Bad Confession Experience - Incorrect Absolution Formulas

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dauphin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dauphin said:
I went to confession today, and it definitely qualifies as the worst experience I’ve had in the confessional.

The priest used a formula of absolution other than the one prescribed by the Church. It went something like:

“I ask God to free you from all your temptations and iniquities…”

Confused by this prayer I had never heard before, and worried that I would not receive the correct formula of absolution, I interrrupted the priest, and asked him to use the correct formula. I accept that this was probably not the best approach, but I was really thrown off by this brand new prayer he had invented. After telling me how rude I was being, and after I apologized to him, the priest then offered me this absolution:

“I ask Christ to absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”

I knew that this wasn’t the correct formula either, but the priest was already upset at me, so I thanked him and went to the rectory to seek a confession from the pastor.

The pastor let me in. I explained what had happened, and he argued with me, telling me that the confession was valid as long as the priest had the correct intention. I responded that the confession might have been valid (since I knew there are different formulas used in the east), but that priests are supposed to use a particular formula, and I wanted absolute certainty that my sins were absolved.

The priest then gave me a confession, using the proper formula, “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”, and then admonished me not to be “scrupulous”.

Was I wrong to be so insistent on the proper formula of absolution? What would you have done?
Click to expand...
I am sorry you had a bad experience. I know sometimes I can hardly even hear the priest, so I can understand how upsetting this all can be.

I believe as long as these words are included in the absolution , you are forgiven. " I ABSOLVE YOU FROM YOUR SINS IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT" catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/documentText/Index/2/SubIndex/40/ContentIndex/450/Start/446

I also noticed in this link, if you go to the Table of Contents , that there are adaptations to the Rite of Penance. Priest can add prayers, biblical texts, to suit the individual penitent, as long as they keep the essential formula which is , “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”

Maybe the priest was saying special prayer for you before he gave you the essential words of absolution? If you do have a priest in the future that says something a little different, be sure to let him finish so you can see if these essential words are in the absolution.

I do believe I have had a priest say the formula a little different, but the essential words were always there.

I hope you don’t have to deal with any confusion or problems with confession again.

Blessings
 
bilop said:
Dauphin,

Ignore those attacking you or making you out to have a problem.

Abuse of the Sacraments has become so common, it seems, that people believe priests have a **right **to change things.

It is clear that your heart is in the right place, and you understand the importance of our Faith and the Sacraments. It is a tribute to you that you have done so at such a young age. It took me a lot longer.

God Bless
Click to expand...
Thanks, Bilop. I appreciate your comment.
 
Dauphin said:
And I’m saying that there’s no scrupulosity in exercising my right to a licit confession. If I had waited, and left with any uncertainty about my absolution, it would have meant that salvation was low on my list of priorities - below my ego. I found it extremely humiliating to go into the rectory and beg the pastor for a confession and then give one face to face to someone who clearly thought I was a nut, but I did it out of the conviction that confession isn’t a joke or a game - that this is the most important thing in the world and it has to be done correctly.

I could be like all the other people my age at this school, endulging in drunkenness and fornication and not giving it a second thought. I’d be alot less susceptible to this sort of humiliation and condemnation that way. Maybe that’s the solution? I’m tired of exposing myself in such a way to priests who seem to take it so lightly.
Click to expand...
I admire your devotion.
 
I am not so sure of myself on this one-- it would definitely throw me off, especially if the pastor disagreed with me about it after. But it is my understanding that for a sacrament to be valid the correct matter and proper formula must be used. I don’t know that I’d have interRupted the priest, but I probably would have sought out another priest and repeated the confession.

I’m sorry you had such an experience. Hopefully it will not happen again.
 
Let’s remember that it is God that forgives us our sin through the priest – if we validly confessed our sins and the priest INTENDS to forgive us, then we ARE forgiven.
 
Sir_Knight said:
Let’s remember that it is God that forgives us our sin through the priest – if we validly confessed our sins and the priest INTENDS to forgive us, then we ARE forgiven.
Click to expand...
uh oh. Cover your head. I think I tried that already.
 
Sir_Knight said:
Let’s remember that it is God that forgives us our sin through the priest – if we validly confessed our sins and the priest INTENDS to forgive us, then we ARE forgiven.
Click to expand...
The whole point of theis thread is that’s not clear.

If a priest intend to baptize and say “I baptize you in the name of the creator, redeemer and sanctifier” Rome has ruled that that baptism in invalid.

There is significant evidence that in the Latin Church the formula “I absolve thee/you…” is required. It definitely is for licity, it may be for validity.

Do I think God would send a person to hell if they sincerely thought they were absolved? No.

But, the laity has a right to **valid and licit **sacraments and the priest is committing a grave sin by abusing the sacrament. It is a big deal.

God Bless
 
bilop said:
The whole point of theis thread is that’s not clear.

If a priest intend to baptize and say “I baptize you in the name of the creator, redeemer and sanctifier” Rome has ruled that that baptism in invalid.

There is significant evidence that in the Latin Church the formula “I absolve thee/you…” is required. It definitely is for licity, it may be for validity.

Do I think God would send a person to hell if they sincerely thought they were absolved? No.

But, the laity has a right to **valid and licit **sacraments and the priest is committing a grave sin by abusing the sacrament. It is a big deal.

God Bless
Click to expand...
bilop, I think this sums it all up pretty well.
 
bilop said:
There is significant evidence that in the Latin Church the formula “I absolve thee/you…” is required. It definitely is for licity, it may be for validity.
Click to expand...
I lived in Florida for several years and the Pastor there would say “I forgive you your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Go in peace.” That was it. None of the “Seeking to reconcile the world to Himself, God sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sin …”

Are you saying that all of the people who have gone to confession with this priest and who continue to go to him, walk out of the confessional with their sins retained?
 
I’m not yet Catholic and haven’t experienced the Sacrament of Reconciliation yet… but since the OP interrupted the priest… how do we not know that the priest was praying in his own way before completely giving the absolution?

Just my two cents…
 
Sir_Knight said:
I lived in Florida for several years and the Pastor there would say “I forgive you your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Go in peace.” That was it. None of the “Seeking to reconcile the world to Himself, God sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sin …”

Are you saying that all of the people who have gone to confession with this priest and who continue to go to him, walk out of the confessional with their sins retained?
Click to expand...
Most opinions I’ve read state that it is only the “I absolve you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” that is required. The other prayers do not affect validity.

This priest’s fornula is very similar: forgive vs. absolve. I would guess it’s valid.

If the people honestly believe they have been absolved, I think they’re in the clear, but the priest could be sinning, although in this case, he seems to intend to use the right formula.

The way to avoid all this speculation is for priests to do the Sacraments by the book. I don’t know why that is so hard for many.

God Bless
 
stacywva said:
I’m not yet Catholic and haven’t experienced the Sacrament of Reconciliation yet… but since the OP interrupted the priest… how do we not know that the priest was praying in his own way before completely giving the absolution?

Just my two cents…
Click to expand...
When the OP requested the correct formula, the priest refused. If he had intended it, I doubt he would have refused.

God Bless
 
bilop said:
The way to avoid all this speculation is for priests to do the Sacraments by the book. I don’t know why that is so hard for many.
Click to expand...
The priests are there to shepard the flock given to them

Does the shepard answer to the sheep?
 
Sir_Knight said:
The priests are there to shepard the flock given to them

Does the shepard answer to the sheep?
Click to expand...
The shepherd answers to the Supreme Shepherd - the Pope. And the Pope commands him through the law of the Church to use a particular formula of absolution. To change the formula is to go astray from the Shepherd.
 
Sir_Knight said:
The priests are there to shepard the flock given to them

Does the shepard answer to the sheep?
Click to expand...
The shepherd owes his sheep proper “shepherding”.

When a priest deviates from the directives of Rome, he is not being a proper shepherd and deserves correction. Both for the good of his soul, and the souls under his care.

God Bless
 
Dauphin said:
The shepherd answers to the Supreme Shepherd - the Pope. And the Pope commands him through the law of the Church to use a particular formula of absolution. To change the formula is to go astray from the Shepherd.
Click to expand...
bilop said:
The shepherd owes his sheep proper “shepherding”.

When a priest deviates from the directives of Rome, he is not being a proper shepherd and deserves correction. Both for the good of his soul, and the souls under his care.

God Bless
Click to expand...
None of that changes the fact that the sheep do not judge the actions of the shepard.
 
Sir_Knight said:
None of that changes the fact that the sheep do not judge the actions of the shepard.
Click to expand...
Untrue.

The Holy Father himself has told the laity that they have the right to properly celebrated Sacraments, and the right to complain if they don’t get it, to Rome if necessary.

A priest or bishop has **zero right **to alter the Sacraments, and the laity have the **absolute right **to complain if they do. First to the priest, then to the pastor, then to the bishop, and then to Rome, if necessary to have the abuses rectified.

From Redemptionis Sacramentum
[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the **right to lodge a complaint **regarding a liturgical abuse to the **diocesan Bishop **or the **competent Ordinary **equivalent to him in law, or to the **Apostolic See **on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.[290] It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.
Click to expand...
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top