www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Mortal, venial sin & theosis in the Byz Cath churches

JJP,

Please don't be too hard on your deacon-in-waiting (deacon candidate?). The question is really an unfair one, similar to the question the Pharisees asked Jesus, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" (Mark 10:1-5)

"They said, 'Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to dismiss her.' And Jesus answered and said to them, 'Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.'"
Similar to the Mosaic Law, the Catholic Church categorized sin, not because of the theological reasons, but for fatherly pastoral reasons. Whether we call it "grave sin" or "mortal sin" only points out that we have only reached an elementary level of "theosis."

Dare I presume to say this? If we have been graced to be "divinized" would we really need to ask about divorce -- or "grave sin". If we were all "theosized" we would already have the understanding and to ask such questions would be scandalous!

The question is unimportant and there should be no dispute whether "mortal sin" or "grave sin" is used to define our fall from grace. Let us not become an occasion for sin by causing unnecessary division.

A poor sinner,
Fr. Deacon Paul

Yes, "Deacon candidate"... the term escaped my memory, thank you.

I'm not sure I understand your post.

Which question is unfair? Whether or not Byzantines define and categorize sin in the same manner as Roman Catholics?

Do not mistake "difference" for "divison".

JJP,

I hope I didn't come across as being critical; my intention is just to approach the subject from a different perspective.

Perhaps "unfair question" is poor wording on my part. What I wish to point out is that perhaps we try to distinguish Eastern and Western thought by seeking definitions and categorizations. If we find someone who could give us a perfect answer would that make us a better Christian in any way? Or does it just incite smugness and a prideful response, such as, "my theology is better than yours"?

What is the importance of distinguishing "mortal sin" from "grave sin?" Is there anything to be gained? Both terms suggest that seeking this distinction betrays our desire to love God with our whole mind, whole heart and soul. Instead our human weakness wants to know "what we can get away with" and still not go to Hell.

Especially during this fasting season the Church encourages humility and kindness. RC's have their own approach to Theosis; they may call it by different names and use different approaches, but we are all God's children; He loves us all equally and both Churches seek salvation for their people. I guess that is why I called the question of mortal/grave sin an unfair question....let the first person who is positive of the answer speak up. It is not I. And by trying to give an intelligent answer we will probably display ignorance instead. The responses which you received are good answers and reflect spiritual maturity and wisdom.

I can attest to the saying, the older I get; the more I find that I don't have the answers.

Have a blessed Great Fast.
Fr Deacon Paul

Bishop Thomas Tschoepe, the late bishop-emeritus of the RC diocese of Dallas, was fond of sharing his opinion that most people were too stupid to commit a mortal sin.

I love it!

Fr Deacon Paul,

I thought I was pretty thorough in attempting to make clear that I have no interest in debating the perceived merit of any of these interpretations of sin.

I was just confused by the teaching that was given to us, so I came here for clarification.

As a side note in answer to your question of what the importance of distinguishing between different types of sins may be, I agree entirely. Our class spent 30 minutes hashing out which might be "venial" or "mortal" and what the different implications of each may or may not be. It sounded very legalistic to me (and very off-putting), and not at all germane to the Eastern understanding of theosis that I have come to love (which was not given any air-time at all, sadly). Hence my confusion.

JJP,

Mortal vs venial sin is an interesting informal subject that spurs enthusiatic participation but you are correct....it should have led to our less legalistic and true Eastern teaching. I see your point.

Not being aware of the circumstances, I suggest that should it happen again (or in a private setting) you (or anyone) try to steer the question away from the mortal/venial and toward the repentance/theosis direction. Chances are that the deacon candidate learned RC catechism when growing up (as there were few alternatives) and he gave a knee-jerk reaction and the conversation snowballed.

As has been repeated ad finitum our church and other Eastern Churches absorbed much Western thought. This re-adjustment will take generations but it is making progress. Please be patient.

Many years,
Fr Deacon Paul

Sound advice. I would *love* to be able to steer the conversation like that, but the plan is laid out pretty deliberately, we read directly from the RC catechism booklet. Hard to avoid.

I am actually going to meet with our priest this weekend and bring it up, only because I'm not sure why we are reading from that booklet at all. I have no problem with its teachings even if my perspective is different, but the RC church down the road doesn't read from the Light For Life books in its RCIA class, and nobody would expect them to. I would think the same be true in reverse.

I'm not as patient as I should be about most things, this will be a good opportunity to improve