Dear Jeanmarie:

Mother Angelica of EWTN once said something to the effect, "If any priest or anyone says something that contradicts the Catechism, they are wrong."

The Monsignor is wrong if he is saying that the term "mortal sin" is not used anymore in the Church. But, I rather think that he may be trying to say that we should not automatically refer to grave (serious) sin as mortal because for a serious sin to be mortal three conditions must exist. If he is saying that, then he is correct. This is explained in the Catechism:

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent." (my emphasis)

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother." The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God. (my emphasis)

I would ask the Monsignor to clarify his comment.

As to a previously married co-habiting couple receiving the Eucharist, the couple are committing grave sin twice — the first time in co-habiting as husband and wife when they re not validly married to each other, the second and far worse sin, is grave sin against the Holy Eucharist by receiving our Lord unworthily.

We cannot know if these grave sins are counted as mortal to their souls, because that involves knowledge of their hearts, which only God knows. But, we can tell this couple that they are endangering their souls to hell, as these sins are objectively grave.

This second sin is most serious. St. Paul reports that dropped dea

1385 To respond to this invitation we must prepare ourselves for so great and so holy a moment. St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself" (1 Cor 11:27). Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion. (my emphasis)

Three verses later in 1 Cor 11:30, St. Paul says, "That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died."

Thus, the bottomline is that I think, I hope, that the Monsignor is referring to the fact that we cannot know when someone is in mortal sin as only God knows for sure about that. But, if he is saying that the term mortal sin is no longer used, then we have a problem.

As to biding time until ordination, unfortunately that is often the necessary since so many seminaries are teaching error. I had a friend in the seminary who told me that the only way to get an "A" on a paper was to propose actual outright heresy. It was suggested to him to "grin and bare it" and after ordination he can openly be an orthodox priest. In his case, he could not put up with that for three years and thus dropped out. I am not sure I could have spend three years pretending to be a heretic.

I had another friend in the Permanent Deacon program who was told to stop kneeling during the the time Eucharistic prayer from the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer. He was ordered to stand, contrary to clear requirements of liturgical law. H refused and ended up leaving the program.

This is very unfortunate, but if one believes they are called to Holy Orders, it is often necessary to mortify one's pride, put up with such nonsense, and keep one's eye on the prize down the road of ordination.

In the case that you present, however, I think this is probably the Monsignor not being clear (I hope).

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary