Is Missing Mass a Mortal Sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alex_H
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Don_Ruggero said:
The candidate is validly baptised. Baptism is the gateway to the other sacraments and anyone who is validly baptised could validly receive the other sacraments. Whether it is licit or illicit is a separate issue.

In the case of one who is validly baptised as a non-Catholic, that person is in a state impaired communion with the Roman Church. The relative degree of impaired communion is on a broad continuum. For example, one who is non-Catholic but Orthodox (or equivalent to the Orthodox from the perspective of Rome) may be admitted to Eucharist, Confession or Anointing simply by the person spontaneously asking for it…although they are advised to follow the directives of their own Church on the issue. In the case of Christians of other ecclesial communities, there are norms both in the Code of Canon Law (Universal Law) and in Particular Law that governs how such a matter is to be addressed.

In any event, having established that one who is validly baptised can be validly admitted to the sacraments by a Catholic priest in spite of their impaired communion with Rome, for a candidate, such as the original poster, s/he would be admitted to the sacrament of penance before her/his reception into full communion with the Church so that s/he is in the state of grace for her/his reception, confirmation, and first Communion – which the rite envisions as occurring in one continuous liturgical act. There is a norm of law that obviates what would be suspending the Mass to hear confessions of those who in one instant are received into full communion but then in a subsequent instant are confirmed and in a subsequent instant are given their First Communion.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the thorough explanation.
 
Alex_H said:
Hello,

So last week I slipped up and didn’t go to mass. I think I hit the snooze button on my alarm and then went back to sleep. I’m not justifying this sin, just telling you how it happened. My question is, is it a mortal sin to skip Sunday mass?

I am going to be confirmed into the Church this Saturday. On Saturday, I will take my first communion. I don’t want to take it unworthily, however, so I want to know if I need to confess this sin before Mass on Saturday.

Also, as a side note, I just went to Confession a few days ago. Would it be wrong for me to go to confession so soon again, and only to confess that one sin?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not…go to confession!!! It is never wrong to wait to confess when your conscience clearly tells you something is wrong. You will notice a more awareness toward sin when you become Catholic and this is GOOD! God wants us to be holy and every chance we see sin it is good to get cleansed and forgiven (some will differ with me based on what is absolutely necessary…) If you truely want to grow in holiness this is important!! Blessings to you as you enter His Church. I am a convert and am immensely grateful that our Lord called me to come into His Church!!! My love and prayers,
mlz
P.S. PM me if you have any more questions.
 
Op, good luck on Sunday!!!

Might want to spend some extra study time this week because there are a slew of things you will now be bound by. For instance last Sunday was the last time you can miss Mass. Too bad to because passion Sunday is pretty moving. Hopefully you have been prepared as to what those things are.

Welcome and blessings!
 
mlz said:
Absolutely not…go to confession!!! It is never wrong to wait to confess when your conscience clearly tells you something is wrong. You will notice a more awareness toward sin when you become Catholic and this is GOOD! God wants us to be holy and every chance we see sin it is good to get cleansed and forgiven (some will differ with me based on what is absolutely necessary…) If you truely want to grow in holiness this is important!! Blessings to you as you enter His Church. I am a convert and am immensely grateful that our Lord called me to come into His Church!!! My love and prayers,
mlz
P.S. PM me if you have any more questions.
Click to expand...
And confess what? This?

It has already been shown that there was no sin.
 
porthos11 said:
And confess what? This?

It has already been shown that there was no sin.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that has been established. Even if we put aside the law of the church which I’m still not convinced doesn’t apply, there are at least two commandments the op has an issue with. Of course number one, and then number three.
One because we have to assume that the sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence was taught to the op. Knowing that God himself was there and choosing something over that would be something to examine. Also three. Being a baptized Christian would bind him to the observance of the Lord’s day. And he should have been taught that as well.

I just find it odd that at the end of the program this happens. Most people coming in can’t seem to get enough of Holy Week. One should be well prepared and ready for the challenge of being obedient to God and the Church.

Confession is not out of line to suggest. Might be helpful to the priest as well to have a little insight as to the preparation of a candidate.

Also, was there no other Mass?
 
Gorgias said:
NeedImprovement,

Deacon Jeff beat me to the punch!
Click to expand...
OK, but I think he partially did it back in post # 2 not post # 21 – The Rev. Mr. Jeff is simply quoting from the CCC . I would note here that I wasn’t asking him to commit –the question was addressed to you.

I see a hybrid from peter26 and Deacon Jeff as providing something towards a more complete answer ; “it was not a mortal sin for you if you were not aware that it was” – implies the “full knowledge” condition and “deliberately not attending Mass on Sunday is a mortal sin” covers the aspect of “intention”.

(name removed by moderator) also speaks of the objectivity being expressed better as a “grave matter” and I would agree. (posts 14, 21).
Gorgias said:
(I’d still quibble a little, and change #1 to address the fact that one deliberately skips Mass when he has been excused from the obligation!)
Click to expand...
That would make for a most interesting discussion in itself.
Gorgias said:
. . . Your claim seems to be that objectivity in standards implies a lack of subjectivity in evaluating the situation. That has me scratching my head. Yes, there is an objective standard; yet, one meets (or fails to meet) that objective standard by virtue of his subjective engagement in a situation. To call this an ‘objective situation’ seems to deny that (subjective!) circumstances matter!)
Click to expand...
If it’s any consolation to you, I’m scratching my head too. We still appear to be speaking in parallel rather than on the same level. That’s why I’m replying. I would still like to give you the last word , but would prefer my own words not be misconstrued.

You speak of subjective “circumstances” and I was seeing “subjective” more as a disposition. Of course the subjective matters- enough that our Blessed Lord would come to die for us and redeem us. And it is just as necessary as the objective. What I’m saying is that the objective standard must precede the subjective in order to have something to contrast the subjective against – otherwise we could never tell it was subjective.

Try a word other than objective “standard” and perhaps it will make more sense. I’m alluding to the** moral truth**. The moral truth which the Catholic Church proposes is objective. When the Church defines a type of sin , is She not proclaiming/proposing a moral truth ? And that moral truth is always objective and is the moral standard. It then becomes up to each of us to live that truth subjectively as best we can.

So who actually makes the judgment – the determination of whether what we personally did (or didn’t do) constitutes sin ? Even a confessor is at a disadvantage here and has to go on trust , because the only One who can truly know the full movement of our will apart from ourselves, is God. Even then, it can be a challenge to know what is going on in our own mind at particular moments.

While venial sin , mortal sin and grave matter may look fine on paper , in the real world, it isn’t always all that cut and dried. They converge sometimes. While one is wondering whether they may have committed a more serious venial sin, it could, due to factors be instead a mortal sin, and what might not seem like a grave matter, might actually be a very grave matter due to consequences ; and what might be called a grave matter, might actually not be at all due to mitigating factors.

As an aside , not every mortal sin is mortal because the matter is grave:
*MODERN CATHOLIC DICTIONARY ; Fr. John Hardon, S.J.
*
GRIEVOUS MATTER.
Moral obligations that are binding under pain of mortal sin. The gravity of the matter is determined by the object and circumstance of the action (or omission) and is known in the first place by the teaching authority of the Church, based on divine revelation. Some sins do not admit of slight matter, and these are mortal sins “from their whole nature” (ex toto genere suo), as lust and blasphemy. In other sins the matter is not always grave, as in theft or injustice, and these are mortal “from their nature” (ex genere suo). In every case, however, for a mortal sin there is also required full advertence of the mind to the fact that the matter is serious, and full consent of the will to do or not do what a person knows is a grave command or prohibition.
Click to expand...
Have a Blessed Triduum everyone.
 
mlz said:
Absolutely not…go to confession!!! It is never wrong to wait to confess when your conscience clearly tells you something is wrong. You will notice a more awareness toward sin when you become Catholic and this is GOOD! God wants us to be holy and every chance we see sin it is good to get cleansed and forgiven (some will differ with me based on what is absolutely necessary…) If you truely want to grow in holiness this is important!! Blessings to you as you enter His Church. I am a convert and am immensely grateful that our Lord called me to come into His Church!!! My love and prayers,
mlz
P.S. PM me if you have any more questions.
Click to expand...
No. There is no sin for the confessor to absolve. Because no law has been violated. The conscience can err when it is making a moral judgement, if it does not have the knowledge it needs in order to have been properly formed – which is the case in this situation.
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
I’m not sure that has been established. Even if we put aside the law of the church which I’m still not convinced doesn’t apply, there are at least two commandments the op has an issue with. Of course number one, and then number three.
One because we have to assume that the sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence was taught to the op. Knowing that God himself was there and choosing something over that would be something to examine. Also three. Being a baptized Christian would bind him to the observance of the Lord’s day. And he should have been taught that as well.

I just find it odd that at the end of the program this happens. Most people coming in can’t seem to get enough of Holy Week. One should be well prepared and ready for the challenge of being obedient to God and the Church.

Confession is not out of line to suggest. Might be helpful to the priest as well to have a little insight as to the preparation of a candidate.

Also, was there no other Mass?
Click to expand...
As a convert I can vouch for the fact that lapses like this often happen to people in their last weeks of RCIA. I remember the temptations to laxity and disbelief that suddenly came out of nowhere those last few weeks. It happened to my husband too. We both agreed to just put our heads down and be obedient and gut it out and pray for the grace we needed. We made it through the vigil, and suddenly things changed. Of course they would, because the grace of being admitted to the sacraments makes all the difference in the world. But Satan battles the hardest when he is about to lose a soul, from what I have read.
 
Don_Ruggero said:
The answer I provided is not derived from my suppositions or from common knowledge…it derives from being a priest who was also a professor who lectured the classes of liturgy and sacraments, theology and the code of canon law, and canon law in pastoral ministry.
Click to expand...
I see. But it is “all Greek to me”. Well, I finally understood what you were trying to say after reading over the posts. I thought my post was rather simple to understand. I was not attacking your position or your knowledge of the subject. I was just simply trying to say that some of us did not understand at first what you were trying to say and some were just asking questions. I respect you as a priest and I respect your knowledge on the subject. And I agree that the OP’s question was answered more than 30 posts ago.
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
I’m not sure that has been established.
Click to expand...
Yeah. It really has. 🤷
Even if we put aside the law of the church which I’m still not convinced doesn’t apply
Click to expand...
The hang-up that you seem to have is what types of ‘law’ there are, and the recognition of who is bound by these various categories of law. It’s already been mentioned that there are both ‘divine law’ (which is God’s law, and to which we are all held accountable) and ‘ecclesiastical law’ (which is the law of the Church, and to which only Catholics are held accountable).

So, for instance, the precept to attend Mass on Sundays and holydays applies to Catholics. (Not non-Catholic Christians, not the unbaptized – only Catholics). Non-Catholic Christians and Jews must “keep holy the sabbath”, but would you say that they’re required to attend Catholic Mass? Of course not.

Would it be praiseworthy for the OP to attend Mass as he prepares to enter into the Church? Of course. It is obligatory? No – he’s not bound, in the way that Catholics are bound, to ecclesiastical law.

There is law, of course, to which all are bound: regardless of baptismal status and congregational affiliation, we are bound not to murder, for instance.

These distinctions make for the explanations you’ve already read: the OP isn’t yet obligated by Church law, although those who are already members of the Church are. Is that so confusing?
One because we have to assume that the sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence was taught to the op. Knowing that God himself was there and choosing something over that would be something to examine.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. Yet, given that he’s not yet bound to Mass attendance, it doesn’t rise to the level of sin.
Also three. Being a baptized Christian would bind him to the observance of the Lord’s day. And he should have been taught that as well.
Click to expand...
Of course. And, as I’ve mentioned, his observance of the sabbath is not yet a full participation in the Mass. That day is coming; but as of today, it’s not yet a binding to the obligation of Sunday Mass attendance.
Confession is not out of line to suggest.
Click to expand...
Confession is never bad to suggest. In this case, however, the OP hasn’t sinned mortally (nor has he sinned venially). In fact, his question was whether, in the absence of another confession, he would be receiving communion unworthily. The answer is “no, you wouldn’t be receiving unworthily.”
 
NeedImprovement said:
I would note here that I wasn’t asking him to commit –the question was addressed to you.
Click to expand...
🤷 And? His answer was, largely, what I would have answered.
What I’m saying is that the objective standard must precede the subjective in order to have something to contrast the subjective against – otherwise we could never tell it was subjective.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. But, once we have subjective considerations, we can no longer claim a matter to be merely ‘objective’. That’s where we started – with the claim that mortal sin is an objective consideration.
Try a word other than objective “standard” and perhaps it will make more sense. I’m alluding to the** moral truth**. The moral truth which the Catholic Church proposes is objective. When the Church defines a type of sin , is She not proclaiming/proposing a moral truth ? And that moral truth is always objective and is the moral standard.
Click to expand...
That’s fine. However, the question at hand was a particular application of the ‘moral truth’. That particular application involves subjective considerations; hence, not objective. 🤷
So who actually makes the judgment – the determination of whether what we personally did (or didn’t do) constitutes sin ? Even a confessor is at a disadvantage here and has to go on trust , because the only One who can truly know the full movement of our will apart from ourselves, is God. Even then, it can be a challenge to know what is going on in our own mind at particular moments.
Click to expand...
That’s correct. And so, in a way, it really doesn’t matter whether a penitent has committed a mortal sin or not; when he exits the confessional, his sins are forgiven – whether they were mortal or not. Neither the penitent nor the confessor needs to make that judgment; absolving the penitent of his sins, the confessor only really needs to know whether the penitent is contrite and has a firm resolve not to sin again.
While venial sin , mortal sin and grave matter may look fine on paper , in the real world, it isn’t always all that cut and dried.
Click to expand...
While one is wondering whether they may have committed a more serious venial sin, it could, due to factors be instead a mortal sin, and what might not seem like a grave matter, might actually be a very grave matter due to consequences ; and what might be called a grave matter, might actually not be at all due to mitigating factors.
Click to expand...
And, once one enters the confessional, properly disposed, these considerations no longer matter. 😉
As an aside , not every mortal sin is mortal because the matter is grave:
Click to expand...
That’s not at all what your quotation is saying. 🤷

It’s saying that some sins are always grave, and others are sometimes grave. Of course, a sin must be of grave matter in order to rise to the level of mortal sin. Every mortal sin is mortal because it is grave matter; sin that is not of grave matter cannot be mortal.
Have a Blessed Triduum everyone.
Click to expand...
You too!
 
Gorgias said:
Yeah. It really has. 🤷

The hang-up that you seem to have is what types of ‘law’ there are, and the recognition of who is bound by these various categories of law. It’s already been mentioned that there are both ‘divine law’ (which is God’s law, and to which we are all held accountable) and ‘ecclesiastical law’ (which is the law of the Church, and to which only Catholics are held accountable).

So, for instance, the precept to attend Mass on Sundays and holydays applies to Catholics. (Not non-Catholic Christians, not the unbaptized – only Catholics). Non-Catholic Christians and Jews must “keep holy the sabbath”, but would you say that they’re required to attend Catholic Mass? Of course not.

Would it be praiseworthy for the OP to attend Mass as he prepares to enter into the Church? Of course. It is obligatory? No – he’s not bound, in the way that Catholics are bound, to ecclesiastical law.

There is law, of course, to which all are bound: regardless of baptismal status and congregational affiliation, we are bound not to murder, for instance.

These distinctions make for the explanations you’ve already read: the OP isn’t yet obligated by Church law, although those who are already members of the Church are. Is that so confusing?

Perhaps. Yet, given that he’s not yet bound to Mass attendance, it doesn’t rise to the level of sin.

Of course. And, as I’ve mentioned, his observance of the sabbath is not yet a full participation in the Mass. That day is coming; but as of today, it’s not yet a binding to the obligation of Sunday Mass attendance.

Confession is never bad to suggest. In this case, however, the OP hasn’t sinned mortally (nor has he sinned venially). ** In fact, his question was whether, in the absence of another confession, he would be receiving communion unworthily. The answer is “no, you wouldn’t be receiving unworthily**.”
Click to expand...
Actually he had two questions and one “I want to know…” and I’m not sure that his questions have been answered.

**Question # 1: ** “My question is, is it a mortal sin to skip Sunday mass?”

I WANT TO KNOW: "I am going to be confirmed into the Church this Saturday. On Saturday, I will take my first communion. I don’t want to take it unworthily, however, so I want to know if I need to confess this sin before Mass on Saturday.
I still thought that the question posed by Hoosierdaddy was a good one, especially if the candidate was concerned because he had overslept. “Wasn’t there another Mass to attend?” But the question of his need to confess has been answered by our expert board member, Don Ruggero. “No”

Question #2: “Also, as a side note, I just went to Confession a few days ago. Would it be wrong for me to go to confession so soon again, and only to confess that one sin?”
 
zab said:
Actually he had two questions and one “I want to know…” and I’m not sure that his questions have been answered.

**Question # 1: ** “My question is, is it a mortal sin to skip Sunday mass?”

I WANT TO KNOW: "I am going to be confirmed into the Church this Saturday. On Saturday, I will take my first communion. I don’t want to take it unworthily, however, so I want to know if I need to confess this sin before Mass on Saturday.
I still thought that the question posed by Hoosierdaddy was a good one, especially if the candidate was concerned because he had overslept. “Wasn’t there another Mass to attend?” But the question of his need to confess has been answered by our expert board member, Don Ruggero. “No”

Question #2: “Also, as a side note, I just went to Confession a few days ago. Would it be wrong for me to go to confession so soon again, and only to confess that one sin?”
Click to expand...
Since when does the act of going to confession itself become a moral issue? (On your question 2)
 
ProVobis said:
Since when does the act of going to confession itself become a moral issue?
Click to expand...
It isn’t, but that’s not what the OP is asking solely about. He is worried that he would NEED to go to Confession lest he receive Communion unworthily.

The answer, and yes, it has been established and beaten to death already in this thread, is no.
 
porthos11 said:
It isn’t, but that’s not what the OP is asking solely about. He is worried that he would NEED to go to Confession lest he receive Communion unworthily.

The answer, and yes, it has been established and beaten to death already in this thread, is no.
Click to expand...
How does one determine another’s need to go to confession?
 
Gorgias said:
By listening to the situation he presents and applying the teachings of the Church, doncha think? 🤷
Click to expand...
Yes, but the NEED for confession is still a personal matter. If one feels the need to spill his confession all over the internet, it is no longer a private matter. Seems self-defeating even to bring it up. Certainly no sacrament has been received.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top