Question for Catholics: Will you really go to hell for deliberatly missing mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter michaelp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
ppcpilot:
God already knows what you did, and your innermost thoughts on the subject.
So…that means…???
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
Michael, you have twisted this into a pretzel:D We know without God grace we can do Nothing,right?We know our good works by themselves merit us nothing,right?What does willfully rejecting Gods grace bring?And what is more serious to betray man or God?If going to Church has been limited to studying scripture and singing and fellowship than you can do that at home you would never have to go to church.If there are no people sent to preach the word,forgive sins,annoint the sick,exorcise demons,and most importantly celebrate the Holy Eucharist,then you would be correct in your analogy,but it would be totally against scripture.God didn’t set up His Church to be legalistic He did it out of love.The Eucharist is strength for the journey and by the way is as full of graces as anything this side of heaven:) So in willfully choosing to miss Mass we choose against God,against grace, and in a very real way we decide we are our own God and don’t need Jesus.God Bless
I don’t think that the pretzel is mine. 😉 All that I am talking about is James Akins statement and, from what I see, the concensus of the RCC that missing mass ONCE without a valid excuse will send you to hell, no matter what you have done in the past, no matter how many times you have been to mass, etc.

This is hard for me to see in Scripture.

Michael
 
I guess it’s just as hard for us Catholics to believe the flip; if we truly accept Jesus once, nothign else matters after that.
 
40.png
ppcpilot:
I guess it’s just as hard for us Catholics to believe the flip; if we truly accept Jesus once, nothign else matters after that.
Who would ever endorse such heresy? This is not the Evangelical viewpoint. Maybe some radical non-catholics, but not mine.

Michael
 
40.png
michaelp:
This is hard for me to see in Scripture.
I Cor 11: 27-29 – Whoever takes communion unworthily or without “discerning the body” brings judgment upon him/herself. How many such transgressions would merit judgment? It seems just one. Even if the person had been going to communion worthily his/her whole life. Is Paul harsh? I guess so. Is he right? Yes. Missing Mass seems a similar transgression against the body.
 
40.png
michaelp:
Who would ever endorse such heresy? This is not the Evangelical viewpoint. Maybe some radical non-catholics, but not mine.

Michael
Once saved, you can’t lose salvation, right?
 
40.png
aridite:
I Cor 11: 27-29 – Whoever takes communion unworthily or without “discerning the body” brings judgment upon him/herself. How many such transgressions would merit judgment? It seems just one. Even if the person had been going to communion worthily his/her whole life. Is Paul harsh? I guess so. Is he right? Yes. Missing Mass seems a similar transgression against the body.
All this would tell me is not to take communion if I have sin. It says nothing about missing communion once and being damned forever. The people who did so unworthely “fell asleep” or died, they did not go to hell. To “sleep” does not say anything about their eternal condition does it?
 
michealp,

Your mortal sins don’t send you to hell. Your final impentinence of mortal (or merely original) sins send you to hell.

You can have a “bad day” and commit adultery. If finally impenitent of such a sin, you risk eternal damnation depending upon your full advertence and perfect willfulness while committing such a sin.

If you KNEW without a doubt that Jesus Christ wanted you to worship at the Holy Mass, and you willfully chose not to dine with Him, that would be as grave a sin as any other.

Afterall, how “grave” a sin was eating from a forbidden fruit tree? Doesn’t seem that grave, does it? Yet this seemingly small act of disobedient resulted all humanity suffering from it’s consequences, right? Even though a defiant act of disobedience to God may seem trivial to you, an invitation from God to participate in his Holy Sacrifice as a community is important–especially if it is known with full advertence to be a serious and divine obligation and with perfect consent of will one defiantly rejects this obligation, this is just as serious a sin as eating from a forbidden fruit tree.

It’s called sloth, and it is traditionally a deadly sin for a reason, whether or not one clearly understands the theological basis for that reason.

Judas seemed to be a true disciple … until he had a bad day. The difference is, Peter repented of his bad day, and Judas did not.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
michealp,

Your mortal sins don’t send you to hell. Your impentinence of your mortal sins send you to hell.

You can have a “bad day” and commit adultery. If impenitent of such a sin, you risk eternal damnation depending upon full advertence and perfect willfulness while committing such a sin.

If you KNEW without a doubt that Jesus Christ wanted you to worship at the Holy Mass, and you willfully chose not to dine with Him, that would be as grave a sin as any other.

Afterall, how “grave” a sin was eating from a fruit tree? Doesn’t seem that grave, does it? Yet this seemingly small act of disobedient resulted all humanity suffering from it’s consequences, right? Even though it may seem trivial to you, an invitation from God to participate in his Holy Sacrifice as a community is important, and especially if it is known with full advertence to be a serious and divine obligation and with perfect consent of will one defiantly rejects this obligation, this is just as serious a sin as eating from a forbidden fruit tree.

It’s called sloth, and it is a deadly sin for a reason, whether or not one clearly understands the theological bases for that reason.
So then, it is just apostacy (turning your back on God), not the “moral sin” of missing mass? While I disagree, I can handle this better.

I would not equate committing adultry once to missing mass once, would you?

Would you rather have a society of people who missed mass once, or a society of people who committed adultrey once? Which has the worse temporal consequences?

Do you really think that missing mass once is worthy of going to Hell?
 
Paris, this is for you.

From EWTN apologist…

Confession is a popular name for the Sacrament of Penance (or Reconciliation). This sacrament restores the grace and presence of the Holy Spirit to a soul that has lost Him through mortal sin, or else it increases His grace and presence in a soul that has not lost Him, but offended Him by venial sins. Confession is necessary when a person has committed a mortal sin, which is a conscious and deliberate choice of evil over good, in some grave matter. This drives the Spirit from the soul, and since the grace that His presence emanates is the life of the soul, the soul is then dead. It needs to be resurrected, which can be accomplished only through the means God has supplied. On the night after His Resurrection, Jesus breathed on His Apostles and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (John 20:22-23). And so, in giving this power to the Apostles (and to the bishops and priests who would succeed them), He instituted the Sacrament of Penance.
Every Catholic is obliged to confess any mortal sins at least once a year, though good sense would require him to confess a mortal sin as soon after committing it as possible. Catholics conscious of having committed a mortal sin must go to Confession before receiving Holy Communion. Since we are obliged to receive Holy Communion at least once a year, preferably during the Easter season, Confession and Communion at Easter time traditionally have been called our “Easter Duty.” But this is a bare minimum. Any Catholic who is serious about his/her spiritual life should go to Confession at least once a month. Although not necessary to remit venial sins, the sacrament, if devoutly received, increases the grace of the Spirit within us, and gives additional grace to be strong against temptation.
 
Michael, yes! Again, if you miss Mass once for no valid reason, and you die, you die in the state of mortal sin. Why else would St. Paul work out his salvation in fear and trembling? Why would he not be ‘don’t worry be happy’?
 
Dear MichaelP;

I offer the following reply;
No. All sins are not equal. All sins evidence an equally depraved nature. Our rejection of God is what ultimately sends us to hell. Sins are just a natural outcome of our depraved nature.
I agree. Now you’re talking like a Catholic. 🙂 Catholics believe that when you make a conscious decision that you are not going to attend mass it is a willful rejection of God, in both a figurative and a literal sense, which removes you from the state of grace necessary for salvation.
I just do. Would you feel worse if you missed mass or committed adultry? Which has the worst consequeces? Would you rather have a society of people who missed mass once or one that was filled with those who committed adultry once? Seriously.
My feelings on the matter are irrelevant. Both are equally in violation of what we understand to be God’s commendments. We already do live in a society in which peoplre miss mass and commit adultery. I do not need to choose one or the other. Again, you miss the point. It’s not me that makes the judgment on whether a person goes to Hell or not. I can only try to do what I believe God commands of me, and that includes attending mass as I am obligated to do and remaining committed to my spouse in accordance with my marriage vows. My own personal opinion as to which sin is “worse” is not relevant to my salvation.
For you information, Fundementalism is a pejoritive term to Protestants these days. It has become equated with legalism (don’t dance, smoke, or go to movie theaters). I am not a fundementalist although I do hold to the fundementals of the faith.
I meant no offense by using the term fundamentalism. If I have offended you, please accept my apology.
That is where I am at. But faith will always produce love and good works or it is not faith. We do good works because we are justified, not so that we can be justified. “We love, because he first loved us.”
These statements do not support the salvation doctrine that you hold to. It is my understanding that you believe in the “once saved always saved” idea of salvation. But you also believe that sins are a natural outcome of humanity’s “depraved nature.” Thus, even if a person is “saved” their very human nature will continue to compel them to sin despite their assurance of salvation. My point is that this doctrine reduces salvation to the equivalent of a spiritual “get out of jail free” card? A rational person would have to reject the idea that a just God would allow an unrepentent sinner to enter the gates of Heaven.

In contrast, Catholics believe that a person can fall out of a state of grace and place their mortal soul in jeopardy of Hell by committing a mortal sin - like deliberately turning their back on God by ignoring an obligation to attend mass.

Peace,
 
Do you really think that missing mass once is worthy of going to Hell?
Depends.

If I missed Mass by accident (didn’t remember Jan 1st is a Holy Day of Obligation), then it is not a deadly sin.

On the other hand, if with full advertence I understand correctly that Almighty God wanted me at a specific place and a specific time, and I didn’t follow that Divine guidance with the obedience of faith as Abraham and many other holy ones did, but instead with perfect consent of will, disregarded what I knew God called me to do, then I have, like Peter, become “offended” (Gk “skandalizo”) in Christ, and denied what was divinely revealed to me as my sacred obligation. If I remain unrepentant of such a sin unto death, I do indeed deserve the just punishment of eternal damnation.

The word skandalizo is the word in Scripture used to describe the Pharisee’s reaction the Christ’s teachings. Christ used it too to describe the apostle’s reaction during the tribulation they endured during His passion and death. Such a sinful denial is possible for even the closest disciples of Christ. Some, like Judas, never turned again toward Christ (final impenitence). So too, those of little faith may fall from grace (as Judas did) and never turn again toward Christ. Others, like Peter, may “turn again” (Gk “epistrepho”) to Christ. The key to God’s mercy is a contrite heart born of love for God. This kind of contrition is an act of will brought about by grace. If after rejecting the invitation to worship the Lord, I continue in final impenitence to reject the grace of sorrow for such a sinful rejection of God, then I have made a choice of turning away from God without turning again toward Him. As such, I certainly risk eternal damnation … in fact I think I would be asking for it.
 
michaelp,

With a proper understanding of ecclesiology, a Catholic understands that what is bound on earth by the Holy Catholic Church led by the Vicar of Christ, the Roman Pontiff, is bound in heaven. What is loosed on earth is loosed in heaven.

Ecclesiastical disciplines are as binding to a Catholic as though Christ Himself said it with his own voice. For a Catholic, “He who hears you, hears me” are the words of Christ that applies to the precepts and doctrines of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. If you could see things from this perspective, then this would make better sense to you. Even if you disagreed with this ecclesiology, at least attempting to see things from this Catholic ecclesial viewpoint will help you to understand.

For example, I’m betting if you lived in the the 2nd century, you would certainly feel morally bound to refrain from eating meats from strangled animals in accordance with the apostolic decree in the Book of Acts. A defiant disregard for what the apostles held bound at the Council of Jerusalem in the 1st century would surely be viewed as a rejection of the voice of Jesus Christ Himself. Yet, although this was bound in the early Church, it is no longer bound today. The Church has the power to bind, but also has the power to loose. So, not many Christians feel obliged to refrain from eating only Kosher meats that have not been strangled, even Protestant Christians. Yet, I don’t really understand why Protestant “Bible alone” Christians feel as though they can eat meat from strangled chickens or partake of a bloody red T-bone, GIVEN that they deny the Church the authority to “bind and loose.”
 
I think it is very un-Catholic to try to guess who will or will not go to hell. God alone knows the intention of the heart that sins through commission or omission, and we are no one to judge. We are told several times not to judge. It is not the business of humans to speculate on such matters. Good deeds only own merits when they are prusued in order to please God and promote his will, when they are pursued due to the fear of hell, they earn much less merit, if any at all.
 
michaelp,

Think of it in terms of obedience of faith. In the words of one Protestant scholar…
God comes down to walk with men who obey. If they walk with him, he walks with them. *The Lord can only have fellowship with his servants as they obey. *Obedience is heaven in us, and it is the preface of our being in heaven. Obedient faith is the way to eternal life—nay, it is eternal life revealing itself.

{C.H. Spurgeon, Obedience of Faith, Sermon No. 2195, August 21st, 1890, spurgeon.org/sermons/2195.htm}
 
michaelp - you seem to be avoiding my question, which is unfortunate, because i have a followup bit that i think will shed light on your dilemma.

if you would be so kind as to share what you believe a person must do to be saved, please?
 
40.png
michaelp:
All this would tell me is not to take communion if I have sin. It says nothing about missing communion once and being damned forever. The people who did so unworthely “fell asleep” or died, they did not go to hell. To “sleep” does not say anything about their eternal condition does it?
Right. Again, I’m making an analogy. There is no proof text for missing Mass. My point that one transgression against communion brought judgment and punishment. So, one transgression against the precept of the Church for Mass attendance can be a mortal sin, and if unrepented send oneself to hell.
 
Hi Michael,

Earlier you said:
No. All sins are not equal.
So in addition to jeffreedy789’s question,
40.png
jeffreedy789:
michaelp - you seem to be avoiding my question, which is unfortunate, because i have a followup bit that i think will shed light on your dilemma.

if you would be so kind as to share what you believe a person must do to be saved, please?
can you also explain what you believe are the consequences of sin? (If that’s your follow-up jr789, sorry for taking your thunder :o .)

A friend of mine who describes himself as a Fundamentalist (it’s not prejorative to all non-Catholics, just non-Fundamentalist non-Catholics 😃 ) argued with me over lunch that all sin is equal in God’s eyes. He used the Sermon on the Mount as evidence (i.e. just looking at a woman with lust = adultery). He also told me that once saved you can’t lose salvation.

The way I see it, his belief was consistent…wrong, but consistent 😉 . Please give your thoughts.

God Bless, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year,

Robert.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top