Cardinal Pell and the forgiveness of sins

[CRV]

penance is separate to reparation or restitution or justice.

The penace is usually prayers or a financial donation etc. As Canon lawyer Dr Edwards said, absolution cannot be withheld or delayed dependant upon a future event ie handing one self into police. The Sacrament is for the forgiveness of sins, the satisfaction (penance we’re given) goes in some way to repay God for our offense.

The reparation or restitution or justice etc is a separate issue to the absolution of sins.

 

[pete_bowes]

CRV, apologies for the late amendment.

 

[CRV]

ok, well as I understand it, the forgiveness is not dependant on the performance of the penance given. Absolution is dependant on the sorrow for sin, firm purpose of amendment of ones life and the acceptance of the penance given.

The penitent could/would be urged to turn themselves in, but that cannot be a condition for absolution

ETA from Dr Peters (linked article above)
“In short, I see no canonical or sacramental support for the claim that a public self-disclosure of a penitent’s sins, at the time of or following confession, can be required for absolution.”
and
" POINT TWO : While the refusal to accept a lawful penance can be grounds for refusing absolution, the failure to perform a penance lawfully imposed does not render the prior confession and/or absolution null."

ETA FURTHER -
In sum, any assertions that: (1) absolution from sin may be withheld from a penitent who declines to report his or her acts to civil authorities; (2) absolution may be made contingent upon a penitent’s later reporting his or her acts to civil authorities; (3) a penitent’s failure to perform a penance/satisfaction renders the prior confession and/or absolution null; or (4) public acts of penance/satisfaction may be imposed on a penitent for sins not known by the community to have been committed by the penitent, are either simply wrong or, at best, are subject to serious interpretive restrictions.

(sorry, pete, gotta go for now)

 

[GiftofMercy]

But who are these people who believe he is guilty of pedophilia?

Who are these people who do not believe he is guilty, There is a cross section of the population that believes either way and another on the fence.

Paul Tatchell is hearsay. Just because one person never heard mention, doesn’t mean it did not or that it did happen. Paul Tatchell is also in that article from 2016 and talking about an incident at a Pool in Ballarat, not about a Cathedral in Melbourne. Big difference. The information about the Surf Life Saving Club is currently suppressed and is one of the blocks that were problematic in Louise Milligan’s book that came out pre trial.

Louise Milligan has some interesting evidence that was suppressed along with her book until after all the legal channels have been exhausted.

We must wait for the outcome of the next appeal, if indeed Pell is allowed to appeal. And then, what the grounds for the appeal will be. The Vatican is waiting before they make any moves. It is the right thing to do.

 

[pete_bowes]

Good bloke, that.

 

[Rau]

absolution cannot be withheld or delayed dependant upon a future event ie handing one self into police.

So be it. The proposition ought perhaps be put that handing oneself in is the right thing to do.

 

[Divine3]

He is innocent but your poor system of justice isn’t innocent. Gods justice is eternal and we all should take great comfort in that. We are all going to die and the older we are the shorter our life here on earth will be. You can become a saint in prison not sure about all those who put him in jail and your evil minded crowd and media …not sure about their chances of sainthood but conversions do happen.

 

[CRV]

Well yes, but that would be part of the justice owed, not part of the Sacrament of Confession.