Confession Confusion

  • Thread starter Thread starter CollegeKid
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CollegeKid

Guest
I just read *Rome Sweet Home * by Scott and Kimberly Hahn. Good book. But in one section of the book Kimberly wrote that for sacramental confession to be valid (for the sins to actually be absolved, I guess she meant) one must do the penance assigned by the priest afterward.

The way I had always understood Confession, one’s sins are forgiven once the priest pronounces the words of absolution, and if you purposely neglect to do the penance he assigns, you’ve committed a new sin, but the sins you’ve already confessed and had absolved are actually absolved. Am I mistaken?
 
CollegeKid said:
I just read *Rome Sweet Home *by Scott and Kimberly Hahn. Good book. But in one section of the book Kimberly wrote that for sacramental confession to be valid (for the sins to actually be absolved, I guess she meant) one must do the penance assigned by the priest afterward.

The way I had always understood Confession, one’s sins are forgiven once the priest pronounces the words of absolution, and if you purposely neglect to do the penance he assigns, you’ve committed a new sin, but the sins you’ve already confessed and had absolved are actually absolved. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
I do not believe so. The absolution is dependent on the future act of performing the penance. If you are physically restrained from performing the penance (hit by a bus), you are not held accountable.
 
I found this in the Catechism. Scroll down to section 1459. I think it says that sins are absolved when the priest says the words of absolution.
 
CollegeKid said:
I just read *Rome Sweet Home * by Scott and Kimberly Hahn. Good book. But in one section of the book Kimberly wrote that for sacramental confession to be valid (for the sins to actually be absolved, I guess she meant) one must do the penance assigned by the priest afterward.

The way I had always understood Confession, one’s sins are forgiven once the priest pronounces the words of absolution, and if you purposely neglect to do the penance he assigns, you’ve committed a new sin, but the sins you’ve already confessed and had absolved are actually absolved. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
I agree with you and here is why, If you did not have substantial penance prior to seeing the Priest it is unlikely you achieved contrition. You are obligated to perform the Priest assigned penance but that can not achieve contrition. The Priest assignment is external to you while true contrition is internal to you. Your Priest assigned penance is in my view a consummation of your request for forgiveness. Whether the lack of completion of a post confession penance fails to achieve consummation of the first sin’s forgiveness or becomes a second sin seems the real question. I still think your view is better contrition has to proceed absolution.
 
CollegeKid said:
Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
Here follows my opinion, based on the facts I have at hand. I am less certain of this answer than I usually am, but still fairly confident.

Your sins are immediately remitted, so long as you have the requisite contrition and meet any other criteria (aren’t deliberately hiding a mortal sin, etc). It is a judicial power and they exercise it.

Your sacramental penance applies to the temporal punishments of the sins which happen to remain after the guilt and eternal punishment have been remitted. If you fail to do your penance, tell your confessor at your next confession. If you walk into the confessional with a will to NOT do your penance, you may be in trouble. If you just forget afterwards, that is different. The first is a strike against you having enough contrition.
40.png
CCC:
Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused
Click to expand...
Trent said:
Canon 15 If anyone says that the keys have been given to the Church only to loose and not also to bind, and that therefore priests, when imposing penalties on those who confess, act contrary to the purpose of the keys and to the institution of Christ, and that it is a fiction that there remains often a temporal punishment to be discharged after the eternal punishment has by virtue of the keys been removed,91 let him be anathema.
Click to expand...
 
Sins are forgiven when the words of absolution are pronounced so long as the proper matter is present in the sacrament. The matter in the sacrament of penance is made up of the acts of the penitent - contrition, confession, and satisfaction. The penitent must intend to perform the penance (which is the satisfaction), but the absolution is not dependent upon the penitent actually performing the satisfaction (though, logically, if a penitent intends to do it, the penitent will do it).

This is important because if the absolution did not actually take place until the penance is performed then the priests words - “I absolve you…” - would be a lie.

The forms of the sacrament always convey the meaning of the sacrament and the words are efficacious. Thus, when the priest at Mass says, “This is My Body…” we can know that what he holds is indeed the Body of Christ and we can worship it with confidence.
 
what if you don’t like your pennance? Can you then go to a different priest to get an easier one? Like let’s say a person confesses to murder and his or her pennance is to turn him or herself in. Could that person not want to do that but still be sorrowoful for their sin and then go on to confession again in order to get a different pennance that is easier?
 
CollegeKid said:
I found this in the Catechism. Scroll down to section 1459. I think it says that sins are absolved when the priest says the words of absolution.
Click to expand...
It it true. I have looked around and found in the Code of Canon Law that the penitent is obliged to fulfull any penances, but doesn’t talk about validity.

However, Wikipedia tells that the validity of the sacrament does depend on the performance of penances.

Still looking! 😉
 
The priestly absolution forgives the sins, not the penance done by the penitent.

Deliberately failing to do the penance would be a sin in itself, but it does not affect the validity of the sacramental absolution.

(Note that contrition is necessary, so if omitting the penance is caused by lack of contrition, the penitent has not met the conditions for the sacrament) A penitent who deliberately omits the penance should confess that sin in his next confession–not the sins already forgiven.
 
wjp984 said:
what if you don’t like your pennance? Can you then go to a different priest to get an easier one? Like let’s say a person confesses to murder and his or her pennance is to turn him or herself in. Could that person not want to do that but still be sorrowoful for their sin and then go on to confession again in order to get a different pennance that is easier?
Click to expand...
No, sorry, it doesn’t work that way. The first penance received is the one to be performed. You cannot say - "Oh well, I do not like this penance so I will just go to another priest to get an “easier” one. If you do then you commit another moral sin on top of the first one that cannot be absolved for it is a sin against the Holy Spirit. You MUST perfom the penance given in order for the Sacrament to be valid.

IF YOU DO NOT do the penance, the “satisfation” required for the Sacrament it is INDEED INVALID and do NOT let any of those liberal theologians tell you otherwise. If they do you tell them to supply you with the document from the Church that says otherwise. As sister Irma taught me you best pray that penance immediately after you get out of the confessional lest you get struck by a car before praying your penance!

However you can ask your confessor if he can modify or change the penance- I was told a few weeks ago to go to each station of the cross and pray the Our Father, Glory Be and Hail Mary one time for each station. I told the priest I had 15 minutes to get to work and he told me to pray the Glory Be 15 times instead.

Ken
 
well if the pennance is required before for absolution is valid then that explains why pennances are so easy now. If I ever get a pennance that I can not do before leaving the church then I will have to argue with the priest saying what if a car hits me or something on the way home.
 
I can’t find it on the forums, but I think the apologists on these forums said that once the absolution was given, the sins were remitted, and that remission was not dependent on performing the penance.
 
As a matter of sacramental theology, it is absolutely necessary that the sins are forgiven when the words of absolution (that is, the form) are spoken. Why? Because sacraments are signs that accomplish what they signify. When the priest says “I absolve you…”, the forgiveness has been signified; because this is a sacrament of Christ, the forgiveness has also been accomplished. See?

Does the penance (satisfaction), then, have any bearing on the validity of the sacrament? Yes. The satisfaction (along with confession and contrition) constitutes the matter of the sacrament. For validity, every sacrament needs valid matter and valid form.

What bearing could the satisfaction have on validity if it is accomplished after absolution is given? [Nota Bene: the absolution is not conditional - sacramental grace can never be such - and therefore the failure to perform the penance could never “undo” a valid absolution.] The answer is that the penitent must, at the time the absolution is given, intend to perform the penance. This intention is what is necessary for validity of the sacrament.

St. Thomas Aquinas says this: “Satisfaction confers grace, in so far as it is in man’s purpose, and it increases grace, according as it is accomplished” (Summa, Third Part, Question 90, Reply to Objection 2)

So, as long as satisfaction “is in man’s purpose” (i.e., he intends to perform it) then grace is conferred (i.e., sacramental grace). If grace is conferred, the sacrament is accomplished.
 
wjp984 said:
what if you don’t like your pennance? Can you then go to a different priest to get an easier one? Like let’s say a person confesses to murder and his or her pennance is to turn him or herself in. Could that person not want to do that but still be sorrowoful for their sin and then go on to confession again in order to get a different pennance that is easier?
Click to expand...
Surely in the situation given above, you could not do the penance and then go to confession again with a different priest and confess to having neglected to do your penance at your last confession. The other priest would simply think you’d forgotten to say a few Our Fathers and give you a few more as penance.
 
If you don’t think you can do the assigned penance, you should ask the priest immediately to assign a different one.
 
wjp984 said:
well if the pennance is required before for absolution is valid then that explains why pennances are so easy now. If I ever get a pennance that I can not do before leaving the church then I will have to argue with the priest saying what if a car hits me or something on the way home.
Click to expand...
My understanding is the real penance is associated with the deep regret for the sin which should have occurred prior to confession. The assigned penance is more about the public cleansing, closure, and sacrifice. BTW I have had assigned penance which required prays daily for a week or more.
 
JimG said:
I’m staying away from your confessor.
Click to expand...
Ha! That’s funny!

The last time I went to confession, my penance was actually to research a certain topic!!! I was still working on it 2 months later! The thing is though, I actually learned a lot and was able to change my behavior, so the priest actually did know what I needed! I realized also that if he hadn’t made it my ‘penance’ I wouldn’t have done it on my own because I didn’t think it would help! When it was all said and done, I sent him a little note and thanked him for his ‘creative’ penance! He really wasn’t being hardnosed! He was trying to help me grow and it actually worked!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top