195. Consent in Pleasure and the Morality of Sin

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

• Consent in Pleasure: Whether assenting to pleasurable thoughts about sinful acts constitutes mortal sin
• Higher vs. Lower Reason: The different roles of higher reason (considering eternal reasons) and lower reason (deliberating about temporal matters) in moral acts
• Object of Pleasure: The distinction between pleasure taken in thought itself versus pleasure taken in the act thought about
• Mortal vs. Venial Sin in Higher Reason: Whether higher reason can commit only mortal sins or also venial sins
• Sudden Motions of Infidelity: How sudden motions of disbelief (infidelity) can remain venial despite infidelity being mortally sinful by nature

Key Arguments #

Argument 1: Consent in Pleasure is Not Mortal Sin (Objection) #

• Consent in pleasure pertains to lower reason, which does not directly turn away from eternal reasons
• Therefore, it cannot be mortal sin, since mortal sin requires turning away from divine law (per Augustine)
• The pleasure itself need not be immoral simply because it accompanies thoughts of immoral acts

Argument 2: Pleasure Differs from the Act Itself #

• Pleasure without the deed is venial (mere thought), not mortal
• Fornication is mortal by reason of the disorder of the act, not by reason of the pleasure also found in marital acts
• Therefore, consent to the pleasure of the thought does not equal consent to the disorder of the act

Argument 3: Consent in Pleasure is Mortal Sin (Against Objection) #

• Augustine says the whole man is damned unless sins of thought alone are remitted
• No one is damned except for mortal sin
• Therefore, consent in pleasure must be mortal sin

Thomas’s Resolution: Two Types of Pleasure #

Consent in pleasure can be understood in two ways:

1. Pleasure in the thought itself: The affection rests in the thinking operation. Since thinking itself about fornication is not mortal sin, neither is pleasure in the thinking mortally sinful.
2. Pleasure in the act thought about: The pleasure proceeds from inclination toward the act itself. This pleasure is mortally sinful if the act is mortal, but becomes mortal only through deliberate consent.

Important Definitions #

• Higher Reason (Superior Ratio): Adheres to and consults eternal reasons; it judges and orders all acts according to divine law
• Lower Reason (Inferior Ratio): Deliberates through temporal reasons; applies eternal principles to particular cases
• Conspiciendo (Looking Into): Simple understanding directed at eternal reasons themselves and their truth
• Consulendo (Consulting): Deliberating through eternal reasons to judge and order other things
• Venial Sin: A sin that is not contrary to eternal reasons (a disorder apart from them, not a turning away from them)
• Mortal Sin (Peccatum Mortale): A sin contrary to eternal reasons and divine law; a turning away from the ultimate end
• Subitum (Sudden): An act or motion occurring suddenly before deliberation

Examples & Illustrations #

• The Lord’s Prayer: Augustine teaches that consent in pleasure is abolished through the Lord’s Prayer, particularly the petition “forgive us our debts.” This supports treating such consent as venial sin requiring forgiveness but not necessarily confession in the strict sense.
• Thought of Fornication vs. Fornication Itself: Someone thinking about fornication can take pleasure in two ways: (1) in the thinking itself as a pleasing cognitive operation, or (2) in the act of fornication being thought about. Only the latter involves assent to the disordered act itself.
• Sudden Infidelity (Infidelitas Subitana): A sudden doubt about the resurrection or real presence can arise without full deliberation. Before one consults the eternal reason that God’s word is to be believed, the motion remains venial despite infidelity being mortally sinful by nature.
• The Girl in California: Berquist provides a contemporary example of brain death discussions, illustrating confusion between medical declarations and metaphysical reality; though not directly about sin, it exemplifies how understanding distinctions (like act vs. potency, deliberation vs. sudden motion) matters for proper judgment.

Notable Quotes #

“In the thinking itself by itself is not a mortal sin” (repeated throughout the response to objections)

• Thomas’s fundamental principle that thought about sin differs in moral species from the act of sin itself

“Higher reason adheres to the eternal reasons, to looking at them right and consulting them right”

• Clarification of higher reason’s dual function in understanding and directing

“A sin that is against the eternal reasons, although it is a mortal sin next genera [by its kind], nevertheless it can be a venial sin in account of the imperfection of the act”

• Key principle allowing even mortally sinful acts to be venial when undertaken suddenly or without full deliberation

“One doesn’t always deliberate”

• Berquist’s summary of how reason can operate through simple understanding as well as deliberation

Questions Addressed #

Is consent in pleasure always mortal sin? #

Answer: No. Consent in pleasure is mortal or venial depending on the object:

• Consent to pleasure in the thought itself = venial (thought alone is not mortal)
• Consent to pleasure in the act itself with full deliberation = mortal (assent to disordered act)
• Consent to pleasure in the act but without full deliberation or with impediment = venial (imperfection of act)

Can higher reason commit venial sin? #

Answer: Yes, but only regarding sudden motions. Higher reason can:

• Sin mortally when deliberating and consenting to acts mortal by their nature
• Sin venially when a sudden motion of disbelief or disorder occurs before consultation of eternal reasons
• When the disordered motion is reduced by deliberation to higher consideration of divine law, it becomes mortal

What is the role of deliberation in determining sinfulness? #

Answer:

• Without deliberation: A sudden motion may remain venial even if the act is mortally sinful by kind
• With deliberation: If one deliberately consents after consulting eternal reasons and finding contradiction to divine law, the sin becomes mortal through the deliberation itself
• The deliberation does not create the sin but perfects it from venial to mortal

Why does the object of pleasure matter morally? #

Answer: Because what one takes pleasure in reveals what one’s will assents to:

• Pleasure in thinking reveals assent only to cognitive operation
• Pleasure in the act itself reveals assent to the act and its disorder
• The latter is more joined to and participatory in the evil, hence graver

Theological/Spiritual Context #

Berquist includes practical reflections on confession and spiritual direction:

• The importance of distinguishing venial from mortal sin in sacramental practice
• Augustine’s teaching that venial sins should be confessed but are not strictly required for absolution
• The relevance of Alphonsus Liguori’s position on confession of venial sins
• The proper role of priests under 30 versus older, experienced confessors in understanding these distinctions
• The Christian practice of purgatory and the need for ongoing intercession (mentioning prayers for deceased parents)

Pedagogical Notes #

• Berquist emphasizes that Thomas’s distinction between two objects of pleasure is subtle and requires careful reading
• The lecture demonstrates the scholastic method of examining objections, counterarguments, and systematic replies
• Understanding these distinctions has immediate practical application in sacramental theology and spiritual direction