Tolkien has a strong theological reason to absolve Frodo because his basic sense of human compassion tells him that Frodo doesn’t deserve to be punished for his failure. But if he were morally culpable—if his failure counted as a sin—logically he would have to punished (if not formally absolved by God in some pre-Catholic way), not with hell, I’m sure, but maybe purgatory? And that just feels far too cruel; I think he and I would agree on that.
Without claiming any expertise beyond being raised a Catholic, I think the fact that Frodo a) repents and b) actively does something about it fulfills the theological requirement for absolution. No, he can't go to confession to a priest and receive absolution in Middle Earth, but as Tolkien the WWI veteran would know, there are extreme circumstances in in "our" world as well where no clergyman is available, and Frodo's sincere repentance, confession and good works would end up in his salvation.
Again, I could be wrong here, and of course I'm post Vatican 2 raised, as opposed to Tolkien.
no subject
Without claiming any expertise beyond being raised a Catholic, I think the fact that Frodo a) repents and b) actively does something about it fulfills the theological requirement for absolution. No, he can't go to confession to a priest and receive absolution in Middle Earth, but as Tolkien the WWI veteran would know, there are extreme circumstances in in "our" world as well where no clergyman is available, and Frodo's sincere repentance, confession and good works would end up in his salvation.
Again, I could be wrong here, and of course I'm post Vatican 2 raised, as opposed to Tolkien.