A hypothetical situation involving just one mortal sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ecclesiastes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Ecclesiastes

Guest
Imagine a hypothetical situation where a Catholic man never committed a sin in his entire life except that he intentionally missed one Sunday Mass a day before his death, but watched the Mass through the Internet, knowing full well that he committed a mortal sin according to the Church. Moreover, imagine that this guy was extremely loving, peaceful, forgiving, humble, non-judgmental, etc. According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, this unfortunate soul would be condemned to eternal suffering in hell.

My question is how many Catholics believe that a fair and just God would condemn him to this severe suffering throughout eternity given all his righteousness?
 
Well what reason did he miss mass- was he sick, lacked transportation? What is his intention

According to Catholic doctrine he missed his Sunday obligation. If he willing chose to not attend then from what I was taught, yeah, he’s probably in hell.

Do I believe that he’s in hell? My own human opinion would say “no, God wouldn’t forget the good he’s done either.” But then again God has killed people in scriptures for breaking even 1 commandment. So, I could see a just God also condemning the man who missed 1 mass to hell.
 
This is a highly self-contradictory question.

A loving, peaceful, forgiving, humble, non-judgmental person doesn’t do something that they are 100% positive is gravely evil, and then shows no remorse. Not even secular society believes that.

If a person is guilty of mortal sin and clings to that mortal sin without repentance, they go to hell.

And God doesn’t condemn people.
 
Last edited:
So he intentionally disobeyed God? Where did that come from. a sinless man all of the sudden just decides to choose a disobedient act. Bottom line is that wouldn’t happen and if it did well then he wasn’t always sinless was he?
 
Suppose that he just disagreed with the Church that watching Mass through the Internet would fulfill his obligation to God, even though he was perfectly aware of the Church’s teaching?
 
That’s a kind of cognitive dissonance that I don’t think is possible for a sane person. He was fully aware of the church’s teaching, he was without sin in every other way, and yet all of a sudden he disagreed? This is one reason why hypotheticals aren’t really all that useful to think about.

-Fr ACEGC
 
So again. He lives a long life of obedience and holiness following teachings and mysteries he does not fully comprehend and said forget it all! I’m logging in to defy the Church!?
 
I agree that it’s highly improbable but I intentionally took it to the utmost extreme to better illustrate the dilemma–such a scenario is possible. So, suppose that he was perfectly sane but just happened to disagree with the Church’s teaching on this one occasion. The dilemma is that he willingly went against the Church’s teaching but believed he fulfilled his moral obligation to God. I believe that this dilemma indirectly applies to many church members, like those who truly believe that birth control is OK and does not offend God in any way.
 
Last edited:
Ecclesiastes said:
According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, this unfortunate soul would be condemned to eternal suffering in hell
Click to expand...
According to his own volition, this unfortunate soul would be condemned to eternal suffering in hell.
 
Last edited:
Ecclesiastes said:
The dilemma is that he willingly went against the Church’s teaching but believed he fulfilled his moral obligation to God.
Click to expand...
If he believed in his moral obligations to God, he wouldn’t willingly go against Church teaching. God and Church aren’t two separate entities like your job and your family where you have to sometimes choose which is priority. I think that is the source of confusion. God (Jesus) created the Church so its not two but one.
 
That is why we are specifically forbidden from judging the eternal fate or the state of another’s soul. “Judge not least you be judged”.

What happens to this man is between him and God.

I will give you an example to think about, imagine a man who has been faithful to his wife for all of their 40 years of marriage. He decides to have sex with another woman and he dies of a massive heart attack during the adulterous act.

Does he go to hell for that sin?

Only God knows.
 
Thanks for your opinion!

What about those who were baptized in the Catholic Church, and are fully aware of the Church’s teachings, but transfer to Judaism or Protestantism and thereby no longer attend the Catholic Sunday Mass? Are such individuals condemned to hell even though they are righteous in almost every other respect?

I do not mean to be difficult but this dilemma perplexes me.
 
Christ would not set a goal that is impossible.

He said “Be perfect as my Father in heaven is perfect”. While perfection in this life is rare, it is not prideful, heretical, presumptuous, etc. to believe that some people do live a life without personal sin.
 
Where is the dilemma? They willingly left the Church. I assume they weren’t kidnapped or forced to leave.

The only people outside the Church who are saved are those who are “invincibly ignorant” of the Church, e.g. a child born to a religion outside the Church who has never been exposed to the Church’s teachings. That is not your hypothetical. That person was a member of the Church and willingly left. Either people are accountable for their voluntary choices or they’re not. If they’re not, as in your hypotheticals , then the entire faith is meaningless.
 
Last edited:
Moses and King David each killed a man but both were favored by God. We can hope that God would be so merciful with each of us.

An assumption here is based on scripture, that Christ gave the Church the power to bind and to loose. So, the Church expresses that it is a normal obligation to attend Mass on Sunday.

Some people make distinctions about Catholics: “good” Catholics, “devout” Catholics, etc. (there must be “bad” Catholics, “lax” Catholics, “lapsed” Catholics, “fallen away” Catholics, or just plain “Catholics.”) We need to keep looking through the right end of the telescope, so to speak.

It should be a joy to go to Church. The psalmist says, I rejoiced when they said unto me, we shall go up to the house of the LORD. As radio priest Fr John Riccardo says, we should want to go to Mass because Jesus wants to give himself to us. Where would we rather be?
 
Ecclesiastes said:
Imagine a hypothetical situation where a Catholic man never committed a sin in his entire life except that he intentionally missed one Sunday Mass a day before his death, but watched the Mass through the Internet, knowing full well that he committed a mortal sin according to the Church. Moreover, imagine that this guy was extremely loving, peaceful, forgiving, humble, non-judgmental, etc. According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, this unfortunate soul would be condemned to eternal suffering in hell.

My question is how many Catholics believe that a fair and just God would condemn him to this severe suffering throughout eternity given all his righteousness?
Click to expand...
This is a very common and reasonable question considering Church teachings, and a disturbing one nonetheless because I think it also points to a basic ignorance about the nature and will of God. Intrinsic to this question is the thought that it almost seems that God might be sort of whimsical, perhaps even relishing the idea that He might send us to hell on a technicality-or is at least bound by His justice and commands to do so. But God desires none to perish-and loves man lavishly, wanting only the very best for us. And He’s bound by nothing except for the dictates of His love, a virtue which is part and parcel of His own nature, of His essence.

So where do the teachings on mortal sin fit into these apparently conflicting views? How well should we be able to predict a person’s eternal destiny based on Church doctrines on sin? God judges by the heart, Scripture tells us. But, because man is pretty well limited to judging by external appearances, the teachings on mortal sin are meant to give us a “picture” of where the heart might be in terms of love of God and neighbor-because love is the measure of how just a person is, and is taught to be destroyed by MS as that sin is always a direct act against love. Now in order to understand where the heart is-the person’s state of being, or their state of grace-I think the following teaching is helpful, because of its emphasis on persistence:

1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:621

Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.622
 
Last edited:
Ecclesiastes said:
What about those who were baptized in the Catholic Church, and are fully aware of the Church’s teachings, but transfer to Judaism or Protestantism and thereby no longer attend the Catholic Sunday Mass? Are such individuals condemned to hell even though they are righteous in almost every other respect?

I do not mean to be difficult but this dilemma perplexes me.
Click to expand...
What dilemma?
 
Ecclesiastes said:
Suppose that he just disagreed with the Church that watching Mass through the Internet would fulfill his obligation to God, even though he was perfectly aware of the Church’s teaching?
Click to expand...
Didn’t that already happen in history?

What happened to Adam and Eve for one deliberate disobedient act? They knew what would happen if they did it. And they did it anyway. And were thrown out of paradise. And that was no hypothetical.
 
Last edited:
Ecclesiastes said:
Imagine a hypothetical situation where a Catholic man never committed a sin in his entire life except that he intentionally missed one Sunday Mass a day before his death, but watched the Mass through the Internet, knowing full well that he committed a mortal sin according to the Church. Moreover, imagine that this guy was extremely loving, peaceful, forgiving, humble, non-judgmental, etc. According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, this unfortunate soul would be condemned to eternal suffering in hell.

My question is how many Catholics believe that a fair and just God would condemn him to this severe suffering throughout eternity given all his righteousness?
Click to expand...
God is always just. If a person dies in the state of unabsolved mortal sin then condemnation is the just result. The Catechism states that:
1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him. …
Click to expand...
St. John Paul II condemned the fundamental option in paragraphs 65-70 of Veritatis Splendor :
The statement of the Council of Trent does not only consider the “grave matter” of mortal sin; it also recalls that its necessary condition is “full awareness and deliberate consent”. In any event, both in moral theology and in pastoral practice one is familiar with cases in which an act which is grave by reason of its matter does not constitute a mortal sin because of a lack of full awareness or deliberate consent on the part of the person performing it. Even so, “care will have to be taken not to reduce mortal sin to an act of ‘fundamental option’ — as is commonly said today — against God”, seen either as an explicit and formal rejection of God and neighbour or as an implicit and unconscious rejection of love. “For mortal sin exists also when a person knowingly and willingly, for whatever reason, chooses something gravely disordered. In fact, such a choice already includes contempt for the divine law, a rejection of God’s love for humanity and the whole of creation: the person turns away from God and loses charity. Consequently, the fundamental orientation can be radically changed by particular acts. Clearly, situations can occur which are very complex and obscure from a psychological viewpoint, and which influence the sinner’s subjective imputability. But from a consideration of the psychological sphere one cannot proceed to create a theological category, which is precisely what the ‘fundamental option’ is, understanding it in such a way that it objectively changes or casts doubt upon the traditional concept of mortal sin”. [ Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhoration Reconciliatio et Paenitentia of Pope John Paul II (December 2,1984),17: AAS 77 (1985), 223.]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top