amarkich Posted August 3, 2004 Posted August 3, 2004 Picchick, I understand that they were not talking about self-mortification, but I just wanted the fact to be clear so that no one was confused. I disagree with you that we can simply say that we will not watch TV as a valid mortification (compared to physical mortification). Physical mortification has always been supported by the Church and is commanded in the form of fasting and abstinence. To wear a hair shirt which constantly pains oneself and which is constantly mortifying is far superior to giving up an act which is a form of entertainment (which is generally a means of combatting a vice, not necessarily of fostering a virtue). The same is true for all physical self-mortification as it is for fasting and abstinence. These are the highest and most beneficial forms of mortification.
picchick Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 [quote name='amarkich' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:07 PM'] Picchick, I understand that they were not talking about self-mortification, but I just wanted the fact to be clear so that no one was confused. I disagree with you that we can simply say that we will not watch TV as a valid mortification (compared to physical mortification). Physical mortification has always been supported by the Church and is commanded in the form of fasting and abstinence. To wear a hair shirt which constantly pains oneself and which is constantly mortifying is far superior to giving up an act which is a form of entertainment (which is generally a means of combatting a vice, not necessarily of fostering a virtue). The same is true for all physical self-mortification as it is for fasting and abstinence. These are the highest and most beneficial forms of mortification. [/quote] Yes, I agree that the forms of mortification you talk about is a high form of mortification. I think however that before we start flogging ourselves we need to start at by combatting the things that cause us to sin. Kind of like starting at step one. Am I wrong?
Dave Posted August 4, 2004 Author Posted August 4, 2004 [quote name='picchick' date='Aug 3 2004, 07:01 PM'] Oh, and Dave sorry. I guess I kinda got off topic. Yeah I think that it would be a sin if you were doing it as a dare or to make a fool out of yourself because you have to take care of your body since it is a temple of the holy spirit. It would count as Reckless behavior. [/quote] Mortal or venial?
amarkich Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 You are correct. That is the correct dichotomy. First we are to combat the things that make us sin (combating vice); then we are to practice self-mortification (fostering virtue). Before we can foster virtue, we must defeat vice. It is senseless for one who is slothful to attempt to foster the virtue of purity by chastising himself before he attempts to combat his vice of sloth, especially if his self-mortification is a cause for physical exhaustion which could contribute to his vice of sloth. God bless.
p0lar_bear Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 For the benefit of those who may not know.... Self-mortification for the sake of virtue should always be under the direction of a spiritual advisor.
picchick Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 [quote name='p0lar_bear' date='Aug 4 2004, 08:16 AM'] For the benefit of those who may not know.... Self-mortification for the sake of virtue should always be under the direction of a spiritual advisor. [/quote] Right, sorry.
Guest JeffCR07 Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 I would just like to stress how very important it is that the practice of self-mortification (in the interest of fostering virtue) be done exclusively under the supervision of a spiritual director. St. Francis of Assisi, who, when he was younger practiced relatively extreme forms of self-mortification, regretted it when he was much older, and even, before dying, asked his body its "forgiveness" for the things that he had done to it. Now remember, I am in no way shape or for saying that self-mortification is a bad thing. It is not, when properly supervised. It helps us to be joined to Christ's suffering and Passion and can act as a mirror of the stigmata, which is the most powerful and real partaking of that suffering. Dave: I think a small distinction must be made. If you are, for example, trying to ride a bike down some ridiculously steep incline, or a sled down a tree-filled ravine, and end up hurting yourself, you have not committed a sin. Personally, I think that Christ holds a special place in his heart for the rugged, fearless, kind-of-stupid kids. However, if you deliberately aiming the sled for a tree, or the bike for a wall, with the knowledge that bodily harm will come from it, this I [i]would[/i] consider a sin, because it shows a lack of reverence for the body. It is a small difference between the two scenarios, but in the first case, the bodily harm is a side effect or, an "accident," while in the second case, it is unavoidably linked to the purpose of the action. I think the level of sin (mortal or venial) would depend on the gravity of the situation and harm incurred upon the body. - Your Brother In Christ, Jeff
nikkan_hanil Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 Confession: I used to hurt myself out of mental disorder... But I think that hurting yourself for no justified reason is a sin against the fifth commandment. "Thou Shalt Not Kill". If you had the sole intention to hurt yourself for no reason or to harm another out of agression, that is a sin against the fif commandment.
nikkan_hanil Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 [quote name='Dave' date='Aug 3 2004, 09:26 PM'] Mortal or venial? [/quote] Since it is not a [b]direct[/b] sin against the fif commandment I'd probably say venial.
Madonna Posted August 4, 2004 Posted August 4, 2004 I disagree. I don't think breaking the ten commandments directly are necessarily mortal sins, and that breaking them indirectly immediately excuses it from the venial department.
nikkan_hanil Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 No, I meant breaking them indirectly would be venial. You misunderstood.
Tora-Musume Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 I don't like pain so I wouldn't hurt myself. No sin here. I don't even pinch myself to see if I am dreaming cause that would cause pain.
Madonna Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 (edited) [quote name='nikkan_hanil' date='Aug 4 2004, 08:22 PM'] No, I meant breaking them indirectly would be venial. You misunderstood. [/quote] Thank you for catching that. And I mispoke. The last part should have read "and that breaking them indirectly immediately excuses it from the [i]mortal[/i] department. Edited August 5, 2004 by Madonna
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now