Confirmation Clarification

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lisa_Mladinich
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes this is true, but for someone to say that they do not agree with this is not heresy as it is not a dogma. It is a discipline.

That is the point I was trying to make.
Often, I wish I was Byzantine. The liturgy is so beautiful, the icons make me want to touch Heaven, and the order and administration of the sacraments is so logical.

Plus, the Byzantine Rite just seems like it has escaped some of the silliness and confusion of the Roman Rite, but maybe that’s just the way it seems on the outside…
 
Well, yes and no. You can transmit information that way but unless the catechist is trained and knows what he/she is talking about, you will have problems. It’s the way I was taught back in the 60s, by the teachers in my catholic school – teachers who had no training in catechetics beyond knowing how to read. If you sought clarification they were totally useless because they had never had to think beyond what was on the page and it only resulted in their repeating what was on the page – more loudly. You learned to spit back answers word for word without once having to think about what you were saying. If this method was so great how do you explain that I’m one of the few of my contemporaries who still go to Mass?
Here is what happened to me. The nuns, who were trained in philosophy and theology, were able to explain in more detail and answer questions. The information was memorized and drummed into my thick head. Now when I need it, it seems to pop back out and it is useful in resolving questions that I have or others. But I learned the lessons in the 50s from very qualified teachers.

I can’t say how many of my contemporaries remained faithful, but I think most. I was reading on the web about my boyhood parish. It is in an inner city and there was a reunion not too long ago. The neigborhood is trashed, crime, drugs, it all went bad. The school is still there and kept up just as it was fifty years ago. The hallways gleam. The statue of Mary is still in the hall in the same place. The support comes from a couple of generations of people who went through there and credit the nuns for shaping them and now they can see how much they were loved by them. They used to talk about how tough the nuns were. Now they sing their praises. Of course they are all gone. One response of gratitiude is to treasure the old building where all the memories were created. The students there now are mostly minorities and the financial support comes from alumni who work hard with fundraisers to keep these kids in Catholic school. The school is the community’s anchor. Without it they have really no hope. The building was already old in the 50s. A new public school opened in 1952 a few blocks away that was modern and much nicer then. Today that place is trashed and delapidated despite puvlic funding. Why is the Catholic school preserved so well? What happened there is seen as very important and continuing it is also essential to the community, because it has contributed to the well being of the people there. It is where we learned our catechism. “Who made me”? Why did God make me". “What must I do to be saved”? “What are the three powers of the soul”? What are the theological virtues"? “Why are they called theolgical”? What are the cardinal virtues"? “Why are they called cardinal virtues”? “What are the six sins against the Holy Spirit”? I can still spit all the answers out, and now I understand it.

I know why I exist, where I came from, where I am going and how to get there, because the nuns taught me. If only we still had them. There are two ancient nuns at my parish. I get up at 5 and bake them fresh bread every Sunday morning. It is a way to say thank you to the ones who are gone and who I see as instrumental to the salvation of my soul and so many others.
 
What a grace, Grandfather! I wish I had had that kind of education.

I had 11 years of ccd and all the required sacramental prep… and I didn’t know: the true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, what sin was (much less a mortal sin), why you should go to confession, who the pope was, never even heard the term purgatory. Thought the “devil” was a symbol for evil and not an actual being…and much the same

The fact that I’m a practicing Catholic fairly well informed about my faith is a miracle. What is not a so great is that out of all my cousins and siblings, only three of us are practicing Catholics. A whole generation lost.
 
I’m asking as someone who is in the RCIA program and is also trying to find his way around the other areas of the Church.
Exactly HOW can a priest refuse confession in his parish for 25 years? And how can the priest and the bishop not be called to the carpet for it? The things I’ve read in this thread and in others are shocking. I mean, this doesn’t even sound possible. I’m sure at least some regular members had to have complained about these things. Noone did anything about it all?
Is there some kind of tolerated movement going on that I should be aware of?
The reason I know about the situation, is the priest who told his parishoners confession was unnecessary died. I met this priests once or twice. He seemed like a nice man. A good friend of mine was the parish priest there after this first priest died. He inherited this situation and told me he did not know what to do to convince a parish that had no confessions for 25 years that this was wrong. The parishoners there would not go, because the practice was abandoned by the former priest who told them confession was something from the old pre Vatican II Church… My friend had to undo the mess.

My sister went to Catholic high school in the early 70s. She was taught there that confession was no longer necessary. It was optional.

Sorry to shock you. The Church has been through a major storm. Peter’s boat will not sink, ever.
 
Yes this is true, but for someone to say that they do not agree with this is not heresy as it is not a dogma. It is a discipline.

That is the point I was trying to make.
Yes, I know - it’s “disobedience” when you don’t follow the discipline of the Church; not “heresy.” I never said she was a heretic for not following it. I said, if the teacher who is teaching the class is a heretic, she needs to tell the Bishop about it. Not just go ahead and disobey the Church, without telling anybody why.
 
Yes, I know - it’s “disobedience” when you don’t follow the discipline of the Church; not “heresy.” I never said she was a heretic for not following it. I said, if the teacher who is teaching the class is a heretic, she needs to tell the Bishop about it. Not just go ahead and disobey the Church, without telling anybody why.
I can agree with the second part but must clarify disobedience. It is not disobedience to disagree with a discipline of the Church and to say as much. It only becomes disobedience when one chooses not to follow the discipline and/or encourages others to do so.
 
The reason I know about the situation, is the priest who told his parishoners confession was unnecessary died. I met this priests once or twice. He seemed like a nice man. A good friend of mine was the parish priest there after this first priest died. He inherited this situation and told me he did not know what to do to convince a parish that had no confessions for 25 years that this was wrong. The parishoners there would not go, because the practice was abandoned by the former priest who told them confession was something from the old pre Vatican II Church… My friend had to undo the mess. My sister went to Catholic high school in the early 70s. She was taught there that confession was no longer necessary. It was optional. Sorry to shock you. The Church has been through a major storm. Peter’s boat will not sink, ever.
Oh, shock me, please. I need to gain the most clear understanding as I can about as much as I can.
To put it this way:
Suppose I happen to be a part of a parish where the priest says Confession isn’t necessary and doesn’t offer the Sacrament. I tell the Bishop about this and he does nothing or worse, tells me to mind my own business. At that point I would contact the Archdiocese? And if nothing is done by anyone and I cannot get through to Rome…
What then? Am I excused from needing Confession, as I don’t have a car to attend elsewhere? And what is really happening if the Bishop let’s this sort of thing go on, because it’s heresy to deny the necessity of a Sacrament, is it not?
I hope I’m not being a pain by asking these things, but I would like to know.
 
Oh, shock me, please. I need to gain the most clear understanding as I can about as much as I can.
To put it this way:
Suppose I happen to be a part of a parish where the priest says Confession isn’t necessary and doesn’t offer the Sacrament. I tell the Bishop about this and he does nothing or worse, tells me to mind my own business. At that point I would contact the Archdiocese? And if nothing is done by anyone and I cannot get through to Rome…
What then? Am I excused from needing Confession, as I don’t have a car to attend elsewhere? And what is really happening if the Bishop let’s this sort of thing go on, because it’s heresy to deny the necessity of a Sacrament, is it not?
I hope I’m not being a pain by asking these things, but I would like to know.
After the Bishop you could contact the Nuncio (sort of an Ambassador), or a number of Congregations in Rome: for Bishops, of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, of the Doctrine of the Faith. Action would probably be taken, and relatively quickly (that is, months not decades). The Archdiocese, however, would not be able to intervene, as it is largely a ‘figure of unity’ (unless their is an unexpected vacancy like in Scranton, PA).

In the situation of not being able to go elsewhere I would probably call neighboring parishes until I found a priest who would work with me for Confession. Certainly you should be able to get to another parish once during the Lenten or Easter Season to fulfill the minimum requirement under canon law. If you are conscious of having committed a mortal sin, then you would not be able to receive the Eucharist until you had gone to Confession, this would not change.
 
After the Bishop you could contact the Nuncio (sort of an Ambassador), or a number of Congregations in Rome: for Bishops, of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, of the Doctrine of the Faith. Action would probably be taken, and relatively quickly (that is, months not decades). The Archdiocese, however, would not be able to intervene, as it is largely a ‘figure of unity’ (unless their is an unexpected vacancy like in Scranton, PA).

In the situation of not being able to go elsewhere I would probably call neighboring parishes until I found a priest who would work with me for Confession. Certainly you should be able to get to another parish once during the Lenten or Easter Season to fulfill the minimum requirement under canon law. If you are conscious of having committed a mortal sin, then you would not be able to receive the Eucharist until you had gone to Confession, this would not change.
Thank you.
So…most of the members of the parish discussed in prior posts had not received any valid sacraments in over two decades, assuming they committed a mortal sin or two. At least if they were aware of having done so - and what if the renegade clergy had told them that mortal sins were also a thing of the past? What would the responsibility be for members of said parish to rectify these things? Now it’s even more complex.
Wow. If there are, as seems certain, some priests, nuns and bishops who reject even such basic tenets of Catholicism as Penance, why are they still in the Church at all? Even if they think they should remain to ‘reform’ (or whatever terminology might apply) the Church, why they are allowed to hang around is puzzling.
The apparatus is certainly there to check these things as you pointed out, which is good. But it still makes me wonder why noone had availed themselves of it during all that time.
 
Thank you.
So…most of the members of the parish discussed in prior posts had not received any valid sacraments in over two decades, assuming they committed a mortal sin or two!
Wow. If there are, as seems certain, some priests, nuns and bishops who reject even such basic tenets of Catholicism as Penance, why are they still in the Church at all? Even if they think they should remain to ‘reform’ (or whatever terminology might apply) the Church; why they are allowed to hang around is puzzling.
The apparatus is certainly there to check these things as you pointed out, which is good. But it still makes me wonder why noone had availed themselves of it during all that time.
That reminds me of the conversation I had in 2003 with my dad’s parish priest. He asked me if General Absolution had been discontinued in the parish where I was residing. I said yes, that had happened about 18 months earlier (we had been having General Absolution for about 10 years at that point).

He told me that he still had it in his parish, indeed only the English parishes in the diocese had stopped it and the French parishes throughout the Atlantic provinces had requested a clarification from Rome. Until clarification they were still having GA. I thought it was interesting that if you happened to be bilingual you could drop by the French parish for GA. His rationale, “If the people make the effort to come to the Penitential Service that shows a desire for reconciliation and I see no reason to make them do more” or something to that effect.

A few years later that same priest had his faculties lifted after depleting the bank accounts of all the parishes for which he was responsible and bilking a former Sister, hospital secretary out of her life savings.
 
A few years later that same priest had his faculties lifted after depleting the bank accounts of all the parishes for which he was responsible and bilking a former Sister, hospital secretary out of her life savings.
And they were all shocked and amazed, I bet, because he had always seemed like such a nice man. :rolleyes:

Maybe I am just getting old, but I have noticed a direct correlation between someone who believes there is no such thing as sin, and criminal behaviour later being discovered on the part of that same person.

So, if you ever encounter anyone - priest, or otherwise - who claims that there are no absolute moral standards, or who mentions that he does not “get” why certain things are considered “bad”, get yourself away from that person, as far as you possibly can.
 
Oh, shock me, please. I need to gain the most clear understanding as I can about as much as I can.
To put it this way:
Suppose I happen to be a part of a parish where the priest says Confession isn’t necessary and doesn’t offer the Sacrament. I tell the Bishop about this and he does nothing or worse, tells me to mind my own business. At that point I would contact the Archdiocese? And if nothing is done by anyone and I cannot get through to Rome…
What then? Am I excused from needing Confession, as I don’t have a car to attend elsewhere? And what is really happening if the Bishop let’s this sort of thing go on, because it’s heresy to deny the necessity of a Sacrament, is it not?
I hope I’m not being a pain by asking these things, but I would like to know.
God looks at the heart. We have to be careful not to be like the pharisees who swallow camels and choke on gnats. I am bound by the sacramental economy. God is not. If you read the catechism it says in order to be saved we must worship God in faith, hope and love. We all want to know we are on the right path and there is sacramental grace that puts us and keeps us on the right path. But God’s long arm can reach down and touch any heart in any circumstances and love will flourish in it.

I have seen a lot of abuse of varioius kinds in the Church and lay people try to follow the channels to get it corrected. It is a lot of agony and rarely works. There will be priests and bishops that are fallen. We are all human. I don’t know of any heresies named after laymen. There are also some that are very holy, and consecrated women also, and lay people. Find them and be near them.

My job is not to keep the Church on the right path. That is God’s job. I am not the pope. I have enough struggle with my own soul. I am a nobody who likes being a nobody. I want to go to church and woship in peace and not have to do battle with the off track clerics. So I found an orthodox priest and go to his parish. I have been there for fifteen years or more and never heard a nutty homily or anything questionable. The parishoners are all in sync. I have friends who are in parishes where there is turmoil and they choose to stay there and do battle. I respect them, but it is not for me.
 
If these things are true and you can prove them, then you have a case to present before the CDF, and you should do so sooner rather than later. The Pope actually does listen to these cases, and Bishops actually do get removed and defrocked, from time to time. It’s worth a shot.

The fact that she felt the need to sue gives me hope that your Diocese hasn’t lost all of its marbles. :rolleyes:
Actually, for liturgical abuse, it is not the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that you make your complaint; that is the purview of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

I have seen a lot blamed on Vatican II. The documents of the Second Vatican Council, unfortunately, have been misread, maligned and misinterpreted to the point that they don’t even say 1/10 of what people claim they say. What folks, sadly, are following is not Vatican II, but, the alleged Spirit of Vatican II. These are two very dfferent things. One has nothing to do with the other.

In fact, the Compendium on the Catechism was written in the same format as the Baltimore Catechism.
 
After the Bishop you could contact the Nuncio (sort of an Ambassador), or a number of Congregations in Rome: for Bishops, of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, of the Doctrine of the Faith. Action would probably be taken, and relatively quickly (that is, months not decades). The Archdiocese, however, would not be able to intervene, as it is largely a ‘figure of unity’ (unless their is an unexpected vacancy like in Scranton, PA).

In the situation of not being able to go elsewhere I would probably call neighboring parishes until I found a priest who would work with me for Confession. Certainly you should be able to get to another parish once during the Lenten or Easter Season to fulfill the minimum requirement under canon law. If you are conscious of having committed a mortal sin, then you would not be able to receive the Eucharist until you had gone to Confession, this would not change.
You do not go to the Nuncio. Redemptionis Sacramentum does not include him as part of the chain of command.
  1. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters
    [183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.
[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.
Thus, if the Bishop does nothing, then you go to the appropriate Congregation within the Apostolic See. I know because we are working with the CDWDS on a matter in our diocese.

In the case of problems with the liturgy or the sacraments, if you do not get recourse from the Bishop, then, you write to the Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. As Confession is a Sacrament, this is under the jurisdiction of the CDWDS. Doctrinal matters go to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
 
You do not go to the Nuncio. Redemptionis Sacramentum does not include him as part of the chain of command.

Thus, if the Bishop does nothing, then you go to the appropriate Congregation within the Apostolic See. I know because we are working with the CDWDS on a matter in our diocese.

In the case of problems with the liturgy or the sacraments, if you do not get recourse from the Bishop, then, you write to the Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. As Confession is a Sacrament, this is under the jurisdiction of the CDWDS. Doctrinal matters go to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The Nuncio is the representative of the Holy See in virtually all matters within the territory to which he is assigned. He is, therefore, competent in virtually any issue involving a bishop (yes he would be passing things along to the various congregations, but if you aren’t sure who to send the information to, this is where you would start). The heretical reasoning behind the Sacramental neglect would indeed make contacting the CDF an option. The fact that the bishop condones it makes it arguably a case for the Congregation of Bishops (no penalty on a bishop would be imposed without their consultation, and that of the CDF, in any event).

Actually, if my notion of the timing of this particular case is correct, both the CDF and CDWDS were following up on similar cases in a coordinated effort.

burritobrother They would have validly received the sacraments, although not without sinning, if they were indeed aware of mortal sin (and if the priest was teaching that there was no need for confession, and presumably denying mortal sin they may very well not have known). Certainly they would have need of confession, and a good deal of re-catchesis.
 
The Nuncio is the representative of the Holy See in virtually all matters within the territory to which he is assigned. He is, therefore, competent in virtually any issue involving a bishop (yes he would be passing things along to the various congregations, but if you aren’t sure who to send the information to, this is where you would start). The heretical reasoning behind the Sacramental neglect would indeed make contacting the CDF an option. The fact that the bishop condones it makes it arguably a case for the Congregation of Bishops (no penalty on a bishop would be imposed without their consultation, and that of the CDF, in any event).

Actually, if my notion of the timing of this particular case is correct, both the CDF and CDWDS were following up on similar cases in a coordinated effort.
With all due respect, CDNowak, unless you have personally dealt with a situation involving a bishop, your mode is wrong. While the Apostolic Nuncio is the representative of the Holy See, he is not necessarily the go-to person for problems like this. My father has had an on-going problem with both his former pastor and the bishop regarding the matter of sacramental care to the elderly (including confession). When the bishop failed to acknowledge the certified letter, we wrote to the CDWDS and followed up with a phone call. Contacting the Nuncio merely sent us back to the bishop, which did not help any.

In the case of confession, this needs to go to the CDWDS. If the Congregation finds that there are additonal problems, then, nothing would preclude them from involving other discasteries in the matter. But since this is a sacramental issue, they are the first responders.
 
Actually, for liturgical abuse, it is not the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that you make your complaint; that is the purview of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
Thanks for the correction - I’m sure that’s what I meant to say. :o
I have seen a lot blamed on Vatican II. The documents of the Second Vatican Council, unfortunately, have been misread, maligned and misinterpreted to the point that they don’t even say 1/10 of what people claim they say. What folks, sadly, are following is not Vatican II, but, the alleged Spirit of Vatican II. These are two very dfferent things. One has nothing to do with the other.
I agree completely.
In fact, the Compendium on the Catechism was written in the same format as the Baltimore Catechism.
Isn’t it great? 🙂 I use the Compendium in my teaching, because it’s so concise and easy to understand, for people of any age. 👍
 
In the case of confession, this needs to go to the CDWDS. If the Congregation finds that there are additonal problems, then, nothing would preclude them from involving other discasteries in the matter. But since this is a sacramental issue, they are the first responders.
Yes, it does. I should have phrased it we ought to be able to contact the Nuncio (given his job description) when things break down. We still can, but you are right, generally we will not get a positive (or effective response).
 
While it is true to say that “we are not confirming anything, the Holy Spirit is Confirming us”, it would be silly to suggest that no type of preparation was needed. Unfortunately the CCD programs idea of preparation involves service, service and more service. Doing acts of charity is wonderful but not sufficient as preparation for reception of the Sacrament of Confirmation. If the child is not attending Mass and Confession regularly they haven’t got a clue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top