I am not debating anything, and I’m only placing this in GD because of my question’s religious nature.
For a long time I quit going to Sunday mass, or any other holy day of obligation for that matter. Then, about a year and a half ago, or so, I decided that if I am going to call myself a Catholic, I need to act like one, or else I’m Catholic in name only.
As you know, the church teaches that if you miss a Sunday mass, or any other holy day of obligation, for no good reason, your immortal soul is in danger and you could go to hell. I have a hard time believing this*, but will do so for the sake of this OP.
All my life, I’ve never gotten anything out of going to mass. My mind wonders, and it’s a struggle to stay focused on the priest as he gives his homily.
So, my question is, if you go to mass on Sunday, and other holy days of obligation, but don’t get anything out it, your soul is still safe because you fulfilled your duty and went to mass, right?
*One of the disagreements I have with the church which makes me, I freely admit, not a very good Catholic.
I am not a Catholic nor have ever been one, but am considering becoming one in the future. Please keep that in mind as I offer my opinions.
I am not aware of any teaching that skipping mass or any day of obligation leads to the loss of salvation. Skipping out of them is a sin. I have no idea what type of sin. I would assume that as long as you confess and atone, it is treated like any other sin.
One of the main differences between the Catholic Church and its rivals is the belief that God is present in all the Sacraments, so the mass is not strictly symbolic. Hence I don’t know if they’d agree that it’s really possible to “get nothing out of it”. But if you are feeling that your entire relationship with church is serving no purpose whatever in the here and now, something is wrong. I would highly suggest these issues with your priest, someone in a lay ministry, or somebody else who you trust.
And ask yourself, why are you “going to call yourself a Catholic”? Is it because you believe the doctrine is true, even if you don’t find it spiritually fulfilling? Is it because you believe the Church does good in the world, but you don’t believe the doctrine? I’m sure you don’t classify yourself as Catholic merely because you were born in a Catholic family.
My personal opinion, obviously not shared by the Church, agrees with that of C. S. Lewis, that if you find church attendance burdensome, unpleasant, and meaningless, then you should stop attending.
According to church doctrine, skipping mass unless you have a good reason, is a mortal sin.
I was born and raised Catholic, but that’s not the reason I stay Catholic. I truly believe that their is a God, and I believe in Christianity. After studying various Protestant beliefs and comparing them to Catholicism, I chose Catholicism.
As for finding church attendance “burdensome, unpleasant, and meaningless…”, I don’t find it burdensome or unpleasant, although, for me personally, meaningless comes kind of close I guess.
Anyway, since I chose, and still choose, Catholicism of my own free will, I also choose to attend mass.
My question is simply, does the act of attending mass in and of itself fulfill the obligation?
I was born Catholic, raised Catholic and am quite happy to say
I will no longer believe in such an egotistical faith.
If you’re worried that missing one mass makes you a blasphemer,
the only sin to deny your heavenly afterlife (Jesus) you have to realize
these are HUMAN MADE rules from a teaching which cannot be verified.
In short, it’s politics, not religion. Rules, no free thinking.
All Catholics hinder themselves by not allowing them
to be themselves. Be Catholic, burn Harry Potter books,
feel the false warmth.
It might help you keep your attention on the Mass, and h to enjoy it, and thus
participate to the extent that you are fulfilling the attendance obligation.
But the sermons…
I find myself often distracted, too, but Bishop Sheens are few and far between.
Some elements within the Church would like you to believe that only someone who obeys all marching orders without question may call himself a Catholic. Hogwash. The Church has had dissident elements in it since St. Peter was its Pope, and all growth or reform within has come from dissenting voices.
The Church of Opus Dei, Mel Gibson’s dad and the Knights of Columbus is also the Church of Liberation Theology, CISPES and the Lesbian Nuns. You alone get to define your Catholicism, and be very suspicious of anyone who tells you differently. Salvation doesn’t come from jumping through hoops like a show dog, and it never has.
I’m not a priest or religious zealot but here are my comments for what it’s worth…
A strict Catholic could certainly parse your question and conclude that you did not fulfill your duty just by “making an appearance” at mass. The point of mass is to celebrate the Eucharist. (Yes, yes, there are some rituals before the Eucharist and some rituals after but the key reason for mass is the Eucharist.) If you are indifferent (or have become indifferent) to active participation (“active” meaning your mind+body+spirit) in the sacrament then you are not just a “bad Catholic”, you’re actually not Catholic at all.
Forgive the following crude analogy (I can’t think of rated-G version at the moment)… Imagine a man asks you, “if he inserts is penis inside a woman’s vagina, does that fullfill the definition of being heterosexual?” How would you answer that? So is “heterosexual” purely an act or also an internal feeling towards to opposite gender?
Like I said, I’m not an expert Catholic and just relating what I was taught.
Where did this come from? There is no Catholic church antipathy to the series. Individual Catholics have praised or criticized the books, but there has been no condemnation and there have been no book burnings associated with the RCC in the context of Harry Potter.
Sorry t & d, individual Catholic schools and churches have (search Boston Globe,
sorry I don’t have the link now). I only used it as an example of the limited
open views in the catholic churches and communities. Next time I’ll use Ozzy Osbourne. Maybe Evel Knievel, who in my grade school was banned because
our devout (unaware) principal did not see it as a good thing to let boys play with a doll named “Evil”. (shudders)
Apologies to dopers for getting off subject.
Great thread so far…
Maybe Evel Knievel, who in my grade school was banned because