The official RCC position re the destiny of Judas Iscariot

[Davidnic]

So Davidic, what do you think of those who might see it as unfair, that Catholics have great hope that unbaptized, unborn, babies are in limbo, yet some Catholics have great hope that Judas is in heaven, sharing a feast with Jesus; some Catholics have great hope Hitler is sharing paradise with Jesus? It seems kinda odd that Jesus would sit down to a feast, in the afterlife, with Judas and Hitler and yet distance Himself from the unbaptized, unborn babies in limbo.

I think unbaptized babies are in heaven due to that great hope, just as Pope Benedict XVI and much other teaching says. Limbo was only ever a Pius opinion and not Dogma. Pope Benedict XVI explained that clearly and it was well known long before that. Limbo is a matter of free opinion that many luminaries in the Church have rejected.

from "The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptized."

It is clear that the traditional teaching on this topic has concentrated on the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin.

This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium, even if that same Magisterium did at times mention or reference the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis. However, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), the theory of limbo is not mentioned. Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children.

I think scripture points to Judas being unrepentant and unlike almost all others he did not need to meet Christ at the moment of death to understand Him better, he knew Him personally. So my thought is that although the Church makes no formal teaching on it...Judas is likely in hell because he did not repent and did not need greater knowledge of Christ that was misrepresented. Christ was before him daily.

As far as any of history's other men and women who did demonstrably evil acts...I do not know their internal moment of death with Christ.

But I do think that to say they would be admitted to heaven when unbaptized children would not is off base at best. And much like those who close heavens doors as if they were God, it fundamentally misunderstands Catholic teaching.

 

[StevenMerten]

My feeling is that Popes should spend more time telling Catholics, who are still alive, to repent, in order that they may go to heaven, rather than fixating on whether dead evil people, like Judas, are in heaven or hell.

 

[Davidnic]

You are free to that opinion. But luckily Popes do not have to choose either or between that narrow set of options. They can choose to do both. Pope Benedict XVI proves that...as do many others.

 

[StevenMerten]

You are free to that opinion. But luckily Popes do not have to choose either or between that narrow set of options. They can choose to do both. Pope Benedict XVI proves that...as do many others.

Hello Davidic,
Thank you for stating that Catholics are free to have the opinion that Popes do little to actually bring the Flock into eternal life. Everytime I hear a Pope slam America for not caring for the poor, I cringe. Jesus commanded His flock to feed the poor, with eternal life as a reward for doing so. Jesus says that He will burn in hell those of His flock that do not care for the poor. If Catholics above the poverty level were all tithing as the Lord Commands, this would be trillions of dollars to the poor. Yet Popes remain silent to the Flock about how Jesus is going to burn them in hell for not tithing properly to keep the poor from dying. If Pope Francis would focus on teaching Catholics to tithe, or burn in hell, rather than slamming America on immigration, we would not need immigration because Christ's Church would be caring for the poor right there in their own countries. Of course, slamming America brings worldly glorification to Popes while Popes preaching Christ's Gospel to the flock about how Jesus is going to burn Catholics in hell for not tithing properly, brings worldly dis-glorification to Popes. So Popes focus on whether or not Judas is in hell.

Matthew 25:31
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' Then the righteous will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.' Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?' He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.' And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."​

 

[AvilaSurfer]

We get it. You don’t like the current pope. It appears to me that you’re just trying to pick a fight. Popes can concentrate on many things at once.

 

[Davidnic]

Yep popes don't have to focus narrowly they can look at all of Catholic theology.

 

[StevenMerten]

It is not Popes that I dislike. Rather it is the dysfunctional Catholic great commandment to glorify Popes at all cost, regardless of who suffers, that is my sorrow. When Catholics do not care that billions of people on earth are dying and suffering from the loss of God's Commanded tithe money, that would have rescued them, but their only concern is for the glorification of Catholic Popes, this is the greatest of all tragedies to me.

 

[Open Heart]

The Catholic Church doesn't have an "official position" on the fate of Judas because we can't know who is in hell.

Best answer so far.

Remember that a mortal sin has three requirements, not just one:
1. It must be a grave matter.
2. The person must know that it is a mortal sin
3. The person must do it of their own free will, with full consent.

The problem with suicide is that although it is a grave matter, the person does not usually think of it as a sin, and because of their grief and/or depression their ability to think straight is seriously compromised, interfearing with full consent.

 

[Davidnic]

It is not Popes that I dislike. Rather it is the dysfunctional Catholic great commandment to glorify Popes at all cost, regardless of who suffers, that is my sorrow. When Catholics do not care that billions of people on earth are dying and suffering from the loss of God's Commanded tithe money, that would have rescued them, but their only concern is for the glorification of Catholic Popes, this is the greatest of all tragedies to me.

Tithing is not a Catholic concept so Popes would not focus on it. We focus on whatever time, talent or treasure we can give to the Church. We are obligated to help the Church within our means not to tithe. The Church supports the poor of the world constantly and the Popes have preached on their plight and provided support.

What is the Church's position on tithing? | Catholic Answers

 

[AvilaSurfer]

It is not Popes that I dislike. Rather it is the dysfunctional Catholic great commandment to glorify Popes at all cost, regardless of who suffers, that is my sorrow. When Catholics do not care that billions of people on earth are dying and suffering from the loss of God's Commanded tithe money, that would have rescued them, but their only concern is for the glorification of Catholic Popes, this is the greatest of all tragedies to me.

That is just plain false.

 

[chevyontheriver]

It is not Popes that I dislike. Rather it is the dysfunctional Catholic great commandment to glorify Popes at all cost, regardless of who suffers, that is my sorrow. When Catholics do not care that billions of people on earth are dying and suffering from the loss of God's Commanded tithe money, that would have rescued them, but their only concern is for the glorification of Catholic Popes, this is the greatest of all tragedies to me.

I hope it sinks in that tithing is not a Christian requirement, but part of the OT law. You are free to tithe, but it is not a requirement for Christians. You are free to give more than a tithe as well. You are required to give of your time and talent and money for the ministries of the Church, but the percentage has not been specified.

Some Christian denominations insist on a tithe. They do it wrongly. It becomes a sort of works righteousness, destructive of grace and the free response to that grace.

We are to support the ministries of the Church, and many people don't do that very well at all. Some bypass the collection entirely. Some put in a dollar here or there. Some of us have been in financial hardship. Some still are in financial hardship. But others are just miserly. Then there are some who do contribute a great deal, even more than their share, but very quietly. Overall, we should contribute more, but do it freely and not as a formula.

Pope Francis has done me one favor. He has shown me that infallibility has it's limits. I had, and still have, a high opinion of popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I was ready to have the same high opinion of pope Francis, and indeed I started out that way. Now I know that should not be automatic. And I can apply it retroactively.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

I’m always amused by people who say tithing is old fashioned, an Old Testament thing that we don’t need to pay attention to.
My response is OK, let’s just stick with the New Testament. What did Jesus say? He said to sell it all and follow Him.

 

[ClementofA]

Both of the supposed explanations are false.

The first talking about stillborn babies makes no sense because there is no difference between a baby who is stillborn or one who is born and dies very shortly thereafter because they both have souls. We must also take the argument to the logical conclusion which is that Judas is either saved and is in heaven or he no longer exists. Neither of these explanations make any sense based on what Jesus said. If he no longer exists, then he is in the exact same state that he would have been in if he was never conceived. If he is in heaven then the only way to make it make sense is to say that heaven is actually a punishment worse than non-existence.

Jesus said it would have been better if Judas had not been born. He did not say it would have been better if Judas had never been conceived or existed. The latter opposes universalism, the former does not necessarily do so. One who dies in the womb without being born has existed. To not be born & die before being born means that one existed.
It would be better to be (1) concieved (& therefore to exist) & not be born than (2) to be born & live a wicked life (e.g. Judas Iscariot), because the former is in better standing with God than the latter (compare, for example, Lk.12:47-48). Judas will suffer the wrath of God of which the child in utero, who was never born, is not deserving. Therefore, for Judas, it would have been better if he had never been born, but died in his mother's womb. But, though he will suffer the wrath of God, this does not rule out the possibility of his ultimate salvation. Therefore Mt.26:24 fails as a proof text against him being saved.

The second explanation just plays games with the Greek and ignores the surrounding context. Even Judas knew who Christ was talking about. If Judas is in hell, which is what this verse and passage alludes to, then everything makes perfect sense. It really would have been better if he was never born in this case.

How do you know "Judas knew who Christ was talking about" in Mt.26:24? Have you spoken to Judas on the matter? Would Judas' interpretation be inspired?

As for the "second explanation just plays games with the Greek", are you a Greek scholar?

Which "hell" (Hades, Gehenna, Tartarus, the lake of fire) would Judas be in now, if he were in "hell"? And what makes you think there is no escape from such?

It seems there is reasonable evidence that the Scriptures do not condemn Judas to an eternity of punishment:

FAQ 14. Better had Judas not been born? Matthew 26:24

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Starting to sound like a debate.

 

[Davidnic]

if he were in "hell"? And what makes you think there is no escape from such?

Infallible dogma.

Don't debate here

 

[Rhamiel]

A good priest talking about the biblical view that most people go to Hell and the reality of the limbo of the infants