What it comes down to is whether God is bound by his own sacraments. Again, it is inconceivable (I cannot conceive of the possibility) that the person would not be forgiven by God after making what he truly believed to be a valid confession. I don’t claim that the Church teaches this, but rather that it lies outside of the revelation the Church has received, much like the fate of unbaptized babies.“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
As another poster pointed out, the sins you confessed in the invalid confession will be automatically forgiven at your next valid confession. So, it only really matters if the invalid confession was your last confession before death, and either you didn’t go to Mass after that or you had mortal sins. In that case I think we can quite safely trust to God’s mercy.
But as far as the sacrament is concerned, if there was no priest, there was no sacrament. If you had mortal sins, then technically you are still in a state of mortal sin until your next confession, although if you (e.g.) receive the Eucharist it is not a further sin since you don’t know you are still in mortal sin, and it is not possible to sin without knowing about it.
What it comes down to is either the sacrament of penance matters, or it doesn’t. If it matters, then there has to be some difference between having a valid sacrament and not having it. If there isn’t, then we are Protestants. If a real sacrament can effect a real change, then it matters whether the sacrament occurred. If it can’t effect a real change, then nearly 2000 years of teaching on the Real Presence in the Eucharist is wrong.
when he gets up there they will look into his heart. if he truly believed it was a real priest he will be forgiven. God goes by whats truly in your heart. it’s not like a game show, Ah, you picked WRONG! you lose. NEXT! and if you look over at curtain 3, the lovely mother mary has a parting gift for you…OK, let’s bring in the bus, which is so essential to discussing heaven, hell and mortal sin. Joe goes to pseudo-priest, thinking he is a real priest, and confesses a mortal sin. Minutes later Joe is crossing the street and is hit by a bus. Who thinks Joe ends up in hell? Who thinks he ends up in heaven? Who really and truly would not hazard a guess either way?
God is bound by His own sacraments only in the sense that God is not a man that He would lie, and can be depended upon to do as He has promised. In other words, we can be certain that valid absolution is effective. What we are not promised is that the normal means God gives to us for salutary repentance are the only means availabe to God Himself for offering that. There is no reason for God to promise us such a thing!What it comes down to is whether God is bound by his own sacraments. Again, it is inconceivable (I cannot conceive of the possibility) that the person would not be forgiven by God after making what he truly believed to be a valid confession. I don’t claim that the Church teaches this, but rather that it lies outside of the revelation the Church has received, much like the fate of unbaptized babies.
CCC 2283: We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.
It is not the normal situation, where the graces are promised to those who are properly disposed, but we also may not limit what it pleases the Holy Spirit to do. Therefore, it is possible that a penitent who* unknowingly* confesses to a person only posing as a priest might recieve the same graces as if the sins had been confessed to the Cure of Ars himself. It all depends upon what it pleases God to do.
If a penitent defiantly chooses his own sense of things over the directions of his bishop, that is another thing altogether. It might still please God to give him graces, for God is always generous and merciful to us far beyond what we ever deserve, but that is much less the way to bet. Such a choice is always to be discouraged, regardless of what a penitent may believe his past experience in the matter to have been.
Of course if we discover there has been a mistake or a fraud committed, we are obligated to do all we can to repair the fault. But what if we never discover the mistake or fraud, or if we are unable to repair it? What if a baby was invalidly “baptized” and then died? Given what Catholicism teaches about God, can there be much (any?) doubt as to that baby’s fate?You are right and it may be God would give the special graces that come through the sacrament of confession then. But it may be that He would not give these special graces then. There were several cases in recent years when a priest used a strange formula for his baptisms, and in fact an invalid formula. The brishop publicly asked everyone with that “baptism” to come forward to be baptized validly. This all hit the Catholic press. The local bishop did not assume that all the people so baptized gained the graces that come through the sacrament of baptism because they believed they were actually baptized. This could be the case too when it comes to confession from a pseud-priest.
I don’t think the Church has a definitive position on that question. If it did, I would defend it to the death.To ask it another way, who here wants to argue the position that this baby does not go to heaven?
It is true thatYou are right and it may be God would give the special graces that come through the sacrament of confession then. But it may be that He would not give these special graces then. There were several cases in recent years when a priest used a strange formula for his baptisms, and in fact an invalid formula. The brishop publicly asked everyone with that “baptism” to come forward to be baptized validly. This all hit the Catholic press. The local bishop did not assume that all the people so baptized gained the graces that come through the sacrament of baptism because they believed they were actually baptized. This could be the case too when it comes to confession from a pseud-priest.
Right, so we can only speculate based on what God has revealed about himself to us.I don’t think the Church has a definitive position on that question. If it did, I would defend it to the death.
Well, these questions are exactly the kind that an inquirer into the faith might ask, and I have no problem saying “God has not chosen to reveal that to us, but based on what we do know about God, I cannot conceive that God would condemn that person.”I think you need to be careful of applying twenty-first-century human standards of justice and fair play to God.
Mike,OK, let’s bring in the bus, which is so essential to discussing heaven, hell and mortal sin. Joe goes to pseudo-priest, thinking he is a real priest, and confesses a mortal sin. Minutes later Joe is crossing the street and is hit by a bus. Who thinks Joe ends up in hell? Who thinks he ends up in heaven? Who really and truly would not hazard a guess either way?