Do any of the Eastern Traditions consider the missing of Mass a damnable offense against God.
All I have ever heard Byzantine priests say is that Sunday is not seen in our Church as an obligation, but rather we should want to love God to be in the doors anytime Liturgy or other services are offered. I am sure there are Byzantine priests that address the issue from a Latin casuistic perspective, but most priests will say that it is not a matter of obligation, but of desire–we should always desire to go to church as often as possible. Hell is seperation from God, we should always strive to be closer to Him while on this earth and strive to finish the race until the end–the race of faithfulness and loyalty to Jesus Christ and His Church.
Amen. I agree with this post.
nobody in the west thinks this either, it is too much to ask that one determine what the Church truly teaches before attacking that belief, frontally or sideways? the damnable offense is unrepentent rejection of God, which usually takes the form of clinging to sins one committed on earth, will full free will, knowledge and consent, for no other reason than to reject God and his love. Persistence in this determination after death, even after seeing God’s face, and repeating the rejection to his face, is the damnable offense. If you don’t know what unrepentant means, please look it up in the dictionary.
the question makes as much sense as saying, can I tell someone I love her if I reject her, reject everything about her, continually find ways to demean her, and then expect she will want to spend her life with me?
The sense of obligation is somewhat different. According to the UGCC particular law in the USA, the Sunday and festal duty is satisfied by attending Vespers, Matins or the Divine Liturgy.
This is an important restoration of the ancient idea that the Eucharistic celebration includes the Divine Praises in one cyclic sacrifice of praise.
Nobody in the west thinks missing Mass is a damnable offence? is that what you are saying? Because that’s not the case.
Nowhere in any Chruch document or in the Catechism will you find the words, “damnable offense”.
Words mean things, and those are loaded words. Perhaps it would be better to define it the way the Latin Church does, as serious matter.
yes it is the case. it is a mortal sin if done deliberately with full knowledge and consent, but it is not a damnable offense. No mortal sin is, unless the sinner is unrepentent and remains unrepentent when confronted with God at his judgement upon death. watch your phraseology and don’t put your own spin on Church teaching
Gotcha. I’ll use the word grave in the future.
Not if you wanted to be arguementative or uncharitible. Seriously, with only 20 percent of Western Rite Catholics regularly attending Sunday Mass how could anyone actually believe that a significant portion of Catholics believe the “damnable offence” bit. Should we start a thread about the unorthodox beliefs of some members of the Eastern Churches? I don’t think so for we, I believe, are One Body.
But you will find the words “grave sin” associated with missing sunday or obigatory holy day participation.
Grave sin for missing sunday is not in current canon law (Neither CIC nor CCEO), but the obligcation is present in the current CIC for Romans to attend on all holy days of obligation and on all sundays.
So, if I understand correnctly, it is not considered a grave sin to miss Mass on Sunday in the Eastern Churches as it is in the Roman Church. Correct?
Generally, no. One is obligated to participate often and regularly. Certain particular churches have imposed a duty upon their members for sundays and particular holy days, in order to comply with their local Conferences.
WOW, are you serious? It is not a mortal sin for Eastern Catholics to miss Mass (or the Divine Liturgy)? This is certainly news to me. :eek:
I thought the Protestants were the only ones who did this. Is it the same with the Orthodox? Some non-denominationals were surprised when I asked them if they were required to go to Sunday services.
The idea that one wouldn’t want to be there is alien to Byzantine theology.
i think that the reason for the confusion is that Western Catholics come from a legalistic tradition. Eastern Catholics do not.
This is not meant as a put down to us Latins. Legalistic traditions have a hard time lending themselves to the tension that can be found within the East.
The contradiction between the Eastern and Western expressions of attending the Sunday liturgy is only an apparent contradiction, in my opinion. It is not truly a contradiction. i think that the legalism of our tradition tends to lend itself to the letter of the law without recognizing the inner dispostion of the heart as just as important, if not moreso. The west focuses on the letter of the law. The east focuses on the inner disposition. This has always been the tension between understanding east and west. They are really complimentar, not contradictory beliefs.