What happens when you're unable to go to confession?

[Timothysis]

For example, I do not know the state of Joe’s soul when he died so I can’t say he went to Hell. What I can say is that if Joe died in a state of mortal sin then he went to Hell.

I disagree with your second statement.

You can say that if Joe died in a state of unrepentant mortal sin, then the dangers of Hell for him are severe.

To say someone went to hell is to presume to know the mind and mercy/judgement of God.

 

[thistle]

I disagree with your second statement.

You can say that if Joe died in a state of unrepentant mortal sin, then the dangers of Hell for him are severe.

To say someone went to hell is to presume to know the mind and mercy/judgement of God.

No you are wrong. By definition if a person dies in a state of mortal sin it’s unrepented and the Church is clear that anyone dying in a state of mortal sin goes immediately to Hell. That’s not me presuming anything. That is the infallible teaching of the Church.

You also don’t seem to get it. I keep telling you that nobody but God knows the state of any particular individual’s soul when they die so we cannot say Joe or Jim or whoever is in Hell. We can say (because its what the Church teaches) that IF Joe and Jim die in a state of mortal sin they they will go to Hell.

 

[thistle]

Once again, the catechism deals here in generalities which may be true for some but not others. Note that the classic thought was that people who committed suicide were condemned for the murder of themselves. Yet, what does the catechism say about suicide now?

“Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.”

It isn’t so cut and dry.

Again you don’t get it. If culpability is reduced by addiction, mental incapacity, or coercion they likely have not committed a mortal sin by whatever action they took. Nobody is disputing that.
However, that is not what we are discussing here.We are talking about anyone who has committed a mortal sin and dies in that state. Such a person goes to Hell. That is the Church teaching and it is applicable to everyone who dies in a state of mortal sin.

 

[R_C]

@Timothysis

Nobody is debating God’s mercy. Also I think it is indisputable that God loves each soul unconditionally and does not want any soul to enter the state of hell, that is, to be eternally separated from Him.

Nevertheless, the final problem does not rely on knowing God’s will - in a way, we know that God is infinitely merciful, and that in His justice we find a purification called Purgatory, but never eternal rejection.

The issue here, what we really cannot know, is whether a soul will reject God or not. It is totally up to the sinner to accept or reject God. To commit a mortal sin is to willfully reject God, inasmuch as a mortal sin includes full knowledge and deliberate consent. If any of these are lacking, then the soul has not lost sanctifying grace. Again, how would we know? We cannot read into someone’s mind.

Also, if someone has committed mortal sin, how do we know if he has died unrepentant? That is also totally between the soul and God - and we do know as a certain truth that God provides us with auxiliating or actual grace in order for us to be moved to repentance. Yes, imperfect contrition does not remit mortal sins, but is a repentant soul that has not confessed in the same state as an unrepentant one? We know well that all things - especially in the Church - acquire a different level at the hour of our death. We find the Anointing of the Sick with the power to remit mortal sins even to an unconscious person in point of death, we find both marriages and religious professions of vows in articulo mortis…while it is indisputable that to commit mortal sin is to willfully reject God and we will pay the consequences, we do not know how powerful can contrition be on deathbed…we do not know if such a contrition may be made perfect by the mercy of God…we do not know. We can only hope.

@Thistle we also have this blessed hope for all our brothers - we are talking about billions - who are not formally in the Church, thus do not have access to the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Salvation, in a mysterious way, must be accessible for them as well. God is not tied to His sacraments.

 

[anruari]

I think it is important here ot compare the pedantic differences between what constitutes Grave Matter and what constitutes a Mortal Sin.

The church defines a very wide range of things as being Grave matter.

For a Grave Act to be a mortal sin there needs to be several other conditions as well as just the act.

Knowledge that it is Grave Matter (Potentially a Mortal Sin)
Full ascent of the Will (It is not a mortal sin if your choice is not fully free and deliberate)
Sufficient time for reflection (A snap decision later regretted is unlikely to be a mortal sin)

Ultimately a mortal sin occurs when you choose to carry out a deed, knowing it could send you to hell, having time to consider the implications, and going ahead and doing it anyway.
(a bit like the difference between a premeditated, cold-blooded “Murder 1”, knowing you’d be caught, compared to a lesser crime like “Voluntary Manslaughter” or even “Justifiable homicide” )
In each case the act is the same - you killed someone - but the level of guilt and the “punishment” are very different.

When you come face to face with God after committing an act of premeditated deliberate mortal sin, knowing God was watching you, and knowing that that act would seriously damage your relationship with Him - How if you came face to face with Him at that moment could you look him in the face and say (honestly) “I Love You, I’m sorry, Please Forgive Me!”. How could you enter his embrace? How could you accept his forgiveness?

In that state you would be almost certain to refuse his offered forgiveness and cast yourself into the Pit, from Pride or Shame. - That is the effect of Mortal Sin. That is the difference between Mortal Sin, and other sins that also stem from Grave Matter. - How much damage it does to your ability to accept the Love and Forgiveness of God.

• But all sin is Forgivable - you just need to repent of it. You need to say Sorry - and mean it.
  The normal way of saying “Sorry” is in the confessional - but it is not the only way, and God’s mercy is not restricted to our human disciplines.

However when alive and healthy and there is no grave reason to disregard them, to disobey those disciplines can in itself be a Grave Matter. - It is a rejection of the Church to which Christ gave the Power to Bind and Loose. - It is therefore a Rejection of the Body of Christ (In the form of the Church, not the Eucharist).

To receive the Eucharist in this state is in itself a grave sin - (in a similar way If you were having a serious argument with your wife, to insist on having sex right then - without would be Raping her. It would be a very grave sin against her .) - It would be using an act… a gift of Christ… which is meant to bring us closer together at a time and in a way that is totally incompatible with that unintuitive function - thereby causing further significant harm.

It is vital to “Make up” after the argument - to say sorry… then the unitive function of that act (receiving the Eucharist or in the analogy - sharing the marital embrace) can be expressed and serve it’s proper function.

 

[sw85]

If a person is in the state of mortal sin and they go to church fully intent to make a good confession but, for some reason, the priest isn’t there, is that person able to receive communion at Mass? It’s my understanding that if the person were to die, God would forgive them knowing that they had truly intended to confess and were unable to through no fault of their own, but what about going to communion?

Canon law requires Catholics to be absolved in confession before receiving communion. Perfect contrition suffices to absolve one of sins if one should die before confession.

 

[sw85]

How do you know that? Isn’t it presumptuous to speak for the mind of God?

It’s de fide.

I am very tired of the opinion that the love, mercy and judgement of God is as precise as a mathematical equation, or that every action is a simple if/then result.

You don’t have to like it. You just have to assent to it.

The catechism is helpful for general understanding but does not claim or even attempt to go the whole distance in the mystery of salvation.

I don’t disagree here, and in fact I actively dislike the CCC for its obscurantism and linguistic ham-handedness. But so what. The CCC wasn’t the first time the Church taught about the nature and necessity of contrition as a means of absolving one of sins. This has been its teaching for a long, long, long, long time.

Interesting. I have always understood it to be unrepentant mortal sin that endangers one with hell fire. I’ve have also never seen that the Church says that committing any particular sin sends one “immediately to Hell.”

He didn’t say committing any particular sin sends one immediately to Hell. He said dying in a state of mortal sin does that. Which is de fide truth.

But can’t we say that someone who committed a mortal sin, with imperfect contrition who dies in a car accident on their way to confession “goes immediately to Hell?” That is what you say above, isn’t it?

Yes, we can say that. The Church itself says that. Imperfect contrition suffices in the confessional only; perfect contrition suffices on the way to confession.

If what you’re saying is that we cannot say these things about any particular person who dies, then you are right. Because we lack the knowledge necessary to apply the principle properly. That fact doesn’t call the principle itself into question.

Once again, the catechism deals here in generalities which may be true for some but not others. Note that the classic thought was that people who committed suicide were condemned for the murder of themselves. Yet, what does the catechism say about suicide now?

“Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.”

It isn’t so cut and dry.

This is again another case of our lacking the knowledge necessary to apply a principle perfectly. God alone has that knowledge. It does nothing to call the principle itself into question.

N.B.: the teaching did not change.

I disagree with your second statement.

You can say that if Joe died in a state of unrepentant mortal sin, then the dangers of Hell for him are severe.

To say someone went to hell is to presume to know the mind and mercy/judgement of God.

That is not presumption at all simply because it is conditional and could be applied to anyone. The formula “If a person dies in unrepented mortal sin, that person goes to Hell” is de fide truth. You are obligated to believe it with divine and Catholic faith. In a very real sense, refusal to believe it makes you something other than a Catholic, in the sense that a man who says he loves his wife but continues to cheat on her with other women doesn’t really love his wife.

What would be presumption is saying “Joe definitely died in unrepented mortal sin and is therefore in Hell.” We don’t have the knowledge necessary to make that judgment. Only God does. But our lack of knowledge necessary to apply the principle in the previous paragraph does not mean the principle itself is false.

 

[hilde_the_dog]

This as always is an instructive discussion. Thistle states very clearly the position of the Church. To which I agree however, 2 Maccabbee 12
Expiation for the Dead.

38Judas rallied his army and went to the city of Adullam. As the seventh day was approaching, they purified themselves according to custom and kept the sabbath there. 39On the following day, since the task had now become urgent, Judas and his companions went to gather up the bodies of the fallen and bury them with their kindred in their ancestral tombs. 40But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had fallen.f 41They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden. 42* Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.g 43He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection in mind; 44for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. 46Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be absolved from their sin.

 

[xzereus]

I think that it is important to note that the Catechism, while certainly morally and spiritually profitable to read, is not infallible. One might say that most of the underlying precepts of the Catholic Church are infallible, but it would truly be a mistake to claim that everything the Catechism says is infallible (otherwise newer versions couldn’t change on issues, such as capital punishment).

Why does this matter? The majority of this debate is the based on the claim that "the Church says ". This is certainly an irresponsible claim, especially when basing it solely on the Catechism, since one can never humbly claim to fully understand the infallible precepts of fallible writings.

 

[thistle]

I think that it is important to note that the Catechism, while certainly morally and spiritually profitable to read, is not infallible. One might say that most of the underlying precepts of the Catholic Church are infallible, but it would truly be a mistake to claim that everything the Catechism says is infallible (otherwise newer versions couldn’t change on issues, such as capital punishment).

Why does this matter? The majority of this debate is the based on the claim that "the Church says ". This is certainly an irresponsible claim, especially when basing it solely on the Catechism, since one can never humbly claim to fully understand the infallible precepts of fallible writings.

The CCC contains both infallible and non-infallible teachings. It is somewhat academic which ones are which because Catholics are bound by both.
However, in the case of the Church teaching that anyone who dies in a state of mortal sin goes immediately to Hell, this is an infallible teaching. If anyone rejects an infallible teaching they commit heresy.