). In confession, however, there is often no need to go into specifics; it may be enough to say that one consented to bad thoughts against charity or chastity.
ii) Sinful joy is the deliberate complacency in some evil action that is really performed by oneself or by others (often referred to as “willfully recalling sinful actions”). It is much more serious than deliberate pleasure, since it implies approving an actual sin. In other respects, the same considerations can be applied to both.
Nevertheless, it is licit to rejoice in the good that may have resulted from a bad action. Thus, one may rejoice in the triumph of a martyr, even if it is a consequence of the bad action of the persecutor, but one cannot rejoice in the evil act itself.
iii) Evil desire is the deliberate complacency in an evil act one intends to do. If the desire is effective or absolute, that is, if there is a real and firm desire to perform the act, it is a sin of the same species and gravity as the sin intended. If the desire is ineffective, that is, without a firm resolve or subject to a condition:
· it is always unwarranted and sometimes dangerous;
· it is not a sin if the condition removes the malice of the act: “I would take this if it were not somebody else’s”;
· it is a sin—venial or mortal depending on its object—if in spite of the condition the desire is still unlawful: “I would steal this if I had not been expressly forbidden to do so.”
64. The Danger of Internal Sins
Internal sins are especially dangerous. As we said before, they are easier to commit and more difficult to avoid. Furthermore, it is easier to conceal them from oneself and from others.
Because of that, a person who refuses to take notice of his internal sins will easily end by deforming his intellect’s moral appreciation. A soul who gives in to critical judgments, lack of charity, reactions of pride, sensuality, envy, or vanity without starting a resolute struggle becomes used to insincerity. Little by little, the soul refuses to acknowledge that these internal sins are the cause of his external reactions of self-centeredness, touchiness, disproportionate fits of anger, indifference for others, or lack of spirit of sacrifice. This path may even lead to committing serious sins, which are not clearly acknowledged because of a habitual lack of sincerity.
65. The Capital Sins
A capital sin (or capital vice) is one that is the source of other sins and vices. These sins—except lust—can be mortal sins but admit of slight matter.28
65a) Pride
Pride (or vainglory) is an inordinate desire for one’s own excellence. The proud person evaluates himself excessively; he demands from others the recognition of his alleged superiority. The pride of a person who admits no subjection to God is called complete pride; it is a mortal sin. In other cases, this sin admits of slight matter.
Pride leads to other vices: presumption, ambition, boasting, hypocrisy, and disobedience.
The remedy for pride is humility. The means to be humble are:
· consideration of our divine filiation,
· meditation on Jesus’ humility,
· contrition,
· sincerity in Confession and spiritual direction,
· self knowledge.
65b) Avarice
Avarice (greed or covetousness) is the inordinate desire of having possessions or riches. There is avarice when the person covets to have more possessions for dishonest purposes or using unlawful means, has an excessive worry to conserve riches, or becomes stingy.
Greed produces the ensuing vices: hardness of heart; disordered anxiety; and use of violence, fraud, and deceit.
The remedies for greed are:
· detachment from earthly goods,
· generosity,
· temperance,
· love for poverty acquired by meditating on Jesus’ poverty,
· considering ourselves the administrators of the goods that God gives us.
65c) Lust
Lust is the inordinate desire for sexual pleasure. God has linked—in human persons—the use of sex and the transmission of life in matrimony. There, man and woman cooperate with the creative love of God in bringing new life to the world. Inordinate use of sex results in loss of the capacity to love. Lust is a mortal sin that admits of no slight matter.
The vices that follow lust are mental blindness, precipitance (acting too rashly), inconstancy, too much attachment to present life and fear of the future, and hatred for God.
The remedies for lust are:
· humble and frequent prayer (having a life of piety),
· frequent reception of the sacraments,
· sincerity in Confession and spiritual direction,
· devotion to our Lady,
· living well the details of temperance and modesty,
· being busy, and working with the right intention,
· avoiding occasions of sin,
· fighting with humility and promptness at the moment of temptation,
· not being scandalized at seeing one’s own miseries.
65d) Envy
Envy is sadness on account of the goods possessed by another, which are regarded as harmful since they diminish one’s own excellence or glory. It is opposed to charity.
The ensuing vices are hatred, slander, detraction, gossiping, reluctance to praise someone when it is due, material discrimination (for instance, in granting a position), and sadness.
The remedies for envy are:
· fraternal charity,
· humility,
· consideration of the evils that result from envy.
65e) Gluttony
Gluttony is an inordinate desire for food and drink. It is usually a venial sin, but may become mortal if the person places himself in grave corporal danger.
The ensuing vices are laziness, mental dullness, excessive talking, and uncleanness of every kind.
The remedies for gluttony are:
· practicing mortification in eating and drinking (temperance),
· presence of God,
· concern for the others,
· avoiding the occasions of sin.
65f) Anger
Anger (or wrath) is that lack of moderation in rejecting things we consider bad that moves us to the inordinate desire for revenge.
The ensuing vices are revenge, malicious thoughts and indignation, abusive speech and quarrels, and even blasphemy.
The remedies for anger are:
· patience, especially considering our Lord’s example,
· having the right intention,
· charity.
65g) Sloth
Sloth (also called acedia) is sadness or sorrow in the face of the effort that is needed to do good. As a consequence of this sin, man tends to evade the demands of work and his duties toward men and God. It is called tepidity or lukewarmness when referred to the effort needed in the ascetical struggle.
Sloth consists in the lack of interest for doing good and regret for having received spiritual gifts (faith, or vocation) because of the effort they entail.29 In a broader and less accurate sense, sloth can be, and is at times, identified with laziness or procrastination.
The ensuing vices are tepidity, negligence in the fulfillment of one’s duties, faint-heartedness when facing a good that is difficult to obtain (like that of the servant who buried the talent [cf. Mt 25:18ff]), despair of salvation, and seeking unlawful compensations.
The remedies against tepidity are:
· intensifying the love of God, and of our Lady,
· a joyful struggle to practice all virtues,
· meditation on man’s eternal reward.
The remedies against laziness are:
· diligence and industriousness (living well the demands of one’s work and practicing good deeds),
· mortification (taking care of the “little things” and setting the “last stones”).
Footnotes:
1. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 159.
2. Cf. CCC, 385–387.
3. Cf. Ibid., 1846–1876.
4. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 154.
5. Cf. CCC, 1849–1850.
6. Cf. John Paul II, Enc. Veritatis Splendor, 53, 55, 88, 98.
7. Cf. CCC, 1852–1853.
8. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 176.
9. Cf. CCC, 385–409.
10. Cf. John Paul II, Enc. Dominum et Vivificantem, 46; CCC, 1864.
11. Cf. CCC, 1867.
12. Cf. Ibid., 1866.
13. Cf. ST, I-II, q. 84, a. 4; CCC, 1866.
14. Cf. DS 780, 1544.
15. Cf. CCC, 1854–1861.
16. St. Augustine, Sermo 169, 11, 13.
17. Cf. DS 228–229, 1536–39, 1573.
18. Cf. CCC, 1862–1863.
19. Cf. ST, I-II, q. 80, a. 1.
20. Cf. Ibid., I-II, q. 80, a. 1.
21. Cf. Ibid., I-II, q. 79, a. 1.
22. Cf. Ibid., I-II, q. 79, a. 2
23. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 152–153.
24. Cf. Ibid., 153.
25. Cf. John Paul II, Ex. Reconciliatio et Poenitentia, 16; CCC, 1869.
26. Cf. G. Grisez and R. Shaw, Fulfillment in Christ, 159.
27. Cf. CCC, 1456.
28. Cf. Ibid., 1866.
29. Cf. ST, II-II, q. 35, a. 1.