Meat on Good Friday...Mortal Sin?

[Wannano]

If he didn’t do it on purpose or if there was a situation outside of his control where it would have gone against the law of charity to refuse to eat meat (since the law of charity supersedes all other laws) then no sin would have been committed. Also, if he totally forgot what day it is, and was eating meat before he remembered that he wasn’t supposed to.

An example where the law of charity would apply would be, someone who loves you, but is not aware that you are required to abstain from meat on this day, surprises you with an elegant meal of steak and ribs. She has gone to a great deal of work to make the meal, first of all. Secondly, she isn’t doing it out of malice to make you break your fast, but rather, out of love for you and in order to make you happy.

Telling her that you are fasting and that you are required to abstain from meat would not be helpful - the meal is already cooked. Therefore, you eat the meal that she has prepared for you, and you enjoy it, and you thank her for her thoughtful kindness to you.

There is no sin in this.

However, crashing an acquaintance’s barbecue and helping yourself to their steak and ribs when they feel compelled to offer it to you would be completely wrong. On so many levels. But especially where you are trying to get someone to offer you meat so that you can pretend you were following the law of charity.

Priests have been given authority to give dispensations, when it’s necessary for some reason.

Tell me if I am wrong. The Pope binds a rule so Jesus enforces it, a man commits a mortal sin and dies like in my op but escapes hell if the Priest can give a dispensation?

 

[Gorgias]

frangiuliano115:

I’m rather appalled to be honest.

I think your last sentence shows no respect.

fran, there’s been a whole lot of ‘no respect’, from many sides, in this thread. That’s why I left it; lack of charity abounded, from all sorts of folks.
Don Ruggero:

Rarely, but it did happen, we would have a student who would made it through the process and to the classroom and there showed a want of respect and was rude or impertinent. They did not last long in any formation program I was part of.

And if this were a priestly formation program, and we were your seminarians, I would agree with you. Of course, that’s not the current context, so I’d hope you aren’t thinking that your fellow posters are seminarians, let alone seminarians under your direction; perhaps that’s where the disconnect is coming from…

Of course, that’s neither here nor there, so… have a blessed Easter season!

 

[jmcrae]

Tell me if I am wrong. The Pope binds a rule so Jesus enforces it, a man commits a mortal sin and dies like in my op but escapes hell if the Priest can give a dispensation?

The priest isn’t going to give a dispensation after the fact, and certainly not after someone has already died. The dispensation happens beforehand.

For example, suppose I plan to go for lunch with some of my co-workers next Friday, and further suppose that I assume there will be meat served at the luncheon - in that case, I’m going to ask my Confessor (that is, the priest who normally hears my Confessions) to give me a dispensation from abstinence from meat on that Friday. If he says “Yes,” then I can go ahead and eat meat at the luncheon; otherwise, I will stick to fish, eggs, and vegetables.

 

[Reuben_J]

For example, suppose I plan to go for lunch with some of my co-workers next Friday, and further suppose that I assume there will be meat served at the luncheon - in that case, I’m going to ask my Confessor (that is, the priest who normally hears my Confessions) to give me a dispensation from abstinence from meat on that Friday. If he says “Yes,” then I can go ahead and eat meat at the luncheon; otherwise, I will stick to fish, eggs, and vegetables.

Granted that is hypothetical. In reality, it is no biggie. Since it is not a fast, the person would just simply skip on the meat and eat everything else on the table.

It is different then if it is on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday - the two obligatory fasting days. Dispensation indeed should be sought.

Again that is hypothetical because in reality it is hard to imagine a Catholic who wants to go to all the trouble to ask for dispensation, meaning he knows the significance of the days in question, to contravene the restriction on these two days.

Just to put it in context for our non-Catholic friends.

 

[jmcrae]

Granted that is hypothetical. In reality, it is no biggie. Since it is not a fast, the person would just simply skip on the meat and eat everything else on the table.

It is different then if it is on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday - the two obligatory fasting days. Dispensation indeed should be sought.

Again that is hypothetical because in reality it is hard to imagine a Catholic who wants to go to all the trouble to ask for dispensation, meaning he knows the significance of the days in question, to contravene the restriction on these two days.

Just to put it in context for our non-Catholic friends.

Yes, exactly.

 

[dronald]

Colossians 2:20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

Romans 14: 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.

20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.[c] 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

 

[Wannano]

The priest isn’t going to give a dispensation after the fact, and certainly not after someone has already died. The dispensation happens beforehand.

For example, suppose I plan to go for lunch with some of my co-workers next Friday, and further suppose that I assume there will be meat served at the luncheon - in that case, I’m going to ask my Confessor (that is, the priest who normally hears my Confessions) to give me a dispensation from abstinence from meat on that Friday. If he says “Yes,” then I can go ahead and eat meat at the luncheon; otherwise, I will stick to fish, eggs, and vegetables.

I guess I proved my ignorance by asking, at least now I know that.

I have just read through all the posts on this thread from first to last. Very interesting how varied the reasoning appears. I must say, IF I were ever to consider joining Catholicism I would hope to have other questions answered with more clarity and consensus. In fairness I have been told by others at times that one of my faults is wanting to understand everything. I am not one to beiieve in something just because someone else has decided that I should or because they make it so impossible to comphrend.

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

Colossians 2:20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

Romans 14: 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.

20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.[c] 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

Execpt abstinence is NOT a human precept.

 

[rcwitness]

For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

hey d,
If you have read these posts, you have seen my genuine appreciation for the thin line the mandi tory fast walks with 2nd Colossians! I’m still trying to reconcile the two.

But this final statement from Paul is important! Can a Catholic in good conscience intentionally and unremorsefully (for the sake of eating meat) reject the Church’s minimal petition to fast during the high point of recognizing our Lord’s Passion, and be doing so in faith?

 

[jmcrae]

I guess I proved my ignorance by asking, at least now I know that.

I have just read through all the posts on this thread from first to last. Very interesting how varied the reasoning appears. I must say, IF I were ever to consider joining Catholicism I would hope to have other questions answered with more clarity and consensus. In fairness I have been told by others at times that one of my faults is wanting to understand everything. I am not one to beiieve in something just because someone else has decided that I should or because they make it so impossible to comphrend.

If you choose to become Catholic, you would take preparation classes and participate in various Rites where you would have access to the original source material, rather than random strangers on the Internet.

 

[Reuben_J]

I guess I proved my ignorance by asking, at least now I know that.

I have just read through all the posts on this thread from first to last. Very interesting how varied the reasoning appears. I must say, IF I were ever to consider joining Catholicism I would hope to have other questions answered with more clarity and consensus. In fairness I have been told by others at times that one of my faults is wanting to understand everything. I am not one to beiieve in something just because someone else has decided that I should or because they make it so impossible to comphrend.

I will say this again – you have the right to ask but when you do it in an internet forum, it is not just question and answer session but where you would also get views from the individuals’ perspective.

In the nutshell you are asking whether it is a mortal sin for a Catholic to eat meat on a Good Friday. The answer is yes because it is against the Church’s Commandment. And then what does mortal sin’s entails?

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.

You were asking whether we know if a person goes to hell or not. This question may sound normal to a Protestant, but to Catholics, they are taught that nobody knows who goes to hell or not. Only God knows.

So I think that’s the problem with thread such as this. It will only invite argument as to whether this particular Catholic belief is right or not, rather than her belief on it.

 

[Wannano]

I will say this again – you have the right to ask but when you do it in an internet forum, it is not just question and answer session but where you would also get views from the individuals’ perspective.

In the nutshell you are asking whether it is a mortal sin for a Catholic to eat meat on a Good Friday. The answer is yes because it is against the Church’s Commandment. And then what does mortal sin’s entails?

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.

You were asking whether we know if a person goes to hell or not. This question may sound normal to a Protestant, but to Catholics, they are taught that nobody knows who goes to hell or not. Only God knows.

So I think that’s the problem with thread such as this. It will only invite argument as to whether this particular Catholic belief is right or not, rather than her belief on it.

 

[Wannano]

I will say this again – you have the right to ask but when you do it in an internet forum, it is not just question and answer session but where you would also get views from the individuals’ perspective.

In the nutshell you are asking whether it is a mortal sin for a Catholic to eat meat on a Good Friday. The answer is yes because it is against the Church’s Commandment. And then what does mortal sin’s entails?

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.

You were asking whether we know if a person goes to hell or not. This question may sound normal to a Protestant, but to Catholics, they are taught that nobody knows who goes to hell or not. Only God knows.

So I think that’s the problem with thread such as this. It will only invite argument as to whether this particular Catholic belief is right or not, rather than her belief on it.

You say I set up a scenario in which the Catholic perspective is a wrong premise? Please explanation that to me.

You say I asked whether someone is in hell or not. I did not ask that and I agree with you that only God knows. I am not going to speculate on your motives for saying that may sound normal to a Protestant but be informed that it is not normal to me.

Interesting how you resent my thread “such as this”. Does it give you the same problem that a lot of threads are based on whether a Protestant belief is right or not?

I spent a lot of time giving a long answer this morning and then messed up sending it. You got a much abreviated version.

 

[guanophore]

You say I set up a scenario in which the Catholic perspective is a wrong premise? Please explanation that to me.

He did explain it. Maybe you need to meditate on his post some more. It is quite clear.

It is Good Friday and I have been reading about eating meat on Good Friday. If I understand the Catholic position the following scenario would be accurate:

A Catholic in good standing with the Church walks by a steak house on Good Friday and is suddenly tempted to have a good rib eye steak. He thinks about his temptation to eat the steak and admits to himself that he knows it is a mortal sin to succumb to his craving today but he willfully decides to eat one anyway. After he is finished eating he gets up from the table feeling very satisfied and immediately drops dead. No thought of confession or chance of confession occured. Does the Church teach that he would immediately have sent himself to Hell with this action?

The CC does not teach that anyone is in hell, or is necessarily going to hell, as only God knows the heart and can judge.

What is taught is that those who willingly and knowingly reject God have a state of existence apart from God, so that their choice to refuse fellowship with God can be honored.

 You say I asked whether someone is in hell or not. I did not ask that and I agree with you that only God knows.

Your thread title does not ask this, but the scenario you proposed is not about the mortal sin, but the consequence of it. So you are basically asking if the person in your scenario is in hell, or not.

I spent a lot of time giving a long answer this morning and then messed up sending it. You got a much abreviated version.

Sometimes you can back up the page and the post will reappear. That happens to me sometimes. Sometimes I copy the post before hitting submit in case it gets eaten by cyberspace.

 

[Wannano]

He did explain it. Maybe you need to meditate on his post some more. It is quite clear.

I honestly am not understanding.

The CC does not teach that anyone is in hell, or is necessarily going to hell, as only God knows the heart and can judge.

I agree that only God is the judge.

What is taught is that those who willingly and knowingly reject God have a state of existence apart from God, so that their choice to refuse fellowship with God can be honored.

Yes, that will be real.

Your thread title does not ask this, but the scenario you proposed is not about the mortal sin, but the consequence of it. So you are basically asking if the person in your scenario is in hell, or not.

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

Sometimes you can back up the page and the post will reappear. That happens to me sometimes. Sometimes I copy the post before hitting submit in case it gets eaten by cyberspace.

 

[Wannano]

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

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I guess I proved my ignorance by asking, at least now I know that.

I have just read through all the posts on this thread from first to last. Very interesting how varied the reasoning appears. I must say, IF I were ever to consider joining Catholicism I would hope to have other questions answered with more clarity and consensus. In fairness I have been told by others at times that one of my faults is wanting to understand everything. I am not one to beiieve in something just because someone else has decided that I should or because they make it so impossible to comphrend.

I was the same way, wanna.

Took 10 years of asking questions until I fully understood everything and became convinced in my mind that said explanations were at least plausible. I alienated many Catholics along the way lol.

In regards to sin and judgment, I actually like the fact that while the CC does define things, they don’t claim to be God or to know anyone in particular’s standing with God when they leave this earth.(except obvious cases like the Saints)

I find non-Catholic churches teaching on sin and salvation to be insufficient and downright presumptuous. I’m “saved” When God says I am and the gates are opened for me, not because i felt good after a prayer while on this planet…

Pax.

 

[Wannano]

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?

 

[Gorgias]

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.

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.

 

[Wannano]

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.

What do you mean here, I am not understanding?