Question About Concept Of Consent In Mortal Sin

[Marie-Therese]

OK, here's the question. A friend of mine and I are having a disagreement about the concept of the full consent of the will in terms of mortal sin.

Background: my friend is a Catholic, and her boyfriend is as well, although he is in no way faithful to the Church (and doesn't care much about it either, to be honest). Anyway, early on in their relationship they became sexually involved. Now, my friend is having a crisis of conscience and wants to maintain chastity in their relationship. Her boyfriend is, shall we say, less than enthused about this turn of events.

My friend says she does not want to sin, but feels compelled to give in to her boyfriend in order to avoid conflicts. She says that this does not constitute full consent of the will because she would be doing something that she doesn't really want to do. My counsel to her is that if she knows it is sinful, and consents to do it anyway (regardless of whether it is something she really wants to do) then that constitutes the grave matter, knowledge and full consent of the will required to constitute a mortal sin. I told her that motivation might play a factor, but if she consents to this in a way that doesn't involve forced coercion (i.e. sexual assault or the like) then she does give assent of the will.

I don't want to advise her in error. Obviously I would never counsel her to sexual relations outside marriage but I wanted to make sure that what I told her was not overly legalistic and was theologically correct. Does the "full consent" of the will include a desire to do the action, or simply the performance of the action knowing that it is a grave sin? The more I thought about it, the more I wondered if there was grey area there and wanted a solid theological reflection on the topic.

Thanks guys! I appreciate your input.

[cappie]

Free consent is present if one freely wills an act although they have clearly recognised the gravity of its sinful character.

No sin is committed if one does not will the deed, no matter how clear their knowledge may be. The determination to do a deed must not be confused with the pleasure of the sensitive appetite.

However a lax conscience may generally not be followed without grave sin if one thereby transgresses a law that obliges gravely.

In the case you mentioned my honest opinion is that your friend may be better off with someone who respects her for who she is and the opinions she holds. As one old sister of Mercy said to me; "If he won't do this for her now, then he will not do it for her in marriage."

[CatherineM]

I just wanted to add from a legal perspective about consent. There are certain conditions that are considered rape even when both parties have consented to the sexual contact. They are when a party isn't deemed old enough to consent or by mental condition not capable of consent (that is different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction), or when one party has an inherent position of power over another person. As an example, a judge, a policeman, or parole officer using their power over an individual to force them to have sex or face punishment. This could also be the case where someone is technically over the age of consent, but still not able to say no such as parent/child or teacher/student or even employer/employee.

I think your friend is trying to delude herself to avoid having to deal truthfully with her actions. If she has truly consented, and doesn't fall into any of those categories I listed above, then she can't claim that she doesn't have full responsibility for her actions. If she isn't truly consenting, or falls into a category above, then she is being raped, plain and simple, and her boyfriend should be prosecuted.