Scrupulous question about receiving the Eucharist tomorrow


#1

Today my father and I were considering buying something at a store. My dad has had a habit since I was a child of being pessimistic about money and has sometimes made it seem like we have none, and eventually my mother clears it up with him that we have the money for this or that. We're not wealthy, but he overstates our lack of wealth of sometimes. I was telling him it was okay and asked him to talk quieter so others wouldn't hear him making it sound like we have no money.

As I was trying to tell him it was okay, I remembered Jesus and how he said one should accept one's lot in life and to not have pride. I was kind of annoyed at remembering it, I think, and wondered what to do. I don't remember if I explicitly rejected such an idea or just kept telling my dad we had the money, but I did the latter and am now worried I committed a mortal sin and shouldn't receive the Eucharist tomorrow. I know someone will suggest talking to a priest before Mass, but I don't realistically see that happening tomorrow due to what's happening at Church tomorrow morning.


#2

That doesn’t even sound like a venial sin. It sounds like a conversation.


#3

[quote="otjm, post:2, topic:324530"]
That doesn't even sound like a venial sin. It sounds like a conversation.

[/quote]

But I remembered what Jesus and the Church has taught and ignored it, I think. Doesn't that make it mortal?


#4

[quote="StudentMI, post:3, topic:324530"]
But I remembered what Jesus and the Church has taught and ignored it, I think. Doesn't that make it mortal?

[/quote]

If I were in your shoes, this is what I would do. I would receive Holy Communion tomorrow and commend yourself to His Mercy reminding Him of what He once said: the healthy have no need of a physician but the sick do.

Then, the next time you go to confession, mention this to the priest. As OTJM said, I don't even think this is a venial sin, but it will ease your conscience to talk it over with a priest.


#5

Being embarrassed isn't a mortal sin. I suppose it might be possible for some embarrassment to be a venial sin, but I would guess that in many cases it is not even that. You were embarrassed that your Dad was speaking so loudly, and you were afraid of feeling embarrassed if people in the store judged you as being poor. Your desire for your Dad to not make a scene might have been totally reasonable (unless he was already speaking quietly), and your worry about being judged might be misplaced, but not necessarily sinful. It also sounds to me as though this is not a case of you being prideful or not accepting your "lot in life", but about disagreeing with your Dad about what you can afford. That's just a disagreement. Keep in mind that just because you recognize the wrong action in the midst of it and continue doing it, does not make a sin mortal. Venial sins can be committed in the same way. A mortal sin needs 1-to be serious, 2-to be done with full knowledge, and 3-to be done with consent. All 3 conditions need to be present. #1 is definitely not present.

BTW, I don't know where Jesus said that in the Bible - do you know where that is?


#6

[quote="ThyKingdomCome, post:5, topic:324530"]
BTW, I don't know where Jesus said that in the Bible - do you know where that is?

[/quote]

I don't know. It seems to be the thrust. The problem is that, even when something is venial or potentially venial, I begin thinking of the sinful nature of it. Then I wonder, if I knew something was venial does that make it mortal because I willfully chose to disobey God? Or if I thought it was mortal and did it anyway?


#7

Im scrupulous myself, so I know what you are going through. I worry I have committed a mortal sin atleast once a week so far and I have only been Baptized for 4 weeks. What you describe does not sound like a mortal sin atleast to me. I would say take communion tomorrow if you can just let it go by then. But it you think you are still going to be worried about it up to and even after you take communion and maybe even feel worse, then maybe you should not take communion until you talk to a priest and/or confess. All the same, it does not sound like a mortal sin to me. I say all this from my experience over the past 4 weeks too :o


#8

[quote="StudentMI, post:3, topic:324530"]
But I remembered what Jesus and the Church has taught and ignored it, I think. Doesn't that make it mortal?

[/quote]

It doesnt sound like you were being prideful to me. It sounds like you are alittle annoyed with your dad. That is not a sin. I have a uncle who gets on my nerves everyday even if we dont say a word to eachother.


#9

Hi,
I'm scrulous too but what really helped me was that if you're experiencing any doubt, which you are, then you do not have to confess it and you can receive communion. Also, that in itself is not a mortal sin, and this is coming from a scrupulous person! Trust in Our Lady, she will help you!


#10

J.M.J.
Dear Student,

It is, as you say, a scrupulous doubt. Since you yourself have recognized this truth, say a prayer to Our Lady for peace, and when you go to receive Our Lord tomorrow, take the burden of the scruple with you and lay it before the Lord.

It's something everyone goes through, I think, but eventually you just have to accept that God's love for you is in fact much greater than yours would be for yourself were you in His position. He has both made you and redeemed you, taking you under His wing with your every single strength, weakness, and quirk.

God bless you,


#11

If something is venial, and you know it, and you choose to do it anyway, it is still venial. I always give my kids the example of eating the cookies on the counter before dinner, even though Mom told them not to. Venial sin. Even if they stop mid-reach, and think about the fact that the 10 commandments require them to obey their parents, and that they know that it is definitely wrong, and they still eat the cookie, it will still be venial. Because it will never be a mortal sin to eat a cookie no matter how much it is premeditated. Your embarrassment/annoyance falls somewhere between perfectly justified, and misguided. Even if it is misguided, it is less offensive to God than the child eating the cookie. It simply couldn’t be a mortal sin.


#12

This is not "grave matter:" It was a conversation, and you were just trying to prevent your father from causing a public scene.

Scrupulosity is one trick of the evil one to make us stay away from the Eucharist. FWIW, you can properly receive the Eucharist in a state of venial sin, because you are not completely cut off from the grace of God.

If you believe you have this tendency, discuss it with your priest for further guidance.


#13

[quote="odile53, post:12, topic:324530"]

Scrupulosity is one trick of the evil one to make us stay away from the Eucharist.

[/quote]

I like that quote.


#14

Notice that there is a difference between being scrupulous and scruples.

Scrupulous, adjective

[LIST=1]
*]characterized by careful observation of what is morally right
*]very careful or precise
[/LIST]
Scruple, noun

[LIST]
*] (often plural) a doubt or hesitation as to what is morally right in a certain situation
[/LIST]

Baltimore Catechism No. 3
Q. 831. What are the signs of scruples and the remedy against them?
A. The signs of scruples are chiefly:

[LIST]
*]To be always dissatisfied with our confessions;
*]To be self-willed in deciding what is sinful and what is not.
[/LIST]
The chief remedy against them is to follow exactly the advice of the confessor without questioning the reason or utility of his advice.


#15

[quote="Vico, post:14, topic:324530"]
Notice that there is a difference between being scrupulous and scruples.

Scrupulous, adjective

[LIST=1]
*]characterized by careful observation of what is morally right
*]very careful or precise
[/LIST]
Scruple, noun

[LIST]
*] (often plural) a doubt or hesitation as to what is morally right in a certain situation
[/LIST]

Baltimore Catechism No. 3
Q. 831. What are the signs of scruples and the remedy against them?
A. The signs of scruples are chiefly:

[LIST]
*]To be always dissatisfied with our confessions;
*]To be self-willed in deciding what is sinful and what is not.
[/LIST]
The chief remedy against them is to follow exactly the advice of the confessor without questioning the reason or utility of his advice.

[/quote]

The definition there in the first part is the one used in common speech (or was in at one time).

Scrupulous in the moral sense has to do with scruples. While there are "degrees" of scruples or scrupulosity -- the terms "scrupulous" and "scrupulosity" and "scruples" in moral and spiritual theology are all referring that such undue worries about confession or seeing sin where it is not or seeing mortal sin where there is venial. The French call it the "doubting disease" (though it is not per se a disease).


#16

[quote="Bookcat, post:15, topic:324530"]
The definition there in the first part is the one used in common speech (or was in at one time).

Scrupulous in the moral sense has to do with scruples. While there are "degrees" of scruples or scrupulosity -- the terms "scrupulous" and "scrupulosity" and "scruples" in moral and spiritual theology are all referring that such undue worries about confession or seeing sin where it is not or seeing mortal sin where there is venial. The French call it the "doubting disease" (though it is not per se a disease).

[/quote]

Actually, an exaggerated perception of wrongdoing and seeing sin where there is none can be symptomatic of psychologic disorder: obsessive compulsive disorder. I am not trying to medicalize morality; I'm simply pointing out that one symptom of OCD is a crippling self-doubt, where the individual is incapable of taking action because of fear of immorality.

That's why anyone who thinks that they may have these tendencies ought to discuss it with a priest, preferably one trained in giving spiritual direction. Such a priest can fairly easily determine if the person is being plagued by inaccurate perception of their personal moral agency due to erroneous or inadequate catechesis and formation, whether they are experiencing an attack by the enemy (the world, the flesh, and the devil,) or whether they are indeed emotionally ill.


#17

Actually, an exaggerated perception of wrongdoing and seeing sin where there is none can be symptomatic of psychologic disorder: obsessive compulsive disorder. I am not trying to medicalize morality; I'm simply pointing out that one symptom of OCD is a crippling self-doubt, where the individual is incapable of taking action because of fear of immorality.

This sounds like me. I'm so glad someone addressed this. I'm always wondering if I really thought something that put me in mortal sin and I go over it again then I realize the full consent wasn't there. It's a Cross.
I've been told by some Priests not to be scrupulous. But reading this helped me, thank you, even though this question wasn't asked by me.


#18

I apolgize, Odile53, I didn't mean to leave your name out when quoting you. I haven't quoted on these kinds of forums for quite some time.


#19

[quote="odile53, post:16, topic:324530"]
Actually, an exaggerated perception of wrongdoing and seeing sin where there is none can be symptomatic of psychologic disorder: obsessive compulsive disorder. I am not trying to medicalize morality; I'm simply pointing out that one symptom of OCD is a crippling self-doubt, where the individual is incapable of taking action because of fear of immorality.

[/quote]

Yes of course.

And a person with OCD can experience scrupulosity... which is also involving such "doubt" (or rather apparent doubt) and fears. Though scruples per se do not = OCD they can be a manifestation of such or can have similarities to such.

[quote="odile53, post:16, topic:324530"]
That's why anyone who thinks that they may have these tendencies ought to discuss it with a priest, preferably one trained in giving spiritual direction. Such a priest can fairly easily determine if the person is being plagued by inaccurate perception of their personal moral agency due to erroneous or inadequate catechesis and formation, whether they are experiencing an attack by the enemy (the world, the flesh, and the devil,) or whether they are indeed emotionally ill.

[/quote]

Scrupulosity is not simply "inaccurate" perception due to erroneous or inadequate catechesis and formation (though that can play a part)--not that your saying such is the case but for clarity for readers.

And I would note that normally one can rule out "attacks of the enemy" as the particular cause....also I would think the better term is the one you used above "disorder" rather than "emotionally ill".


#20

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.