Untraddies may not know this, but traddies know that for a sin to be a mortal sin, three things are necessary: 1. Serious matter; 2. One knows that it is serious; 3. One commits the serious sin with full consent of the will (and usually with forethought and planning).
If any sin, that technically can be called mortal, lacks any of these three, the sin is a venial sin, no matter how heinous the sin might be. It is still a sin, but not mortal.
Thus, on social media, when Catholics show disrespect to the Holy Father, that is a serious sin, in fact showing disrespect to anyone is, but to the Holy Father, there are Church laws on this. If they do so it is a mortal sin, when and only when, their serious sin fulfills the other two categories, they know it is serious and do so with full consent of the will.
If someone advocates for the killing of innocent human beings, born or unborn, or advocates for others to be able to do the killing, like getting a HITMAN as Pope Francis would describe it, that is quite serious. If they do not know that, and were under the influence of a cult leader, drunk or mentally ill, it is not a mortal sin, it is a venial sin but in civil law they could be sent to prison, because in American civil law, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Let’s say that a person who does not know in fact about something, states that so and so priest has never preached about racism (and makes such a bold statement as to infer, that just because he hasn’t heard it, it must be true) and says that to falsely denigrate the priest, thus a lie and detraction also, that is a serious sin. Now if the poor soul is so ignorant of his Catholic faith that he doesn’t know that and he’s in a fever pitch of compulsion and libels that unthinkingly on a southerner’s blog, then it is a venial sin not a mortal sin. But if he fulfills the last two requirements, it is a mortal sin.
I have blocked one commenter here because of that person’s hateful remarks usually revolving around the one sin that strikes terror in that person, sodomy. He calls may church leaders sodomites, even when they aren’t. And thus the use of the term sodomite for this person is similar to how some people use the “N” word, to denigrate people. When false it is both libel and slander. In terms of the word sodomite, when used against someone who isn’t it is also gossip and detraction. It is a lie too. This person uses the term against anyone who has same sex attraction and again is like the ‘n” word, even if the homosexual is chaste or celibate. And beside this, the label is chosen without any proof, unless of course it is proven.
But sodomy is not only the sin of homosexuals who do it, but also of heterosexual men who do it with their wives or girl friends. The person to whom I refer doesn’t use sodomy in the full understanding of it, that person uses it only towards homosexuals or those to whom this person thinks has sympathies for homosexuals. That is a mortal sin, when all three criteria are fulfilled. If one, two or three of the criteria are missing, it is a venial sin.
I hope this helps the ignorant (as the Church must instruct the ignorant) and those who may be heterodox through no fault of their own, or simply choose to be untraddies.