One mortal sin sends you to hell forever?

[theinquisitive]

It never ceases to amaze me how so many will accept the Church’s authority on many matters and clearly reject some.<<
Perhaps it is because you possibily have given up your “fides et ratio”
I have not…
I may not be,what YOU deem,to be a “practicing Catholic”. But then,I am one of very many “Catholics” who do not go to Church every Sunday,do not pray the Rosary daily,but of one thing I am sure,and that is that God alone can look into my heart,in HIS judgement/mercy I trust… as should we all
Amen and God bless you.

 

[teachccd]

It never ceases to amaze me how so many will accept the Church’s authority on many matters and clearly reject some.<<
Perhaps it is because you possibily have given up your “fides et ratio”
I have not…
I may not be,what YOU deem,to be a “practicing Catholic”. But then,I am one of very many “Catholics” who do not go to Church every Sunday,do not pray the Rosary daily,but of one thing I am sure,and that is that God alone can look into my heart,in HIS judgement/mercy I trust… as should we all
Amen and God bless you.

It is precisely because of faith AND reason that I cannot refute the teachings of a Church that acknowledged my sacred Scriptures, maintained them thoughout the centuries and lives them out in the sacraments. It becomes a total matter of faith AND reason that I know that missing Mass on Sunday is an assention of the will not to do as Christ commands when He instituted the Eucharist.

God can look into your heart but He also gave us ten commandments not ten suggestions. Yes, He will look into each of our hearts and judge as to why we either keep or reject those commands. Many reject the Church that Christ founded and, as you say, in His mercy God will be the just judge as to why.

Amen and God bless you…teachccd

 

[DanteAlighieri]

“Jack knew FROM MINUTE ONE what the rules are” <<

The Church was granted the authority to teach in Christ’s name and the authority to “bind and loose”. If something has to be “in the Bible” for you to believe it, this is.

Thus, your argument about Sabat and all that, even if you are historically correct, is meaningless. The Church has the authority given by the hand of God Himself to require us to go to Mass however many times a week as she sees fit.

So, yes, “Jack” knows the “rules”. So should you, since you call yourself “The Inquisitive” and a Catholic.

Peace,
Dante

 

[DanteAlighieri]

This thread is getting wildly off topic.

Peace,
Dante

 

[Tantum_ergo]

That will happen when people attempt to put their ‘personal’ interpretations of Church teaching above, or in lieu of, the true teachings and then argue that theirs are ‘better’, and this ‘proves’ that they’re right.

Or they think they can fudge the words ‘mortal’, ‘sin’, ‘hell’, and ‘forever’ enough to make the Church teaching, in their eyes anyway, meaningless. If nobody can commit a ‘mortal’ sin, then it doesn’t matter that the Church teaches that a mortal sin, unrepented, at death will result in hell–because hey, nobody can actually commit that kind of sin! or if hell isn’t forever, or isn’t the ‘hell’ that we claim, then the idea of going to hell forever is again meaningless. . .

One thing for sure though. God does know the hearts and minds. It is just going to come as a shock to anybody presumptuous enough to think that God “will judge me right even though I don’t follow His Church yet call myself Catholic and claim to be in good standing with Him” that they will be judged exactly the way that they expect those who disagree with them to be judged. . .you see, they think that God will ‘punish’ the ‘hardnosed’ but let them (such ‘loving’ souls) off scot free. . .

 

[JRKH]

This thread is getting wildly off topic.

Peace,
Dante

Agreed. - But not surprised.

This thread is a perfect example of why the Church has so amny documents trying to explain teachings.

The Original question was whether one Mortal sin, unrepented, will send you to Hell. The answer to that question is an unequivical yes.

Now we are dealing with all of the… “Yeas but what if… This … or … that”. And How about in this circumstnace etc. ad-nauseum.

Finally we end up with posts about how unfair God must be or the Church must be, or whatever, to send someone to hell for doing something that they were told would send them to hell.

Heaven is not “deserved” it is attained through our participation in the freely given grace of God. If we choose to turn our back on that grace, we turn our back on heaven.
Hell may also not be deserved but rather is attained by the willful rejection of God’s Grace and salvatiuon.
Simple as that.

Peace
James

 

[StrawberryJam]

Back to poor Jack again. He makes a slip up, I give him the benefit of the doubt he was a good catholic all his life, giving his time talent and money and suddenly poor Jack is being questioned in that area as well and not here to defend himself either. Once a person slips up their entire life is up for scrutiny and a negative light is cast on them. Where there is smoke there is fire? I have seen people walk into Mass late. Do I have the right to make negative assumptions about their dilligence in their faith over that single event? I personally don’t feel that would be the way to approach it.
So, Jack and I are next to each other in hell for eternity and I get just as horrid a spot as he does. We both get to stay for eternity, and have lost any chance of getting out, we “chose” freely this fate and should have known better. This all makes sense to you??

And, why can’t people in the Moral Theology forum disagree with church teaching?

 

[otjm]

Back to poor Jack again. He makes a slip up, I give him the benefit of the doubt he was a good catholic all his life, giving his time talent and money and suddenly poor Jack is being questioned in that area as well and not here to defend himself either. Once a person slips up their entire life is up for scrutiny and a negative light is cast on them. Where there is smoke there is fire? I have seen people walk into Mass late. Do I have the right to make negative assumptions about their dilligence in their faith over that single event? I personally don’t feel that would be the way to approach it.
So, Jack and I are next to each other in hell for eternity and I get just as horrid a spot as he does. We both get to stay for eternity, and have lost any chance of getting out, we “chose” freely this fate and should have known better. This all makes sense to you??

And, why can’t people in the Moral Theology forum disagree with church teaching?

To begin with, there is no such thing as a mortal sin being a “slip up”. A mortal sin, to be such (mortal) requires three things: it must be a serious matter; the person must understand it is a serious matter, and they must have full intent. A “slip up” implies in it that there is no full intent.

One “slips up” when one does not have full intent; habit is an example of something that may reduce full intention. But to commit a mortal sin is an act of intentionallly, knowingly and freely turning one’s back (figuratively) on God; intentionally deciding that one intends to reject God through the act.

One does not “slip up” in adultery; one knows what one is doing.

One is not “sent” to Hell. One freely and intentionally chooses to be there. God does not “send” you to Hell. God allows you to choose Him or reject Him. It is your break with God that is Hell; it is your choice of “not God” which is another way of defining Hell. And while we are at it, Hell is not a physical place; it is a state of being.

People constantly choose to ignore, diagree with, dispute about, and otherwise not follow the Church’s teaching. Doing so in these forae is more likely than not going to draw disagreement with those choices; one should not be surprised if it does.

One also needs to keep in mind that not all disagreements are with Church teachings; at times they are with misunderstanedings of Church teachings. And a surprising bit of information, to a few, is that the Church has been around far longer than most people, and the Church includes in its history - or pre-history, if you will - God’s revelation of Himself through history before Christ; to the Jews, and before the Jews, to His select. The net of that is that there has been far more reflection on God, and on God’s desires for us, than most human beings have had the time, ability, intelligence, foresight, or inspiration to accomplish; so when one cites what the Church teaches, it is not as if this is something that got cooked up over a latte or two, or on a week-long retreat in a wooded setting. If the Church is wrong, then we all should just quietly go about doing whatever we please; but if the Church has consistently for 4000+ years held positions, and particularly if independent, non-religious evidence can be shown which supports the Church’s positions, then one might consider whether the evidence is to the contrary to one’s own opinions.

Unless one is of the mind: “Don’t confuse me with the facts! I already have my mind made up!”

 

[StrawberryJam]

If your argument is that the hebrews, who later became the Jewish people, are to be looked at as the yardstick for what is moral or not, then I say that is absolutely absurd. Just read the bible, which I don’t think children ought to- and you will see every kind of moral abberation you can think of there.

 

[JRKH]

Back to poor Jack again.

Good Idea, Lets get back to good ol’ Jack.

He makes a slip up,

Below is the Original example - You will note that Jack did NOT “slip up”.

Example: one Sunday, Jack, who goes to Church every Sunday, gets invited to play golf instead. **He figures, ah, what the heck, I’ll just play and then go to Mass later in the evening. **Well, he has a good time with his buddies, and they invite him for dinner after playing all day long. **Jack selfishly decides **to take them up on the offer (they are great cooks!) and skips the evening Mass too. “Mass just started,” he thinks to himself as he gets into the car to get to their house. He feels guilty…**he knows that skipping Mass is a mortal sin, but he selfishly presses **on–but does not explicitly ask God for forgiveness.

On the way to dinner, he gets hit by a car. Bam! He’s gone. Instantly. No time for an act of contrition.

Jack “Selfishly” and, with full knowledge that it is a mortal sin, “presses on”.
Why does Jack risk his very soul?? For a dinner - a meal. For simple food he turns his back on his obligation to God. An obligation he freely ascented to at baptism and or confirmation.

I give him the benefit of the doubt he was a good catholic all his life, giving his time talent and money and suddenly poor Jack is being questioned in that area as well and not here to defend himself either.

The state of Jacks committment to the Church was not mentioned in the original example. This was added by you later. In the OP example we merely know that Jack is a long time Catholic and Church goer. We do not know if Jack ever gave ANY of his time or money to the Church.

Once a person slips up their entire life is up for scrutiny and a negative light is cast on them. Where there is smoke there is fire? I have seen people walk into Mass late. Do I have the right to make negative assumptions about their dilligence in their faith over that single event? I personally don’t feel that would be the way to approach it.

No assumptions were made here. The OP placed a scenerio before us and asked our opinion. That is what he received, our opinion, based upon the factors presented.
We cannot know, from the short paragraph presented all of the intricacies of the state of Jack’s soul at the time of death.

So, Jack and I are next to each other in hell for eternity and I get just as horrid a spot as he does. We both get to stay for eternity, and have lost any chance of getting out, we “chose” freely this fate and should have known better.

That is correct, in so far as we are able to understand the circumstances as laid out.

This all makes sense to you??

Yup

And, why can’t people in the Moral Theology forum disagree with church teaching?

People in the Moral theology forum are certainly free to disagree with Church teaching. However if those people happen to be Catholic, and disagree with Church teaching, they may be placing their souls at risk. Therefore it is not a good idea.

Peace
James

 

[StrawberryJam]

Good Idea, Lets get back to good ol’ Jack.

Okay!

Below is the Original example - You will note that Jack did NOT “slip up”.

I disagree, and will note that Jack was merely being Issau from the hebrew scriptures- oh my! He is really in trouble now because Issau was most hated for that very thing!!! Yikes.
Now I think I can understand this better- it was a matter of the hungry man not willing to offer it up?

Jack “Selfishly” and, with full knowledge that it is a mortal sin, “presses on”.
Why does Jack risk his very soul?? For a dinner - a meal. For simple food he turns his back on his obligation to God. An obligation he freely ascented to at baptism and or confirmation.

King David was selfish, and you guys think he is a hero. Others did bad things, yet they were not in this silly hypothetical of dying right afterward. The bible does not mention people who loved God and then went and slipped up then died right away. The bible does mention people who slipped up all their lives then turned to God. Like St. Dismus.

I have no idea why that is, but that is what I see so far in my reading of it which I admit is very basic and not at all fully aware of the many stories in it…

The state of Jacks committment to the Church was not mentioned in the original example. This was added by you later. In the OP example we merely know that Jack is a long time Catholic and Church goer.

But, by being a long time Catholic and Church goer, why do some assume he did not do the right things he was taught to, simply because he had a bout of selfishness on one occasion?

We do not know if Jack ever gave ANY of his time or money to the Church.

And, we do not know if he wasn’t teaching CCD for 20 years either. Or an EMHC every week, or an usher… or…

No assumptions were made here.

( Should we not start out with the best assumptions based on the very fact he was a lifelong catholic? Or is that bare fact worth nothing at all?

The OP placed a scenerio before us and asked our opinion.

And, now I see the foolishness of responding to the kind of hypothetical the OP placed here. And why. Too many loopholes for everyone to have a opinon on a man they never met, don’t know, or care to know. He slipped up selfishly, and is in hell with me now.

That is what he received, our opinion, based upon the factors presented.

I wish there were more facts about this guy. I seem to want to fight for his rights as a catholic, unfortunately I am not able to help him at all. And he will sit with me in hell for eternity, and this all makes sense somehow.

We cannot know, from the short paragraph presented all of the intricacies of the state of Jack’s soul at the time of death.

My point exactly! So, then we agree? He may be in heaven then??

That is correct, in so far as we are able to understand the circumstances as laid out.

Do you see why this makes very little sense to me?

Yup

People in the Moral theology forum are certainly free to disagree with Church teaching. However if those people happen to be Catholic, and disagree with Church teaching, they may be placing their souls at risk. Therefore it is not a good idea.

Peace
James

 

[Spirithound]

We cannot know, from the short paragraph presented all of the intricacies of the state of Jack’s soul at the time of death.

The OP specified that Jack did not make an act of contrition before his death.

 

[StrawberryJam]

The OP specified that Jack did not make an act of contrition before his death.

Maybe he cried out to your God for mercy himself- without the formality of a confession sacrament in the church. Maybe he cried out to the God he always worshiped for mercy before his last breath.

And he still ends up next to me. Poor Jack.

 

[JRKH]

Okay!
I disagree, and will note that Jack was merely being Issau from the hebrew scriptures- oh my! He is really in trouble now because Issau was most hated for that very thing!!! Yikes.
Now I think I can understand this better- it was a matter of the hungry man not willing to offer it up?

I am not familiar with your reference to Issau, but as to the “hungry man not willing to offer it up…” It goes past that.
The thing you must realize here is that we are talking about a person who freely accepted the responsibility that goes with being a catholic. The Sunday obligation is clearly set out and was understood by Jack. He CHOSE to ignore/reject his obligation for insufficient cause.

King David was selfish, and you guys think he is a hero. Others did bad things, yet they were not in this silly hypothetical of dying right afterward. The bible does not mention people who loved God and then went and slipped up then died right away. The bible does mention people who slipped up all their lives then turned to God. Like St. Dismus.

I have no idea why that is, but that is what I see so far in my reading of it which I admit is very basic and not at all fully aware of the many stories in it…

And this is the other aspect of these kinds of discussions that remains frustrating. Our answer is related to the VERY limited facts given in the scenerio proposed. It applies to that scenerio only.
If you wish to ask about Issau, or David or any others, please feel free to do so and you will get answers specific to those scenerios as well. Such exchanges might help you to better grasp the underlying principles.

But, by being a long time Catholic and Church goer, why do some assume he did not do the right things he was taught to, simply because he had a bout of selfishness on one occasion?

So far as I know no on HAS made such an assumption. My only comment was that we do not KNOW from the OP scenerio.
What we do know is that Jacek, with full knowledge and willful disobedience, committed a mortal sin. If such a sin remains unrepented, even at the point of death, then he will go to hell.
I can say that, if Jack is as good a catholic as you propose, he would probably NOT miss mass for a dinner, or if he did, it would be with the intention of confessing it ASAP. At the Point of death he would probably be repentant and go to God relying upon God’s mercy and likely be forgiven.
However that is not what was presented in the OP scenerio.

And, we do not know if he wasn’t teaching CCD for 20 years either. Or an EMHC every week, or an usher… or…

( Should we not start out with the best assumptions based on the very fact he was a lifelong catholic? Or is that bare fact worth nothing at all?

In providing an answer to the OP we had to rely on the facts that the OP placed in evidence. Those facts are that Jack willfully and selfishly committed a mortal sin and did not ask forgiveness. Those were the ONLY Facts presented so the answer was just as simple.
If more facts were presented, perhaps the answer would have been different. See what I mean?

And, now I see the foolishness of responding to the kind of hypothetical the OP placed here. And why. Too many loopholes for everyone to have a opinon on a man they never met, don’t know, or care to know. He slipped up selfishly, and is in hell with me now.

Yes, trying to answer such scenerios almost always ends up in this type of discussion precisely because no one wants to hear the correct answer.

I wish there were more facts about this guy. I seem to want to fight for his rights as a catholic, unfortunately I am not able to help him at all. And he will sit with me in hell for eternity, and this all makes sense somehow.

Yes, I agree. You have a good heart for wanting to defend him.
This is precisely WHY we as catholics will pray for the souls of the departed. We hope that they were NOT consigned to hell and that they can soon be admitted to the presence of God.

I do empathize with you in trying to get a handle on how all of this makes sense. Theologens have been trying to understand and explain it for 2000 years.

My point exactly! So, then we agree? He may be in heaven then??

If there are other mitigating circumstances of which we are unaware then we he would likely be in purgatory, or possibly heaven.

Do you see why this makes very little sense to me?

Yes I can see why it is confusing to one who does not accept the teachings of the Church.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Let me see if I can shed some light on this for you from a different angle.

You said earlier tht you just feel that you want to defend Jack, so lets take that as the germ of inspiration.

Suppose you are a lawyer, who is assigned to defend a person on a Capital Murder Charge. The person was caught in the act, shows no remorse, and refuses to help in his own defense. In fact the person seems to look forward to the death penalty. Even desires it. You can demonstrate that this person had never before had so much as a traffic ticket and was, in fact an upstanding member of the community. But no matter how hard you try you cannot get from him any mitigating reason for committing the crime.
The Procesution can equally show that there was no provocation, no “heat of passion”, no reason for the crime other than your client simply wanted to. In fact this is the reason that the person gave to the police for the crime. “I just wanted to”, “I just felt like it”.

For this we must set aside all of the legal wrangling about sanity etc. This is a straight forward, guilty or innocent Life or death decision.

In the,admittedly, very poor scenerio above you can see how difficult it would be for you to get an innocent verdict because your client is doing everything he can to get a guilty one. In other words he is Choosing the death penalty for himself, first by committing the crime and then by refusing to ask for mercy from the court.

That is what it is like for a person who commits a Mortal sin. It is a severing of ties with God. A willful denial of God’s kingship over you and a refusal to give to God that Love and obedience which He deserves. In such a circumstance, God has no choice but to acceed to your wishes (for God will not interfere with your free choice) and send you to the place you have freely chosen. HELL

 

[StrawberryJam]

Let me see if I can shed some light on this for you from a different angle.

You said earlier tht you just feel that you want to defend Jack, so lets take that as the germ of inspiration.

Suppose you are a lawyer, who is assigned to defend a person on a Capital Murder Charge. The person was caught in the act, shows no remorse, and refuses to help in his own defense. In fact the person seems to look forward to the death penalty. Even desires it. You can demonstrate that this person had never before had so much as a traffic ticket and was, in fact an upstanding member of the community. But no matter how hard you try you cannot get from him any mitigating reason for committing the crime.
The Procesution can equally show that there was no provocation, no “heat of passion”, no reason for the crime other than your client simply wanted to. In fact this is the reason that the person gave to the police for the crime. “I just wanted to”, “I just felt like it”.

For this we must set aside all of the legal wrangling about sanity etc. This is a straight forward, guilty or innocent Life or death decision.

In the,admittedly, very poor scenerio above you can see how difficult it would be for you to get an innocent verdict because your client is doing everything he can to get a guilty one. In other words he is Choosing the death penalty for himself, first by committing the crime and then by refusing to ask for mercy from the court.

That is what it is like for a person who commits a Mortal sin. It is a severing of ties with God. A willful denial of God’s kingship over you and a refusal to give to God that Love and obedience which He deserves. In such a circumstance, God has no choice but to acceed to your wishes (for God will not interfere with your free choice) and send you to the place you have freely chosen. HELL

I don’t think it would be as bleak of a situation in court as you paint.

I could propose many defenses for my client, and you could admit to them based on your very own paperwork you require your belivers to hold to and know.

We don’t even know Jack’s weaknesses and propensitiy to sin in areas of weakness.

If he has, as we all do as humans (I am assuming Jack is a human) and struggles with and seeks guidance with these matters (another assumption)

That, if Jack fully knew and understood and consented freely with full knowledge and acted against it, and in the pit of his heart knew he acted selfishly,.

And, had the unfortunate happenstance to suffer death suddenly after the fact, without having had time to Reflect on his actions, or have time to reflect on the implications of them, and had up to that point lived his life worshiping the one true God, in the catholic church…

Yes- I would take his case and I would take it gladly.

He would have to die in an unrepentant and purposefully defiant manner before I would stop wanting to defend him.

 

[igator99]

Ouch. Jack will be in hell eternally right alongside with unrepentant murderers, rapists, adulterers, thiefs (*perhaps *Hitler, Stalin, Judas). Seems a bit disproportionate, no?

I’ve wrestled with this myself for a long time. I can’t go to confession in my area very often. Yes I’m a sinner. I probably commit 1-3 mortal sins a week. I do many good deeds also and try to be a good Christian. I’m repentive and say the “Chaplet of Divine Mercy” often. It is a struggle. I hope to never sin again but I know I will fall short. Didn’t Jesus die for us because he knew we couldn’t make to heaven on our own? Didn’t he pay for our salvation with his blood? Following this logic everyone on the planet is going to hell except very good Catholics.

I’ve come to the conclusion that the Catholic Church’s rules are almost impossible to follow. I think they do this to offer us the best chance to get on the road to heaven. If it is the only way to heaven then I will have about everyone I’ve ever known as company in hell. I love the Church and will not leave it but I can’t get to confession! I can’t sleep at night because of this.

 

[Spirithound]

Maybe he cried out to your God for mercy himself- without the formality of a confession sacrament in the church. Maybe he cried out to the God he always worshiped for mercy before his last breath.

And he still ends up next to me. Poor Jack.

No, that might constitute an act of contrition. The OP stated there was none of that.

Also, re-view post 22.

 

[StrawberryJam]

No, that might constitute an act of contrition. The OP stated there was none of that.

Also, re-view post 22.

Alright, Jack messed up big time. Let’s forget his life up till that point, any conditions that led him to such a darkened view of what he believed and lived to that point.
Let’s just be okay with Jack sharing space in hell with me because of this, without anyone of us knowing a darn thing about his entire life or any mitigating circumstances.
Let’s fry the man now and not think a thing of it.

 

[Spirithound]

Alright, Jack messed up big time. Let’s forget his life up till that point, any conditions that led him to such a darkened view of what he believed and lived to that point.
Let’s just be okay with Jack sharing space in hell with me because of this, without anyone of us knowing a darn thing about his entire life or any mitigating circumstances.
Let’s fry the man now and not think a thing of it.

You know Jack is a fictional character, right?
The OP gave a very specific situation which requires a very simple answer.

You apparently have no idea what a mortal sin is or requires. And I don’t mean that you don’t know the definition, anyone who has spent a week on this forum can tell me that, but you really don’t know what the requirements mean. That may very well reflect well on you. Perhaps you have never committed a mortal sin. I have.

A mortal sin is, by definition, a complete rejection of God, His Mercy, His Salvation.
It says “forget all the treasures I have stored up, the saints have stored up, YOUR SON won for me, I prefer my own company.”

As you are rightly pointing out, real life is often much more complicated any maybe the real Jack’s consent was not complete, or he maybe he didn’t have full knowledge, but in this example, we have been told exactly what was going through Jack’s head, and that elucidates a very real point of Catholic theology. Hell is real. It is possible to go there.

Or perhaps you are disputing the seriousness of skipping Mass?