Catholic friends have no need for confession

  • Thread starter Thread starter jrabs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jrabs

Guest
Please send some advice my way because I am at a lose. Within the same day, two of my friends asked me to pray for them about desperate situations. Both pleaded to me to explain why God was not answering their prayers and what they could do to facilitate God’s plan in their lives. They both used the same statement, “I don’t get it. I am a good person.”

Both friends are Catholics and attend church weekly. I asked both if they could go to confession and received the response, " I don’t believe in that. I don’t need God to confess."

To further complicate things, one of them is proud of being a Eucharistic Minister, but lives in mortal sin with her boyfriend.

I am not gifted in explaining why we need to go to confession, because for me it is enough to be obedient and go. I cannot respond intelligently as to why “just being a good person” is not enough. Addressing the sexual sins has not worked because I am told I am being unrealistic and they have needs. Besides, “Everyone does it.”

Please help me with a gentle response for people who just think Sunday mass is where it ends.
My friends already think I am an over zealous re-vert, so what ever works for me is too much effort and unnecessary in thier opinion. Yet these two women continue to ask my opinion, but do not want to hear it.

Thanks. I know you folks will have some great humble advice for me.
 
The short answer is: because Jesus said so. He gave the power to his followers to forgive sins and showed us the clear path to Heaven. Thinking that one can be forgiven without confession is presumptious at best. And Jesus never said that those who do more good than bad go to Heaven; no, what he said was that sinners - no matter how much good they do - do not get to see Heaven as nothing impure can get in.

Good one-page article that might help.

It also sounds like your friends need a little more than just a primer on Confession.
 
i could bang my head against the wall when I hear “I’m a good person”. Compared to who?
 
I have heard some very good suggestions about explaining the need to confess. Here are a couple.

When we are sick, we see a doctor. When we have a toothache, we go to a dentist. When we need some emotional help, we go to a psychiatrist. **When we need spiritual help in our lives, we go to a priest. ** It is much like seeking healing in all other areas of our lives. The priest is not there to judge or ridicule you, he is there acting in the person of Christ, to shower you with mercy and forgiveness and give you some spiritual direction which will hopefully lead to healing.

Also, when we sin, we not only injure ourselves, we often injure someone else in the process, plus (most importantly) we injure our relationship with God. It is like each time we sin, we are hammering a nail in a board. If you confess and ask God’s forgiveness, the nail is removed. Yet, what is left in the board? A hole! To totally repair the damage, we must do whatever is needed to fill that hole (penance). Sometimes it is prayer, sometimes it is apologizing to someone we have hurt deeply, sometimes it’s doing an act of mercy for someone else, sometimes it’s making an effort to change a behavior (or sin) in our lives for good.

Plus, since we are all a part of the “Body of Christ” – His Church, when we sin, we sin against the entire body. This damage must be repaired through sacrament.

If we truly want to follow Jesus, we strive for holiness. If we do not want to defile His Precious Body and Blood, we need to make sure we are not in a state of mortal sin when we receive Him. Just your friend’s conscious act of not only receiving Jesus in mortal sin, but also being a Eucharistic minister, is a grave sin.

That said, even if we are striving to be holy, cooperating with God’s grace, that doesn’t mean everything is going to be great in our lives. This journey on earth is meant to refine us and produce character in us, so we are always striving to be more like Jesus. In doing so, we must carry our crosses throughout this life, offering them to Jesus.

The difference is that, with God’s grace (through sacraments and prayer) we are cooperating with His plan for our lives and not becoming resentful of the crosses that come our way. The attitude of “I’m a good person” just doesn’t stand. Jesus was the best person ever in the history of the world, yet He suffered tremendously (and willingly)!

Our reward on earth is knowing that we are never alone, and Our Lord will give us the strength we need to get through whatever comes our way. Our ultimate reward will be everlasting life in His Holy and Perfect Presence!

Hope this helps! Keep praying for your friends!
 
Thanks Barrister. That was a great article. I think I will forward it to them. I can only lead them to the water. The Holy Spirit is in charge of getting them to drink.
 
I would gently point out that Catholic canon law is binding upon all Catholics, just as surely as civil law is binding upon all citizens of the USA. You have three options:
  1. assent to and obey the law
  2. obey the law while working to change it
  3. disobey the law
  4. renounce your citizenship under the governing body you oppose
Option 1) and Option 2) are the options a “good citizen” would choose. A good citizen is obedient in all things lawful, even if they happen to disagree with the law yet vow loyalty to the authority of the lawgiver.

Option 3) is the way of a criminal. They want the appearance of being a good citizen and the benefits of citizenship, but they don’t want to obey the law, nor do they bother to change the law through the institutions and processes established to do so by the lawful authority. They simply take the weasel’s way out and break the law. This is not the way of a good citizen.

Option 4) is the way of rebellion from lawful authority. If one truly believes their government is binding you to do something evil, then they ought to simply renounce their citizenship, otherwise, they are simply being hypocritical. This is not the way of a good citizen either, but at least it is more honest than a criminal.

With regard to our Holy Religion, Heb 13:17 does not give a Christian the option of choosing 3 or 4.

Are they good citizens of the Catholic Church? Not if they disregard the canon law that is binding upon all Catholics.

Living in sin with a boyfriend is fornication according the lawful pastors of the Catholic Church. It is a grave sin which bars a Catholic from receiving Holy Communion. By canon law, one is not permitted to receive Holy Communion without priestly absolution from mortal sin.

Furthermore, even if they were one of those rare holy people that never commit mortal sin, they are bound by canon law to participate in the Sacrament of Confession at least once per year.

They ought to ask themselves, are they being good citizens of the Catholic Church? If not, in what way are they “good persons?” In what way are they obedient in accord with Heb 13:17?
 
40.png
renee1258:
i could bang my head against the wall when I hear “I’m a good person”. Compared to who?
Click to expand...
Even Jesus said dont call me good. Only our Father in Heaven is GOOD. 👍
 
Gosh, what a situation.

This is just me…but I gotta figure these are friends, as you stated…and this is not the first time they’ve come to you for advice…plus, you stated they are seeking help with troubles in their lives, their prayers aren’t being answered.

First, I’d explain that God answers all prayers, but often times not the way we expect them to be answered. Are they looking for His answers, missing the signs He’s trying to communicate to them? Help them reword their prayers to not be specific but more general - “Help me to be open to your response…Your will be done…help me to understand what that will is should it happen to not be what I’m hoping for…give me strength, courage and patience…” that kind of thing instead of “Fix my problems.”

Next, I’d explain to them that when all is right with our personal world, things flow according to plan (His plan). Things tend to get complicated and messed up when we insist on controlling our own destinies. If their prayers continue to not be answered as they expect perhaps God is telling them they’re asking for the wrong things? Help them to consider other options, to see the other doors of opportunity that are open to them but which they are resisting to pass through because it isn’t “Door #1”.

As for “I don’t believe in confession because I’m a good person”…well, just remind them that whether or not they believe it applies to them Jesus created the sacrament for a reason. I wouldn’t presume to second guess Him. Besides, being a good person - well, I’d ask - according to whose standards? If they refuse to accept/participate in one of the Sacraments Jesus died for then how good of a person are they really??? Resistance is futile when it comes to God’s will. The harder they try, the more difficult their lives will be.

And finally, just reassure them that you certainly understand they are uncomfortable hearing what you have to say, but they asked for your advice so you gave the only advice you know - because it works for you. God went through a lot of trouble to give us so many tools and resources to help us through life, why reinvent the wheel?
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
I would gently point out that Catholic canon law is binding upon all Catholics, just as surely as civil law is binding upon all citizens of the USA. You have three options:
  1. assent to and obey the law
  2. obey the law while working to change it
  3. disobey the law
  4. renounce your citizenship under the governing body you oppose
Click to expand...
You say three options but list four. I am guessing that this is just an over sight.

But… I would say that there are five options.

The four you list and one more.
  1. Obey the law but disagree with it
That is a valid option for a good Catholic. This goes to our other discussion. One only need to assent to the dogmas of the Church, everything else can be disagreed with including Canon Law (but one must obey it).
 
40.png
ByzCath:
You say three options but list four. I am guessing that this is just an over sight.
Click to expand...
Yes, I meant four.
But… I would say that there are five options.

The four you list and one more.
  1. Obey the law but disagree with it
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but I suppose I implied this with option 2). But I suppose one can merely disagree but do nothing to change the law.
That is a valid option for a good Catholic. This goes to our other discussion. One only need to assent to the dogmas of the Church, everything else can be disagreed with including Canon Law (but one must obey it).
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I disagree.

From Latin Canon Law, (and I suppose you have something similar, as this is implementing Lumen Gentium):
Can. 752 While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.
Click to expand...
Notice that it says “**submission of intellect and will … to any doctrine.” **This means any doctrine, even though it is not a formal dogma.

How does one disagree with doctrine declared by the pope while being obedient to canon 752?
 
I believe canon 752 has an equivalent in canon 599 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

Canon 599
While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic Magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith and morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.

Can you be obedient to canon 599 while denying a doctrine proposed by a pope via an encyclical to the universal Church published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) or “Acts of the Apostolic See?”
 
I agree with everything that has been stated. However sometimes God’s answer to our prayers is a simple “no”
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
I believe canon 752 has an equivalent in canon 599 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

Canon 599
While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic Magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith and morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.

Can you be obedient to canon 599 while denying a doctrine proposed by a pope via an encyclical to the universal Church published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) or “Acts of the Apostolic See?”
Click to expand...
Yes you can I see you are being selective in your reading of the Canons.

If you read the whole thing, rather than just your bolded section, you will see that it starts out with, While the assent of faith is not required.

And again, your translation seems to differ from the one I use.
Canon 599
A religious obsequium of intellect and will, even if not the assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching on faith or morals which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate when they exercise the authentic magisterium even if they do not intend to proclaim it with a definitive act; therefore the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid whatever is not in harmony with that teaching.
Click to expand...
Obsequium means obedience. So I am bound to obey, but not assent.

This is what it says. If you have issues take it up with my bishop and Rome.
 
The Church is a hospital for souls. People outside the Church don’t know they are sick!
 
40.png
csr:
The Church is a hospital for souls. People outside the Church don’t know they are sick!
Click to expand...
Very good answer! May I use this? :clapping:
 
40.png
csr:
The Church is a hospital for souls. People outside the Church don’t know they are sick!
Click to expand...
Problem is, my friends believe they are in the Church since they are going to Sunday mass. Heck, as I stated, one of them is very proud about serving as Eucharistic minister . Thus they are not sick. They are just following the norms of society. The Church has the problem because it is too rigid since no other religion requires confession.

Thanks for the wonderful advice. I will think about this and pray much over it.
God bless you all for your time in offering advice.
 
40.png
itsjustdave1988:
I believe canon 752 has an equivalent in canon 599 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

Canon 599
While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic Magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith and morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.
I just figured it out…

What you post here as Canon 599 is really the Latin Canon 752. You have just put Canon 599 above it.

With your posting of excerpts and translations that differ from the Vatican’s translations and now this, how are we expected to take what you say without doubt?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
40.png
ByzCath:
… While the assent of faith is not required.
Click to expand...
Correct. Assent of faith is different from religiosum obsequium. Assent of faith is required of formal dogmas. Religiosum obsequium is required of all Catholic doctrines. But it is a obsequium of intellect and will, not just of the will.
Obsequium means obedience. So I am bound to obey, but not assent.
Click to expand...
True. But dissent or disagreement is not the same as witholding internal assent.

From the commentary on Canon Law that I have:
The canon uses the technical expression *religiosum obsequium intellectu et voluntatis," *… An exact translation of obsequium is difficult, but “submission” is not the best one because it exaggerates the force of the Latin. Such English terms as “respect,” “deference,” “concurrence,” “adherence,” “compliance,” or “allegiance” would be better translations of obsequium.

(*New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, *J.P. Beal, et al, ed., New York: Paulist Pres, 2000)
Click to expand...
The above commentary goes on to describe religiosum obsequium as “respectful religious deference of intellect and will” as in contrast to complete “absolute or unconditional obedience” of intellect and will required of “assent of faith” for formal dogmas.
 
Can one dissent while also have religious concurrence of INTELLECT AND WILL? Obedience to something we dissent with is concurrence of WILL alone, no? How can you have concurrence of intellect while also dissenting with a doctrine?

Professor of theology, William May explains:
catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Dossier/2000-5-6/article2.html
It is interesting to note that the term “dissent” did not appear in theological literature prior to the end of Vatican Council II. … the obsequium religiosum required for teaching authoritatively but not infallibly proposed … recognized that a theologian (or other well-informed Catholic) might not in conscience be able to give internal assent to some teachings. They thus spoke of “withholding assent” and raising questions, but this is a far cry from “dissent.”
Click to expand...
… The Instruction on the ecclesial vocation of theologian issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has addressed this matter. It recognized that theologians (and others) might question not only the form but even the substantive content of some authoritatively proposed magisterial teachings. It held that it is permissible in such instances to withhold assent, to raise questions (and present them to the magisterium), to discuss the issues with other theologians (and be humble enough to accept criticism of one’s own views by them). Theologians (and others) can propose their views as hypotheses to be considered and tested by other theologians and ultimately to be judged by those who have, within the Church, the solemn obligation of settling disputes and speaking the mind of Christ**.** ***But it taught one is not giving a true obsequium religiosum if one dissents from magisterial teaching and proposes one’s own position as a position that the faithful are at liberty to follow, substituting it for the teaching of the magisterium. ***
Click to expand...
I haven’t been selective in my understanding of canon law in the least. On the contrary, I’ve studied the matter thoroughly, as understood by various professors of theology and canonists.

So, if I were to deny that “there are such things as undefined dogmas that we must adhere to” I would be incorrect, given that religiosum obsequium of intellect and will involves adherance of both intellect and will to any doctrine of the Roman Pontiff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top