What constitutes grave sin? How can I know if it is ok to receive the Eucharist?

Q: I was told that receiving the sacrament of the Eucharist while in a state of grave sin is a grave sin in itself. I’m constantly worried about whether I am allowed to receive Communion at Mass, and I do make sure I go to confession monthly (or more often). My question is this: How grave must a sin be to have to abstain from the Eucharist? A group of us have discussed this and we got to the idea that you can receive communion if you are truly sorry for your sins, even if you haven’t yet gone to reconciliation for it, and it’s up to ourselves to judge if we’re worthy of receiving or not. Is that true?

A: To keep us from receiving Holy Communion, a sin has to be what we call a “mortal sin.” There are three conditions for a sin to be mortal: It has to have been committed with full knowledge that the action was gravely evil (you can’t commit a mortal sin “by mistake”); it has to be committed with full consent (I didn’t do it because I was afraid or pressured); and it has to involve what is called “grave matter,” which means the action itself has to be serious. Stealing a piece of bubble gum would not be a mortal sin (it would be a venial sin), but stealing a diamond necklace worth half a million dollars would be a mortal sin. Sometimes it’s hard to know if all three conditions have been met. In those cases, the best thing is to go to confession and ask the priest to help you discern, or ask someone who you know and trust and who has good wisdom on these kinds of things. Usually, though, if there is doubt in your mind, it is probably not a mortal sin. But we have to be careful here – it is our responsibility as mature Christians to inform ourselves about what constitutes “grave matter” and what doesn’t. For instance, a lot of people don’t realize that missing Sunday Mass is grave matter. A lot of people don’t think that getting drunk is grave matter either, but it is.

Understanding “Grave Matter”

The basic list of actions that constitute “grave matter” is the Ten Commandments. But it would be impossible to make a list of all permutations of actions in those ten categories. Nevertheless, we can reflect on the underlying reason why something would be considered grave. Whenever we choose something radically opposed to God’s goodness – like murder, fornication, or refusing to praise and thank God by attending Sunday Mass – we are, basically, rejecting God’s friendship. The object of our choice (the “matter” of the sin) is in direct and full opposition to the very heart of God. By choosing it, we are saying to God that we can live without him, that we don’t want him around. In this way, we destroy the theological virtue of charity in our soul. That constitutes a mortal sin, which God will readily forgive if we sincerely repent and go to him in the sacrament of confession. Whenever we give in to temptations that are opposed to God’s goodness in less radical ways – like sleeping in a little longer than necessary, eating a little more than is necessary, stealing small office supplies from an employer for personal use – we aren’t outright severing our friendship with God, but we’re distancing ourselves from him. These actions would not constitute grave matter. In these cases, we’re making small concessions to selfishness that close off certain sectors of our heart from his love and thereby weaken the theological virtue of charity in our soul. That constitutes a venial sin, which God will readily forgive if we sincerely repent even if we don’t go to confession, but which, if left un-repented, could easily snowball into the outright rebellion of mortal sin.

Sins vs Mistakes

Sometimes we have difficulty distinguishing between sins and simple mistakes. If I sincerely forget to send my mom a mother’s day card, I may have strong feelings of regret, but I shouldn’t feel morally guilty about it, I shouldn’t feel remorse. If I do, it’s a sign that my conscience is overactive, or scrupulous. If, on the other hand, I purposely avoid calling my mom on her birthday because I’m nursing resentment about something she said five years ago, then I ought to feel guilty; Christians honor their parents, they don’t hold grudges against them.

Why Communion and Mortal Sin Don’t Go Together

The reason the Church forbids us from receiving Holy Communion when we are in a state of mortal sin is precisely because mortal sin breaks our friendship with Christ. It’s like a divorce – we rebel against him by choosing to do something that pains him deeply; we walk out on him. But Holy Communion is a sacrament of intimate union and love. And so, before we can come back to Communion, we need to be reconciled with the Lord – we need to repent, confess, and receive his forgiveness. This is the point of the sacrament of reconciliation, or confession. (If there is some good reason why I cannot make a good confession before receiving Holy Communion, I can still receive Holy Communion if I make a perfect act of contrition, and if I have the intention of going to confession as soon as I can.) When we commit a venial sin, it’s like getting into an argument with a friend – we offend God, but it is not a total break with him. And so, Holy Communion is actually one of the ways that the Church recommends we use in order to have our venial sins forgiven. In all cases, though, as soon as we realize we have sinned, we should immediately pray to God to forgive us and ask him for help to avoid sinning in the future. God’s mercy is always available – even if we can’t make it to confession for a good reason. But if we can make it to confession, then we should (every confession is like a power-wash of grace for the soul, and it gives great glory to God, and it enhances our spiritual maturity immeasurably). You may be interested in reading what the Catechism has to say about mortal and venial sin, and grave matter. We reproduce it below for you convenience:

IV. THE GRAVITY OF SIN: MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN

1854 Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity. The distinction between mortal and venial sin, already evident in Scripture, became part of the tradition of the Church. It is corroborated by human experience.

1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

1856 Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us – that is, charity – necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation:When the will sets itself upon something that is of its nature incompatible with the charity that orients man toward his ultimate end, then the sin is mortal by its very object . . . whether it contradicts the love of God, such as blasphemy or perjury, or the love of neighbor, such as homicide or adultery. . . . But when the sinner’s will is set upon something that of its nature involves a disorder, but is not opposed to the love of God and neighbor, such as thoughtless chatter or immoderate laughter and the like, such sins are venial.

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.”

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: “Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother.” The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.

1863 Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul’s progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace it is humanly reparable. “Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.” While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call “light”: if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.

1864 “Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.” There are no limits to the mercy of God, but anyone who deliberately refuses to accept his mercy by repenting, rejects the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit. Such hardness of heart can lead to final impenitence and eternal loss.

More indulgence clarification…

Q: Dear Father John, As I read your excellent posts on indulgences. A question occurred to me. If a person were to perform these suggested spiritual exercises without asking for the indulgence, would he still obtain the indulgence? Also since no longer are there no longer specified “time outs” applied to the purgatory… how do we arrive at how many indulgences are enough to avoid as much “time” in purgatory to begin with? Isn’t this kind of thinking sort of like the idea of God having a check list of who is naughty/nice? and how much purgatorial time is required for a particular kind of sin? I don’t mean to sound flippant but it sounds like a massive book-keeping system would be required to keep the “accounts” straight! But then God, being God, would have it all figured out I guess. As you can no doubt tell this is an area of “difficulty” for me. Thank you!

A: Actually, this is an area of difficulty for many people.  In fact, the issue of indulgences was one of the sparks that started the tragic blaze of the Protestant Reformation, a blaze that incinerated the cultural and religious unity of Christendom starting back in the 1500s.  I don’t know if I will be able to completely resolve the difficulty, but I will try to share some thoughts that may help.

Indulgences vs. Benefits

Your first question is easier than your second.  An indulgence can only be attained with the intention of attaining it.  So, if I were to lift my mind to God in the midst of my work day, I would not receive an indulgence for doing that unless I were consciously intending to receive it.  But we need to be very clear about something here.  Indulgences are not the only spiritual benefits out there.  Any time we engage in these spiritual exercises (reading Sacred Scripture, praying the Stations of the Cross, saying specific prayers…), we give glory to God and bring ourselves and our world into contact with the rushing stream of redeeming grace flowing from Christ’s cross.  Even if I am not intending to receive an indulgence, therefore, these spiritual practices are worthwhile, and God will reward them and utilize them to build up his Kingdom.  Through prayer and sacrifice, we become channels of God’s grace.  An indulgence is simply a specific manifestation of that grace, one that the Church offers to us as a concrete way show our love for the Lord and for our neighbor.  That’s why you should feel no obligation to go indulgence hunting.  If this practice doesn’t resonate in your heart, don’t worry about it!  Continue to pray and seek the face of Christ in all you do, and let God worry about the rest.

A Touch of History

Your second question is a bit thornier.  We have to do a small history lesson to get to the bottom of it.  In the first centuries of the Church, confession and penance were much more public than they are now.  Only in the 500s did the Irish monks really begin to popularize individual, private confession.  Until that era, it was more common for Christians who had fallen into grave sin to make their confession in front of the bishop and the entire congregation, and to be assigned a visible penance.  For example, a public sinner may be required to wear some kind of penitential garb and to stay in the back of the church during Mass for six months or 365 days.  Only at the end of that period of penance would he be admitted back into full communion with the Church.  Even during those early centuries, however, the practice of indulgences was emerging.  For example, if you caved in under pressure of persecution and publicly denied your faith, that was the grave sin of apostasy, and if you repented, you would be given a hefty penance.  But that penance could be lessened if you were to go visit a future martyr or confessor who had not caved in and who was being held in prison for their faith.  You would get this holy person to sign an affidavit by which they would express their desire to apply the merits of their sacrifice to your penance.  Then you would bring this document to the bishop, and some or all of your penance could be remitted.

After the period of the Roman persecutions, obtaining this kind of remission of penance through the merits of the saints continued.  Thus, the practice of indulgences emerged.  Until recently, the relative value of the different indulgences was still expressed by correlating them to certain amounts of days – this harkens back to the early Church and its public penances, which were assigned for specific periods of time.  Today, as mentioned in an earlier post, this method of expressing the relative value of indulgences has been simplified.  Instead of specific numbers of days, we just have partial or plenary (full) indulgences.

The Real Issue

That’s some complicated background (you can find a more detailed explanation here) that can help you understand where the length-of-time factor came from.  But I don’t think that’s what is really causing you the difficulty.  After all, we really don’t have the final say about how much benefit is bestowed when we obtain an indulgence.  God is the final arbiter, and since only he can see our hearts, only he can see how pure is our love, our intention, and our detachment from sin – all of which are factors that contribute to the fruitfulness of any spiritual exercise we undertake.  If we ever find ourselves getting caught up in the math, we can be sure that we are losing focus.

The real difficulty with the practice of indulgences, I think, is rooted elsewhere.  Generally speaking (and it’s always dangerous to generalize), our culture has lost a keen sense of sin.  We tend to belittle the reality of sin and the seriousness of its consequences.  This is partially a result of the influence of modern, secular psychology, which attributes blame not to free choice, but to subconscious influences and tendencies.  But our faith teaches us that there is only one thing in the universe more horrible than a venial sin, and that is a mortal sin.  Sin is rebellion against God.  Every sin is an attempt to destroy the universe.  It is spiritual self-mutilation.  It is spiritual chain-saw-massacring.  When we spread lies about someone, for example, we actually upset the order of the cosmos; we do lasting damage to souls – ours and others’ – souls that were created for eternal life and redeemed by Christ on the cross.  Sin is a spiritual suicide-bomber attack.

If we really perceived the gravity of sin, we would more readily perceive the real need for penance and reparation.  Then we would better understand the wisdom and the gentle love of God expressed in his giving to the Church the beautiful practice of indulgences.  Through this practice, God offers us a concrete way to help right wrongs in the spiritual realm, to pour out spiritual balm on spiritual wounds, and to reestablish spiritual peace in war-torn souls.

Yours in Christ, Father John Bartunek, LC, ThD

Shouldn’t we go to confession more frequently than just the minimum required?

Q: Dear Father John, In the Catechism (CCC 2042) the second precept states: “You shall confess your sins at least once a year.” The qualification of having knowledge of a mortal sin is gone. (Or is it still mentioned somewhere else?)  It makes sense to me that the precept is correct as stated because, as I believe St. Teresa of Avila teaches, a soul can be lost due to the multiplication of venial sins. If this is true, then the Church, as any good Mother would do, establishes guidelines to help protect us from ourselves. I see confession as a spiritual ‘teeth cleaning’. Daily examination of conscience is brushing & flossing… and helps to prevent decay, but we still need to visit the dentist a couple times a year to make sure nothing builds up in places we can’t see…

A:  Thank you for requesting a clarification on this point.  Let’s resolve the technical issue first, then I would like to respond to your insightful comments.

Clarifying the Precept

The footnote to Catechism paragraph 2042 (the one you mention) references the Code of Canon Law, #989, which states:

All the faithful who have reached the age of discretion are bound faithfully to confess their grave sins at least once a year.

The term “grave” sin is used in this case almost synonymously with “mortal sin,” as is evident when the Catechism quotes that same number from Canon Law in paragraph 1457.  So, the strict obligation is indeed limited to annual confession when one is aware of having committed a mortal sin. For a more detailed discussion of this, I recommend the article found here.

Nevertheless, your observations about the utility of more frequent confession are right on target.  All spiritual writers agree that frequent confession fosters spiritual strength and maturity, even when we don’t have any mortal sins to confess.  Your dentistry analogy is helpful here.  St Teresa wasn’t alone in observing that frequent venial sins weaken the soul and prepare it for graver and graver falls, paving the way to habitual mortal sin, just as frequent neglect of one’s teeth leads gradually to serious dental problems.  When practiced with humility and a lively spirit of faith, regular confession – not just annually, but monthly or twice a month – can help us identify and repent from our common, venial sins, so that they don’t fester and grow.  Together with the grace of the sacrament, this fortifies us against more dangerous temptations and strengthens our friendship with Christ so that even our venial sins become less frequent.

That’s why anyone who is sincere about spiritual growth will make the commitment to regular, frequent confession.

Double-Layered Protection

As you say, we do need to be protected from ourselves.  But we also need to recognize that our culture is no longer friendly to Christian values.  Behavior considered normal by today’s popular culture is actually corrosive and sinful.  It’s as if we were living in an acid bath, and our protective covering is constantly being eroded by the acid of unhealthy social norms.  It needs to be regularly refurbished.

Perhaps the most glaring example of the subtle, corrosive force of a secularizing culture is seen on college campuses.  Good Catholic students show up on campus full of determination to take advantage of their educational opportunity.  They have no intention of abandoning their faith or forming habits of sin.  But when they are thrown into a campus culture with co-ed dorms, fraternity parties four nights a week, popular and charming professors who glamorize individualism and relativism… Is it any surprise that so many students are no longer going to Mass, praying, or striving for moral integrity by the end of freshman year?

The challenge doesn’t end when college ends.  When it’s normal for businesses and law firms to wine and dine potential clients by taking them to strip clubs, how long can normal Catholic guys keep up their moral standards?  When it’s normal for 44-year-old women to buy their way to looking like they’re still 24, how long can they stay content cultivating their inner beauty as their outer beauty fades?  Not very long, unless they recognize their ongoing need for God’s grace and nourish an awareness that they have a mission to spread Christ’s Kingdom in this fallen world.  And few spiritual practices foster that recognition and that awareness as effectively as confession.

Yours sincerely in Christ , Fr John Bartunek, LC, ThD