2nd Thought on confession

[xyneshia]

When I went through RCIA (three years ago) I was talking to the teacher about first confession. I told him that while I was still protestant I had my sins absolved by a minister. He told me that if in my heart I believed this really absolved and forgave me than I only need to confess my sins back to that point in time and not my baptism. I was baptized as a young child and committed terrible, terrible sins when I was 13 and 14, years after my baptism. I did not confess these because the minister absolved me when I was in my early 20’s. I was relieved that I would not have to confess them, I doubt I would be able to get the words out. So anyway, I am watching Father Corapi on television last week ( I love that guy) and he states that the only valid sacraments that our non Catholic brothers and sisters have is baptism and marriage. So now I am terrified that my confessions are all invalid!! Can someone talk me down? Should I treat my next confession like my first and confess everything back to my baptism or maybe I misunderstood Father Corapi? Thanks in advance, and sorry this was so long.
Xyneshia

 

[passus]

Xyneshia, had or have you been to confession with a Catholic priest anytime during or after your completion of the RCIA process?

 

[xyneshia]

Yup I have been three times now.

 

[PJM]

=xyneshia;4914387]When I went through RCIA (three years ago) I was talking to the teacher about first confession. I told him that while I was still protestant I had my sins absolved by a minister. He told me that if in my heart I believed this really absolved and forgave me than I only need to confess my sins back to that point in time and not my baptism. I was baptized as a young child and committed terrible, terrible sins when I was 13 and 14, years after my baptism. I did not confess these because the minister absolved me when I was in my early 20’s. I was relieved that I would not have to confess them, I doubt I would be able to get the words out. So anyway, I am watching Father Corapi on television last week ( I love that guy) and he states that the only valid sacraments that our non Catholic brothers and sisters have is baptism and marriage. So now I am terrified that my confessions are all invalid!! Can someone talk me down? Should I treat my next confession like my first and confess everything back to my baptism or maybe I misunderstood Father Corapi? Thanks in advance, and sorry this was so long.
Xyneshia

My dear frind in Christ Jesus,

Our Lord loved YOU enough to die for you, certainly He will give you the courage and conviction of heart to do what is right in God’s eyes and heart.

Mt. 16:" 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16* Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17* And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18* *And I tell you, you are Peter, * and on this rock * I will build my church, and the powers of death * shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” *20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ".

John 20:“21* Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” 22 *And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” **

So dear friend, trust in God, who is Mercy and Love!

Tell father you are very nervous, and remember, God can only do good! Catholic reconcillation is the Sacrament od KNOWN FORGIVENESS.

I too am sorry to share with you, that the minister has NO POWER to forgive sins. They must be Confessed, and the sooner the better.

Know that you are in our thoughts and prayers,

 

[passus]

Yup I have been three times now.

We can say we have been absolved of any mortal sin sins that we do not mention in Confession, so long as the sins were not intentionally withheld. Your erroneous understanding that you had rightly received absolution of these grave sins you’re talking about from a Protestant minister would not constitute intentionally withholding sins and so naturally, it is safe to say that you were absolved of them at your first confession with a Catholic priest. You are not in a state of mortal sin because of those sins.

Having said that, it would, however, be most pious and significant of your penitence and demonstrative of your remorse for having committed those sins to mention them at your next confession.

God bless.

 

[judechild]

Having said that, it would, however, be most pious and significant of your penitence and demonstrative of your remorse for having committed those sins to mention them at your next confession.

I agree with Passus; your previous confessions are definately not invalid unless you withheld sins that you knew should have been confessed. I want you to know that I know how you feel, I had a similar problem. I also know it’s hard, but even though those sins in your past are “covered” by the Sacrament of Penance, it really will help to tell them to a priest. The actual confession to a priest is only one part of the whole conversion, “The confessor is not the master of God’s forgiveness, but its servant,” (CCC 1466). If you have become aware of sins from your past, look in your heart and see if confession of those sins will help you grow closer to God, then follow your conscience! God Bless!

 

[FrDavid96]

When I went through RCIA (three years ago) I was talking to the teacher about first confession. I told him that while I was still protestant I had my sins absolved by a minister. He told me that if in my heart I believed this really absolved and forgave me than I only need to confess my sins back to that point in time and not my baptism. I was baptized as a young child and committed terrible, terrible sins when I was 13 and 14, years after my baptism. I did not confess these because the minister absolved me when I was in my early 20’s. I was relieved that I would not have to confess them, I doubt I would be able to get the words out. So anyway, I am watching Father Corapi on television last week ( I love that guy) and he states that the only valid sacraments that our non Catholic brothers and sisters have is baptism and marriage. So now I am terrified that my confessions are all invalid!! Can someone talk me down? Should I treat my next confession like my first and confess everything back to my baptism or maybe I misunderstood Father Corapi? Thanks in advance, and sorry this was so long.
Xyneshia

As others have explained, the confession to a valid priest is what absolved you, the confession to a minister did nothing in the way of absolution (of course, that does NOT mean that God Himself did not forgive you, as that’s related, but distinct).

If you are conscious of any grave sins (and here I mean very serious sins–again, very serious sins) you do need to confess them the next time you confess to a priest. But the fact that you have not done so already is not your fault–the first priest spoke in serious error, and so you are not responsible, and that would not make your real confessions invalid.

You mention very serious sins at age 13 or 14. Please don’t share those on these public posts. Since those are bothering you, yes, you should confess them. However, if you can’t remember all the sins, then chances are they would not rise to the level of requiring that you confess them.

 

[xyneshia]

As others have explained, the confession to a valid priest is what absolved you, the confession to a minister did nothing in the way of absolution (of course, that does NOT mean that God Himself did not forgive you, as that’s related, but distinct).

If you are conscious of any grave sins (and here I mean very serious sins–again, very serious sins) you do need to confess them the next time you confess to a priest. But the fact that you have not done so already is not your fault–the first priest spoke in serious error, and so you are not responsible, and that would not make your real confessions invalid.

You mention very serious sins at age 13 or 14. Please don’t share those on these public posts. Since those are bothering you, yes, you should confess them. However, if you can’t remember all the sins, then chances are they would not rise to the level of requiring that you confess them.

Oh believe me, I will never share what they were. So if I understand what all you good people have told me I am forgiven since I have gone to confession and thought that I did not need to mention them. I am getting a little confilicting info on if I am required to mention them next time I confess of if I should forget them since they are forgiven. I would like to thank each of you for your kind replies. Ever since I heard Corapi the other night have been in a state of panic. All of you have helped me feel much better. God bless each of you.
Xyneshia

 

[The_Prodigal]

What Father Corapi was referring to was the fact that baptism and marriage don’t require the actions of an ordained priest for them to be efficacious.

However, the Church teaches that absolution can only be granted by an ordained priest.

 

[FrDavid96]

Oh believe me, I will never share what they were. So if I understand what all you good people have told me I am forgiven since I have gone to confession and thought that I did not need to mention them. I am getting a little confilicting info on if I am required to mention them next time I confess of if I should forget them since they are forgiven. I would like to thank each of you for your kind replies. Ever since I heard Corapi the other night have been in a state of panic. All of you have helped me feel much better. God bless each of you.
Xyneshia

xyneshia,
The reason why you should mention them is for the sake of your own healing. The absolution by a valid priest reconciled you to the Church and brought-about the forgiveness of your sins–even the ones you didn’t mention through no fault of your own. Mentioning them this time would not be a denial of the absolution/forgiveness from the first time, but rather a form of healing for yourself. Since the fact that you haven’t confessed those sins is obviously bothering you (unless I’m completely misunderstanding your first post), confessing them now would be for the sake of easing your own conscience.

You’ve been absolved and forgiven, but you haven’t had the opportunity to “move on” from those sins yet.

 

[PJM]

We can say we have been absolved of any mortal sin sins that we do not mention in Confession, so long as the sins were not intentionally withheld. Your erroneous understanding that you had rightly received absolution of these grave sins you’re talking about from a Protestant minister would not constitute intentionally withholding sins and so naturally, it is safe to say that you were absolved of them at your first confession with a Catholic priest. You are not in a state of mortal sin because of those sins.

Having said that, it would, however, be most pious and significant of your penitence and demonstrative of your remorse for having committed those sins to mention them at your next confession.

God bless.

If, if. if. their was an intentional witholding of the Mortal sins in Confession, they are not forgiven. God will know and jusge your heart.

Pray about it!

Love and prayers,