If a man goes and commits adultery, but doesn’t much enjoy it, is that as bad a sin as if he did enjoy it?
If he didn’t enjoy it because he feels guilty and remorseful, then I’d say he’s more apt to be forgiven, if he goes to confession. We all know you must have contrition in order to be forgiven. However, if he doesn’t much enjoy it because the woman was ugly, or something, then it certainly is as bad a sin as if he did enjoy it.
“Though shalt not commit adultery” doesn’t add “unless though shalt not enjoy it”.
LOL!!! Very witty!!
Thanks, RF And in all seriousness, can one imagine the reaction of one’s spouse (to say nothing of God’s) to, “but, but, but, darling, . . . . I didn’t ENJOY it!”
To summarize what I think is the two threads here…
Enjoyment (or lack there of) does not change the magnitude of the sin but it is to be hoped that one who does not enjoy their sin may be closer to repent it.
There is no requirement that mortal sins have to be enjoyable or not enjoyable. And neither makes the sin any worse or any better. Although I would think that someone who enjoys killing would fall into the psychopathic killer category.
If you stole a car and it turned out to be a lemon would it still be GTA?
Ah, but wouldn’t you spend less time in Purgatory if you didn’t enjoy the sin? The sin itself has in part already taught you a lesson, so to speak, no?
My guess is that the punishment would be the same. A mortal sin that is not enjoyable is still a mortal sin. I tend not to think of any part of Hell as being any worse or any better.