Aquinas on Sexual Sins: The Dangers of Speaking Formally
#11
Are there people who actually spend time thinking about this stuff?  :Hmm: It seems so unnecessary, especially if one isn't thinking about one's own sins.  :shrug:
Reply
#12
(04-10-2014, 05:04 PM)Deidre Wrote: Are there people who actually spend time thinking about this stuff?  :Hmm: It seems so unnecessary, especially if one isn't thinking about one's own sins.  :shrug:

Yes, there are people who spend time thinking about this.

The next topic that we'll be introducing tomorrow is "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin"

Bring your own pin to the discussion, please.
Reply
#13
St Thomas thought about these things  :Hmm:
Reply
#14
(04-10-2014, 05:44 PM)mortify Wrote: St Thomas thought about these things  :Hmm:

St. Thomas was a theologian and a Dominican- a member of the Order of Friars Preachers. His state of life made it necessary for him to think about whether certain sins are graver than others. For the average layman, I can't imagine that it matters whether one grave sin is graver than another, because all sins carry the same consequence for the soul, if they're mortal: they kill sanctifying grace in the soul and destroy communion with God. And I can't imagine anyone saying: "oh, well, this sin isn't as bad as X, so I'll go ahead and commit it."  :Hmm:
Reply
#15
(04-10-2014, 06:27 PM)Deidre Wrote:
(04-10-2014, 05:44 PM)mortify Wrote: St Thomas thought about these things  :Hmm:

St. Thomas was a theologian and a Dominican- a member of the Order of Friars Preachers. His state of life made it necessary for him to think about whether certain sins are graver than others. For the average layman, I can't imagine that it matters whether one grave sin is graver than another, because all sins carry the same consequence for the soul, if they're mortal: they kill sanctifying grace in the soul and destroy communion with God. And I can't imagine anyone saying: "oh, well, this sin isn't as bad as X, so I'll go ahead and commit it."  :Hmm:

I brought up the topic less because of the probability of someone thinking, "Oh, well, this sin isn't as bad as X, so I'll go ahead and commit it" than because of the judgments people make about the sins of others as opposed to their own sins, and the justifications used for the discrepancies in how they talk about those sins (which I've seen PLENTY of in Catholic circles).

That said, though, I can see a "solely cerebral" type doing just the sort of thing I talked about in my last post --- i.e., committing a sin involving malice and that harms another because it's "officially listed" (at least taken out of context) as being "not as offensive to God" as a sin that doesn't involve malice or harming another. If a person is going to cave in to his or her concupiscence, even with the idea that "I know it's wrong -- but I have neeeeeeeeeeeeds, and  just this once!" --- and if that person is one of those types that intellectualize everything, who are out of touch with their own hearts, who are so "egg-headed" that they lack common sense, then the example I gave doesn't have a probability of zero. Some folks have very legalistic minds, sad to say.

I think traditional Catholicism is prone to attracting the intellectually gifted because more goes into coming to know about it than just going to your local parish, signing up for RCIA, and getting baptized at Easter. Coming to know anything about it -- or even that it still exists -- typically requires some level of intellectual curiosity or an awareness that "something" is amiss in the human element of the Church in the post-conciliar era. And there's a sub-group of the intellectual type that is pretty emotionally deformed (vis "toxic trads") and resorts to legalism as a way of trying to make sense of the world. That can lead to all sorts of goofery.

 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)