Meat on Good Friday...Mortal Sin?

[LethalMouse]

I like to say, the church teaches the highway to heaven. You might get there another route, but why chance it? Cutting through the woods can be bad.

 

[Wannano]

Since I was castigated earlier for having suggested this, let me try again to explain.

I think that this post to which you’re replying is saying, “if you had simply asked ‘is it a mortal sin to eat meat on Good Friday?’, then it would have had the appearance of a simple question asked in good faith.” However, sometimes, those who disagree with Catholicism attempt to ridicule it by making out its pronouncements to be arbitrary and illogical. At first glance, and without anything else to go on, your hypothetical might have seemed to some (including me, at the time of your posting) to be exactly this type of attempt to say “this sounds silly.” (Since that time, your posts have established that this wasn’t your intent, and it was a misunderstanding to think that it was intended that way.) But, the post you quoted is saying that this misunderstanding might not have taken place if you’d have simply asked the question straight up.

Hopefully, you can reply “no hard feelings” – some of us misunderstood your intent… that’s all.

Thank you for replying, I have no hard feelings, hopefully no one else does either.

I understand defensiveness, I have experienced it here my self at Protestant ridicule.:sad_yes:

I can ask the questions straight up:
Question 1. Does the Catholic Church teach that it is a mortal sin to eat meat on Good Friday?

Question 2. Does the Catholic Church currently teach this? CCC 1033 “to die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from Him forever by our own free choice”.

As a result of previous replies I will ask another question:
Question 3. Does the Catholic Church teach that to be separated from God eternally means hell exists?

I hope this is acceptable questioning. Thanks.

 

[Gorgias]

I can ask the questions straight up:
Question 1. Does the Catholic Church teach that it is a mortal sin to eat meat on Good Friday?

You’ve gotten a range of answers in this thread. Some suggest that the objective considerations are sufficient to conclude ‘mortal sin’, while others have noted that objective considerations can only determine sinfulness but not culpability, and therefore, an analysis of ‘full knowledge and deliberate consent’ would be required before the conclusion of mortal sin could be reached. Some of these answers have noted that the sin isn’t in the eating of meat, but in the flouting of Church precept. Another answer found in this thread asserts that only a ‘substantial’ adherence to the requirement to abstain is necessary, and thus, a single instance of rejection of abstinence is insufficient to conclude ‘mortal sin’, even if deliberate and intentional. That’s the joy of internet fora – you’ll get a range of answers.

Question 2. Does the Catholic Church currently teach this? CCC 1033 “to die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from Him forever by our own free choice”.

Yes.

As a result of previous replies I will ask another question:
Question 3. Does the Catholic Church teach that to be separated from God eternally means hell exists?

If you’re asking whether hell can be said to exist merely because it has human occupants, then the answer is ‘no’ – hell exists because it is well-attested in Scripture, whether or not any human soul is condemned there. However, if you’re merely asking whether hell exists, then yes, it does.

 

[guanophore]

I honestly am not understanding.

Ok, then we will keep working on it until we figure it out.

I agree that only God is the judge.

Then, since we cannot know the mind of God, how can we possibly know who is in hell, and who is not?

Yes, that will be real.

So then we can agree that the Church and God don’t “send” anyone to hell?

Actually I directly asked if the Church would teach that he went to hell.

So now you have had several "direct’ replies that the Church does not teach that anyone “goes to hell”. Which part of that do you not understand?

What am I doing wrong this morning with my posting procedures?

If you want to respond by cutting up the post, you need to insert the post source at the beginning and the the quote at the end.

Here is a minitutorial.

 

[guanophore]

"You did not structure your question that way but instead putting up a hypothetical scenario. That complicated things because in effect you were setting a premise which from the Catholics perspective was a wrong premise bordering on the mischievous. "

I do not understand what this means. Can anyone understanding it please explain it to me?

Your hypothetical scenario was not consistent with your thread topic (changing issues).

Your hypothetical scenario asked a question that always has the same answer from the Church. The Church does not know, nor does she pronounce who is in hell - ever.

Your premise, the foundation of your question, does not adequately reflect the Church’s teaching. The hypothetical could be considered mischevievous (trying to start problems) because it is provocative. It is asking Catholics to answer something that we cannot.

 

[rcwitness]

It is asking Catholics to answer something that we cannot.

Maybe it could be said, that the hypothetical scenerio places oneself at odds with God, and it’s possible that through this choice Christ sees a rejection of His own Spirit.

 

[rcwitness]

Matthew 5:27-29(RSVCE)

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.

What if we used this sin with the scenerio in the OP?

 

[guanophore]

Maybe it could be said, that the hypothetical scenerio places oneself at odds with God, and it’s possible that through this choice Christ sees a rejection of His own Spirit.

Certainly yes. It could be a case of final impenitence. But we can only speculate.

Matthew 5:27-29(RSVCE)

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.

What if we used this sin with the scenerio in the OP?

I think it is quite appropriate. A person who loves God and wants to spend an eternity with Him would hardly choose a steak instead.

 

[Wannano]

Ok, then we will keep working on it until we figure it out.

Then, since we cannot know the mind of God, how can we possibly know who is in hell, and who is not?

So then we can agree that the Church and God don’t “send” anyone to hell?

So now you have had several "direct’ replies that the Church does not teach that anyone “goes to hell”. Which part of that do you not understand?

If you want to respond by cutting up the post, you need to insert the post source at the beginning and the the quote at the end.

Here is a minitutorial.

 

[Wannano]

Ok, then we will keep working on it until we figure it out.

Then, since we cannot know the mind of God, how can we possibly know who is in hell, and who is not?

So then we can agree that the Church and God don’t “send” anyone to hell?

So now you have had several "direct’ replies that the Church does not teach that anyone “goes to hell”. Which part of that do you not understand?

If you want to respond by cutting up the post, you need to insert the post source at the beginning and the the quote at the end.

Here is a minitutorial.

I have been away all day and I thank you for your response.

You ask "so now you have had several direct replies that the Church does not teach that anyone “goes to hell”. Which part of that do you not understand?
Two things i do not understand then Guano, I also have just as many Catholics who responded that the Church would teach that the man in my op would have gone to hell.
Secondly if the Church does not teach that anyone goes to hell what is CCC 1033 saying:
“To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from Him forever by our own free choice”. ?

 

[Wannano]

Certainly yes. It could be a case of final impenitence. But we can only speculate.

I think it is quite appropriate. A person who loves God and wants to spend an eternity with Him would hardly choose a steak instead.

I guess this goes to show how we all think differently as I would think a person who loves God and want to spend an eternity with Him would certainly choose the steak instead of adultery.

 

[rcwitness]

I guess this goes to show how we all think differently as I would think a person who loves God and want to spend an eternity with Him would certainly choose the steak instead of adultery.

What? How did it become a steak or adultery?

My intention for bringing the hard teaching of Jesus about committing adultery by even “looking at a woman” is the seriousness of sin. And if we choose, with knowledge and without remorse, we become liable to the flames of hell! Though, we must remember the judgment of our soul belongs to God alone.

You may say, that is a command of the Lord while abstaining meat on an appointed day is a precept of the Church. And I do struggle to reconcile the rule with Colossians 2!

But it is a rule anyway. And one that I do not consider a burden! And if I did fail on account of my old, sinful nature, I know His grace is sufficient to convict, and Reconcile me!

I also believe that if He decides to take my life in a moment that does not give me enough time to have remorse, He is still just and all knowing. He has told us that He will come like a thief! This is the whole intention of fasting! He is away, and we must put aside what is carnal and of the body, to set our minds and prayers on following Jesus.

All food is good, and we have a right to whatever we want. Yet, for the sake of others (INCLUDING THE CHURCH), we are bound through love, to submit.

Now, if your scenerio had the man going to a dinner of a non-Catholic friend, and they spent effort preparing a meal for him, and it had meat, and it was a Friday during lent, and he decided to eat it out of respect for the friend, then this changes everything! He was putting as side a rule in the Church on account of respecting another person. It was not simply wanting to eat meat AND not caring about the Church fast, or having any regret!

I believe this is the freedom St Paul was talking about, that we have in Jesus. Paul was not condemning a call by the Church to abstain for the principle of fasting.

 

[Wannano]

Certainly yes. It could be a case of final impenitence. But we can only speculate.

I think it is quite appropriate. A person who loves God and wants to spend an eternity with Him would hardly choose a steak instead.

Hey guanophore, I owe you an apology. I see now you ,meant a steak instead of an eternity with God! I am sorry, I thought the instead was a reference to the sentence “I think it is quite appropriate” which was an answer to rc asking if adultery could be substituted for eating meat on Good Friday in my op… I took it to mean a steak instead of adultery by tying the two sentences together.

 

[guanophore]

You ask "so now you have had several direct replies that the Church does not teach that anyone “goes to hell”. Which part of that do you not understand?
Two things i do not understand then Guano, I also have just as many Catholics who responded that the Church would teach that the man in my op would have gone to hell.

This can be a problem, as there are a many opinions as there are belly buttons.

You proposed a scenario, and you will get some opinions. If you want to know what the Church teaches, then evaluate the answers based on what the Church says. Not all Catholics are as well catechized as others.

You can ask them to produce a Source for their opinion, then if they cannot produce an authorative document, it is easy to determine that it is an opinion. One of the problems with your scenario is that you are asking Catholics to do what we should not do, which is judge the heart and eternal status of any soul.

Secondly if the Church does not teach that anyone goes to hell what is CCC 1033 saying:
“To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from Him forever by our own free choice”. ?

I did not say that the Church teaches that no one goes to hell. She teaches that we cannot know this about any particular person.

This is the teaching of Christ. He allows us to choose to be separated from Him for eternity if we so desire.

I guess this goes to show how we all think differently as I would think a person who loves God and want to spend an eternity with Him would certainly choose the steak instead of adultery.

Choosing one mortal sin over another does not demonstrate a love for God. He said if we love Him, we will keep His commandments.

Hey guanophore, I owe you an apology. I see now you ,meant a steak instead of an eternity with God! I am sorry, I thought the instead was a reference to the sentence “I think it is quite appropriate” which was an answer to rc asking if adultery could be substituted for eating meat on Good Friday in my op… I took it to mean a steak instead of adultery by tying the two sentences together.

I wondered how that happened! A person whose heart is “in Christ” will make choices that will demonstrate love for Him. One will keep His commandments out of an abundance of desire to please Him and remain close to Him.

 

[Wannano]

This can be a problem, as there are a many opinions as there are belly buttons.

You proposed a scenario, and you will get some opinions. If you want to know what the Church teaches, then evaluate the answers based on what the Church says. Not all Catholics are as well catechized as others.

You can ask them to produce a Source for their opinion, then if they cannot produce an authorative document, it is easy to determine that it is an opinion. One of the problems with your scenario is that you are asking Catholics to do what we should not do, which is judge the heart and eternal status of any soul.

I did not say that the Church teaches that no one goes to hell. She teaches that we cannot know this about any particular person.

This is the teaching of Christ. He allows us to choose to be separated from Him for eternity if we so desire.

Choosing one mortal sin over another does not demonstrate a love for God. He said if we love Him, we will keep His commandments.

I wondered how that happened! A person whose heart is “in Christ” will make choices that will demonstrate love for Him. One will keep His commandments out of an abundance of desire to please Him and remain close to Him.

Please Guano, I am not being mischievous or ridiculing, it does seem to me that CCC1033 does judge the eternal status of an individual soul.

As an onlooker I am not sure I can understand why the pain of MORTAL sin was attributed to eating meat on Good Friday but I also realize it isn’t any of my business.

 

[guanophore]

 Please Guano, I am not being mischievous  or ridiculing, it does seem to me that CCC1033 does judge the eternal status of an individual soul.

If that is so, which individual is it?

Or how about this passage?

“Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.…” Gal 5:20

can you identify any particular person who will be in hell?

These passages describe behaviors that have eternal consequences.

As an onlooker I am not sure I can understand why the pain of MORTAL sin was attributed to eating meat on Good Friday but I also realize it isn't any of my business.

It is not about eating or not, it is about disobedience to Christ’s Church. The Church has chosen certain days where all the faithful are to join to gether in corporate fasting, as we see in Scripture. Those who refuse to participate cannot really consider themselves part of the One Body who is the bride of Christ.

"John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they came and said to Him, “Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?” 19And Jesus said to them, “While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20"But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.” Mark 2:19

Jesus delivered His authority to His Apostles:

“The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.” Luke 10:16

Rejecting the authority of those appointed by Christ to shepherd the flock is the same as rejecting Christ.

The successors of the Apostles have the authority to call the faithful to fast together.

 

[Wannano]

If that is so, which individual is it?

It is the individual who dies in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love.

 

[guanophore]

guanophore;13823979:

If that is so, which individual is it?

It is the individual who dies in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love.

Yes. Therefore keep watch over your own soul. lest you reach a point of final impenitence. If we all considered the eternal consequences of our daily actions, and what would happen if we had to face the lord immedately, we might make decisions differently. If the man in your scenario knew his life woudl be required of him, would he still have chosen to eat the steak? If so, then perhaps he does not want the company of God through eternity?

It is improper to assume that anyone is going to hell, sinc only God can judge the heart of a person. The teachings are given so that we can be responsible for our own souls.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano;13824662:

Yes. Therefore keep watch over your own soul. lest you reach a point of final impenitence. If we all considered the eternal consequences of our daily actions, and what would happen if we had to face the lord immedately, we might make decisions differently. If the man in your scenario knew his life woudl be required of him, would he still have chosen to eat the steak? If so, then perhaps he does not want the company of God through eternity?

It is improper to assume that anyone is going to hell, sinc only God can judge the heart of a person. The teachings are given so that we can be responsible for our own souls.

I absolutely agree with you on everything you have said here. Thanks

 

[rcwitness]

guanophore;13824864:

I absolutely agree with you on everything you have said here. Thanks

Unless your a pastor/bishop, then you have the duty of guarding the souls of others

Hebrews 13:17

Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.