Mortal Sin of Missing Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter murphdog261
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

murphdog261

Guest
I went to go see a priest at my parish, and it came up in conversation how the father did not think that it was a mortal sin to miss a Sunday mass. I know nothing about the development or the history behind this teaching, except that the CC teaches that it is a mortal sin the miss Sunday mass.

When the priest asked me, “Do you really think some one will burn for eternity because they missed a mass on Sunday?” , I replied that I had to observe the teaching of the Church. The priest said “That’s good, but God also gave you a brain” (laughing a bit).

I don’t think that this priest has bad intentions, but he did say that "some people may not like the legalistic nature of Catholicism, and that is why they may steer towards other mainstream denominations (Lutheran, episcopalian, Anglican etc.)

My question: **For how long has the Church taught that missing Sunday mass is a mortal sin and why? **

Your thoughts are appreciated

In Christ,

Murph
 
This reminds me of the priest who told me that going to weekly confession was “abusing the sacrament.”:rolleyes:

Anyway, this is from a CA article called “Forget Mass? Not a Mortal Sin.”
We do have a grave obligation to attend Sunday Mass. It’s been Church law since, well, long before any of us were around. The reason is simple: We are creatures, and our first duty is to worship our Creator. More than that, we are social creatures, so it is right that we should worship together, and that worship is done best at Mass, which is the highest prayer of the Church. Since the Church has authority from her Founder, we ought to obey whatever strictures are imposed for our spiritual good, such as the requirement to be at Mass on the Lord’s Day.
So, yes, it is a mortal sin to miss Mass knowingly, but not if one has a sufficient reason (such as illness or the incapacity to get to a church). But the writer is wrong to insist that merely forgetting to go to Mass is a mortal sin. Sin arises only through a deliberate act. This is true of any sin. You cannot commit a sin—either mortal or venial—accidentally.
It’s slightly different from your question, but it does have some good points.
 
My question: **For how long has the Church taught that missing Sunday mass is a mortal sin and why? **
Uh, for as long as there has been a Church. Your priest is seriously mistaken and possibly spiritually harmful to his flock if he goes around teaching this to others.

I would make an appointment to visit with your priest and discuss it further.
 
It is deliberately missing mass without a legitimate excuse, not the simple fact that one missed mass. In other words it’s knowing that justice says that God is to be worshipped at the appointed time and saying “screw all that”. It is willfull disobedience that destroys sanctifying grace. Saying, “Gee, would God really put me in Hell for doing something so small in comparison?” are totally missing the point.
 
My question: **For how long has the Church taught that missing Sunday mass is a mortal sin and why? **
It is taught as a mortal sin because it is so dangerous.

Scenario one: two boys at a Catholic boarding school, where Mass is compulsory every week, invent a cock and bull story about an invitation to Buckingham palace, and bunk off for the weekend, missing Mass (of course).

Scenario two: a man doesn’t go because he takes a job on Sundays. Later that job ends, and he doesn’t take up churchgoing again. Twenty years later he goes to church for the last time, in a coffin.

Scenario one is almost totally harmless, scenario two happens all too often. In scenario one it is not actually a mortal sin because the school is responsible for the boys’ spiritual welfare, not them, and as long as they are not resisting the school’s authority to the point that they deny that they are schoolboys, their souls are safe.

In a sense missing Mass is the worst thing that you can do. It’s not the act of missing Mass, it is the fact of being no longer any more than a nominal member that leads to de facto exclusion from the Church.
 
In scenario one it is not actually a mortal sin because the school is responsible for the boys’ spiritual welfare, not them, and as long as they are not resisting the school’s authority to the point that they deny that they are schoolboys, their souls are safe.
Malcolm,

That seems a rather innovative view. I admit it looks completely nonsensical to me. Are you trying to say that boys in a parochial school can’t commit mortal sin because they are not their own moral agents, rather the school is?

Very confusing. Where did you get that idea from? Can you show your sources? Can you elucidate your reasoning?

VC
 
Malcolm,

That seems a rather innovative view. I admit it looks completely nonsensical to me. Are you trying to say that a boy in a parochial school doesn’t commit a mortal sin because they are not their own moral agents, rather the school is?

Very confusing. Where did you get that idea from? Can you show your sources? Can you elucidate on your reasoning?

VC
Yes.
It’s nonsense to say that boyish mischief would lead to Hell. Everyone knows instinctively it’s nonsense in that scenario. So why is it nonsense? That’s where my thinking comes in. In this case it’s nonsense because the school has taken responsibility for ensuring that they attend Mass, so they can only sin mortally if they take the radical approach of denying that the school has any legitimate authority over them.

On the other hand in scenario two, though we can’t pass judgement, things look very bleak. This person just isn’t in the story any longer. Scenario two is what will very quickly happen if you don’t hold the line - you must attend Mass. In the school case that rule is enforceable, in the adult case generally it is not, so there is no line of defence if you break it.
 
Yes.
It’s nonsense to say that boyish mischief would lead to Hell. Everyone knows instinctively it’s nonsense in that scenario.
Thanks Malcolm for your response.

I, however, don’t know instinctively that its nonsense. In fact, I instinctively think that it could be very grave matter: given 1) that all are bound to give suitable worship to God, 2) that Christ has given authority to His Church, and 3) that His Church puts us under grave obligation to assist at Mass on Sundays.

I don’t see how appealing to “boyish mischief” frees someone from their grave obligation. To be sure a misunderstanding of what is required might lessen or completely negate culpability. . . but that is a different matter than saying that boys get a pass because they are boys or because the school has some authority over them.

VC
 
To be sure a misunderstanding of what is required might lessen or completely negate culpability. . .
VC
Just an explanatory note here. “To be sure” is my own peculiar way of phrasing things.:rolleyes: I think the phrase “It is true that. . .” would have been clearer in place of my archaic expression “to be sure.”
VC
 
. . .
When the priest asked me, “Do you really think some one will burn for eternity because they missed a mass on Sunday?” , I replied that I had to observe the teaching of the Church. The priest said “That’s good, but God also gave you a brain” (laughing a bit). . . .
God gave you a brain, but it was Satan that gave you a bite of the apple. Remember, Eve ate the apple so she could decide for herself and not depend on God for direction.

Note that the sin in missing mass is not the missing of the mass but the rejection of the Chruch’s authority to make the rule that you attend. This is a direct violation of the Fourth Commandment and thus grave matter.
 
God gave you a brain, but it was Satan that gave you a bite of the apple. Remember, Eve ate the apple so she could decide for herself and not depend on God for direction.

Note that the sin in missing mass is not the missing of the mass but the rejection of the Chruch’s authority to make the rule that you attend. This is a direct violation of the Fourth Commandment and thus grave matter.
Much more succinctly put, but exactly what I was trying to say.
 
Slightly different but missing mass three weeks in a row (I would hope without good reason, but not sure) was an automatic excommunication in the early church
 
Slightly different but missing mass three weeks in a row (I would hope without good reason, but not sure) was an automatic excommunication in the early church
Seems extreme to me, especially when early christians were trying to convert others to their faith. Where is this stated in church history?

Keep holy the sabbath does not say go to Mass or else…!! many ways to keep holy the sabbath.

I do go to Mass every Sunday but I consider it an honor to attend rather than a sin if I don’t. If one goes to Mass simply out of fear of mortally sinning, how pleasing is that to God?

Love and peace,
Mom of 5
 
When the priest asked me, “Do you really think some one will burn for eternity because they missed a mass on Sunday?” , I replied that I had to observe the teaching of the Church. The priest said “That’s good, but God also gave you a brain” (laughing a bit).
That means “having a brain” implies one thinks missing mass is not a mortal sin. Interesting logic. To have a brain means disobeying and not having a brain is to obey. Strange and rebellious.
I don’t think that this priest has bad intentions, but he did say that "some people may not like the legalistic nature of Catholicism, and that is why they may steer towards other mainstream denominations (Lutheran, episcopalian, Anglican etc.)
What is legalistic about loving God? We keep His laws because we love Him. If you stop at every red traffic light on your way home from work or you a legalist?
 
. . .I do go to Mass every Sunday but I consider it an honor to attend rather than a sin if I don’t. If one goes to Mass simply out of fear of mortally sinning, how pleasing is that to God?

Love and peace,
Mom of 5
It seems closely related to imperfect vs perfect contrition. It would be well if we repented out of love of God, but repentence out of fear of punishment is a start.
 
Slightly different but missing mass three weeks in a row (I would hope without good reason, but not sure) was an automatic excommunication in the early church
Please cite the Church document to support your claim because I don’t think that is correct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top