Talk:Venial sin

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 16 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ramsabeoulve. Peer reviewers: Rizfermier.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Citation

If no one provides a citation for the Bible differentiating between "sins unto death" and sins that aren't unto death, then I'm going to remove that claim. Jonathan Tweet 15:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Citation provided, 1 John 5:16-17: "Suppose you see your brother or sister commit a sin. But that sin is not the kind that leads to death. Then you should pray for them. And God will give life to them. I'm talking about someone whose sin does not lead to death. But there is a sin that does lead to death. I'm not saying that you should pray about that. Every wrong thing we do is sin. But there are sins that do not lead to death." Some older versions use "unto death" rather than "lead to death." Eron 16:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. So there is "a" sin that leads to death. How should we reflect that there is one mortal sin mentioned in the Bible? Jonathan Tweet 16:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

1 John 16-17 venial and mortal sin

1 John 16-17: "If anyone sees his brother sinning, if the sin is not deadly, he should pray to God and he will give him life. This is only for those whose sin is not deadly. There is such a thing as deadly sin, about which I do not say that you should pray. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not deadly." (from the New American Bible)

This verse diffrentiates between venial and mortal sins. Venial sin is not "deadly", but mortal sins are "deadly." This means that if someone commits one or more mortal sins and dies without recieving God's forgiveness, that person would have eternal death in Hell. But if someone commits one or more unforgiven venial sins only, and not unforgiven mortal sins, they would have eternal life in Heaven after they die.--Basketballplayer08 (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

chapel veil

When was it not required to wear a chapel veil when entering a Sacred edifice/church and by who authority. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.9.9.93 (talk) 17:51, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Chapel veils are unrelated to this article but here's the answer: 1 Cor. 11:4-10

“Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head -- it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil. For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBGeorge77 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I want to add more to my other response:

Footnote in the Douay-Rheims Bible on verse 10:[10] A power: that is, a veil or covering, as a sign that she is under the power of her husband: and this, the apostle adds, because of the angels, who are present in the assemblies of the faithful.

1 Cor 11:11-16 [11] But yet neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord. [12] For as the woman is of the man, so also is the man by the woman: but all things of God. [13] You yourselves judge: doth it become a woman, to pray unto God uncovered? [14] Doth not even nature itself teach you, that a man indeed, if he nourish his hair, it is a shame unto him? [15] But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. [16] But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the church of God. (So wearing a hat at mass is just a reverence thing and its not a sin to not wear one)(For more info on head coverings click here.)JBGeorge77 (talk) 02:22, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Bold text venial sin and mortal sin, as a distinguishing feature between sins, was not plucked out of thin air all at once. Personally i feel an (even brief) section on the history of the theory's development?

Wuku (talk) 18:30, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Most Protestants understand there are sins that will not cause a person to go to Hell. In fact many include that besides atheism. Since it is pretty is self-evident that all sins do not lead to Hell it's not needed. The area that needs a history section is mortal sin, venial sin's opposite, in it's own article. Then when it is too obvious it's historically backed we can get in trouble in public domain.GreyTanBrown 01:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Mortal sin additions

Hello @Ramsabeoulve: once again I have reverted your addition. This article is primarily about venial sin and so we should strive to give the topic prominence, rather than slipping in 'mortal sin' wherever possible. Secondly, your edit introduced at least one grammatical error. Please use more care when inserting words in mid-sentence. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 22:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Elizium23: . I have attempted to reach out to you about this edit and you have ignored me, so I stated I would go forth with edits I thought were right. I am not defining mortal sin, so it is not prominent at all. Venial sin involves the definition of grave matters just as much as mortal sin definition. My apologies on not locating a grammatical error. I would, yet again, like to ask for your input so I may edit again. I am firm in believing this page is incomplete, as one would have to go through yet another article if not two to understand its subject matter without any prior knowledge. If it is relevant to venial sin, I believe that it has a place in the article. Thank you for the comment. Ramsabeoulve (talk) 23:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ramsabeoulve, "grave" is mentioned 5 times already in this article, and "mortal" is hugely prominent. I think we should invest more time speaking about the topic which is venial sin and I will continue to delete your efforts to make "mortal sin" more prominent. That is WP:COATRACK territory! Elizium23 (talk) 23:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Elizium23, Yes, I understand it is mentioned. However, it is not defined. Upon first arriving to this wikipedia page that was what I noticed. What is "grave"? To understand that, I had to go to other Wikipedia pages, which is inefficient for such a simple definition. The only reason I have for adding more mentions of "mortal sin" is not to define it but to separate how venial sin is different- is that not what the page is defining? What makes a sin venial and what a venial sin is, unlike a mortal sin? I apologize again for making edits that displeased you, but I do not see how I am straying towards WP:COATRACK territory. I would love if you could give me some sort of advice or basis on how to enhance this flaw in the article, if you have any ideas. You seem unhappy with my way of approaching it so far. I've reached out before for your feedback and I am still willing to receive this feedback and to work with you to make this page better. Ramsabeoulve (talk) 23:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ramsabeoulve, 'mortal sin' is linked in this article. That's all you need to do to find out what 'grave' is, to visit the other article. That's what a Wiki is for, to visit other linked articles for definitions. This article does not define 'grave' because it is not the article to do it in. Elizium23 (talk) 23:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Elizium23, I see that. However I don't see what makes this article less important than the mortal sin Wiki article, which very clearly defines what makes a matter grave. They are sister concepts, it would seem, and I do not need to visit the Venial Sin article to understand Mortal sin: why should I need to read Mortal sin to understand Venial sin? Wikipedia is intended to give you linked articles for definitions, yes, I understand, but I do not have this problem with many other concepts, even such close ones as Mortal Sin. As for you saying that this article does not have to do with grave matter, I disagree heavily. Both mortal and venial deal with this definition and I feel it should be present in either both or neither. Where I see it now, I think that this Wikipedia page is incomplete because of this simple lacking information. I am a student working on enhancing this page as an assignment, I really truly genuinely would like your or someone's input on how to fix this in a way that pleases you or others as fellow editors. I am not here to argue my way is right, I am a new editor still learning how to go about things efficiently. Ramsabeoulve (talk) 23:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ramsabeoulve, I will turn it around on you and ask why you think the article on mortal sin should spend WP:UNDUE space defining what is a venial sin? Elizium23 (talk) 23:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ramsabeoulve, what is sin? What is God? What is a relationship? These are all definitions that could be included in this article, but are not? Why not? Elizium23 (talk) 23:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Elizium23, If you truly think that brief inclusion of a concept-specific definition has no place in the mortal sin article then feel free to remove it, Elizium23. I have no place editing that article, myself. It was not I who put that definition there. God and Relationships are not specific to these concepts, but "grave matter" is. You sound as if you are angry with me, and I again would like to simply ask what you think my course of action should be with this article. Please, I encourage anything you can give me that is constructive. Ramsabeoulve (talk) 23:47, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ramsabeoulve, I think your course of action should be to find and contribute more reliable secondary sources on venial sin, because there is at least one "{{citation needed}}" in a critical place. Catechism articles on venial sin, Church Fathers, St. Thomas Aquinas, books, things like that would be useful. Elizium23 (talk) 23:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Elizium23, Thank you for the input. I will keep this in mind next time I seek to make an edit to this page. Hopefully after some work and careful review, I can make a better edit. Ramsabeoulve (talk) 00:09, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Examples?

As a non-Christian, I could really use some examples of venial versus mortal sinning, with explanations as to why they are classified as such. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 17:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC)