Do you have to be Catholic to receive Confession?

[Daprato]

From the OP’s question, I do not think anything would be “watered down”. Some grace would be imparted, it would not meet the “official” definition of Confession, and as of now it is undefined theologically what actually you call what passes through a priest to a non-Catholic during Confession.

How do you know? Where does the Church say that?

 

[benedictgal]

Let me try to explain my “schism” definition again. The schisms are here on earth, but not on the spiritual plane. From all the schisms over the years (and sub-schisms from those), the theological definition of God has not changed as many times as schisms occurred because that is what is agreed upon.

The OP asked about an instance on when a non-Catholic would choose to go to Catholic confession, that means something else is drawing them to go a priest as an intermediary, when as you say they usually try to go the direct route. In the end it is an instance by instance situation when it would happen in real life. Each non-Catholic would have their own reasons to do this. Yet I would think that forgiveness would still happen, it may not fit the “official” definition, but something will happen as the priest gives his blessing, what that causes the non-Catholic to do is an individual situation to each non-Catholic.

“Heresy” has always created more divisions than healing them. All posters on this board are more alike than not if you look at the whole person and away from the anonymity of the internet. If you look at humanity as a whole “liberal vs conservative”, “orthodox vs heterodox” seems very minor in the big picture of life and can come across as internal distortions of humanity.

“Relativism” is defined as:
a theory that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind and the conditions of knowing (From M-W.com)

This is everything in life, as my previous examples (5th Luminous Mystery Discussion, actual mechanism of confession), we are limited by our human minds and conditions of knowing all. The Church (actually all institutions, religious or not) all have this weakness which due to our humanity cannot be totally overcome.

It is good to be aware of our weaknesses, both as part of humanity as a whole and each of us personally. Yet our weaknesses can be turned into strengths if we are aware of them (e.g. in job interviews). I just saw today that a Cardinal from Quebec is putting his own weaknesses into the public eye, a very noble stance.

The big problem is that your treatment of the Faith is leading some to confusion. And, that is something that is dangerious. Please cite appropriate and dogmatic sources for your postings because you seem to be on the slippery slope and heading somehwere that is not corect.

As far as the relativism that then-Cardinal Ratzinger spoke of, your posts seem to be indicative that you are advocating it. Here is quote:

How many winds of doctrine we have known in recent decades, how many ideological currents, how many ways of thinking. The small boat of thought of many Christians has often been tossed about by these waves * thrown from one extreme to the other: from Marxism to liberalism, even to libertinism; from collectivism to radical individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to syncretism, and so forth. Every day new sects are created and what Saint Paul says about human trickery comes true, with cunning which tries to draw those into error (cf Eph 4, 14). Having a clear faith, based on the Creed of the Church, is often labeled today as a fundamentalism. Whereas, relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and “swept along by every wind of teaching”, looks like the only attitude (acceptable) to today’s standards. We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.

That is the kind of relativism to which I am referring. With regard to non-Catholics going to confession, I still hold to my original position.

 

[Nordar]

To be honest with you I have SAID NOTHING in any of my posts that contradicts the teaching of the Church. From your response it is very easy to see that you know very little about the teachings of the Church yourself.

All I have asked for in these posts is evidence from a teaching standpoint that only Roman Catholic’s have access to the rite of reconcilation. Or if there is no true evidence then a good sound theological reason for the exclusion of non-Catholics from this rite. That is all that I have asked for from my posts. I at this point have not received either.

So at this point in time I will chalk this up as being unclear.

I don’t believe I said that you had said anything that contradicted church teaching. If I did then please point it out.
Why is it very easy to see that I know very little about the teaching of the Church?

Reconciliation is NOT a rite, it is a Sacrament, you have been told this over and over but you refuse to hear this for some reason.

You must be baptised in the Catholic Church, you must have religious instructions in the Catholic faith to recieve the Sacrament of Reconciliation. This is so you can continue to have instructions to learn and recieve The Sacrament of The Holy Eucharist in that you will be recieving the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation does NOT stand alone it is united with the Sacraments of The Eucharist and Confirmation. those Sacraments are ALL part of the Church as a whole.

There is NOTHING unclear about it, you just do not wish to hear what is being said. Non Catholics may talk to a priest about their sins If a priest is willing to listen to them. They cannot however recieve the absolution that the Sacrament gives,

 

[peccone]

That’s simply not true. There would be no absolution of sin and that’s that.

Caritas!! This is the sacrament of healing, and not lost to anyone who has recieved Christian Baptism. In its sacramental function, I suppose it would imply understanding of the benefits.

Deus est Caritas:thumbsup:

 

[benedictgal]

Caritas!! This is the sacrament of healing, and not lost to anyone who has recieved Christian Baptism. In its sacramental function, I suppose it would imply understanding of the benefits.

Deus est Caritas:thumbsup:

While I agree with you in principal, the sad truth is that the sacrament cannot be received by someone who is not Catholic. It’s hard to receive a sacrament when you don’t believe that the Church is the legitimate authority to offer it. Christian baptism (by this I mean baptism in other ecclesial communities) is not carte blanche for receiving Catholic sacraments. Matrimony is a special case; however, that does not allow the non-Catholic party to receive Holy Communion, Confirmation, etc. They need to be in FULL COMMUNION with the Church.

 

[mercygate]

Mercygate, I believe you are not understanding my point on Knowledge. No where does the church teach that you must be in full agreement with its teachings to be absolved of your sins in confession. No where. So lets get off of this horse for it is going no where.

It is not a “horse going nowhere.” A person coming to confession would at least believe in the authority of the Priest to pronounce absolution. That comes from Apostolic Succession, so it would be necessary to believe in that (at least implicitly). Apostolic Succession also goes to the teaching authority of the Church as well. A person might not be required to understand all of Catholic teaching in order to receive the sacrament but the presumption is that he is prepared to accept it.

A non-Catholic cannot be presumed to understand anything of the kind. If he did, he would seek to become Catholic so that he could receive the Sacrament of Penance in its fullness, and not just as an exercise in unburdening his conscience.

A non-Catholic who comes to confession should be encouraged to explore the rest of the package. If a non-Catholic expects to remain unrepentant in schism, then his purpose of amendment is defective. When Catholics come to confession, we repent of ALL of our sins, not just the ones that trouble our conscience most.

I do not understand your difficulty in understanding this.

 

[ERose]

I think in very particular circumstances it may be allowed:

1. In my Encyclical Ut Unum Sint I expressed my own appreciation of these norms, which make it possible to provide for the salvation of souls with proper discernment: “It is a source of joy to note that Catholic ministers are able, in certain particular cases, to administer the sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance and Anointing of the Sick to Christians who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church but who greatly desire to receive these sacraments, freely request them and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacraments. Conversely, in specific cases and in particular circumstances, Catholics too can request these same sacraments from ministers of Churches in which these sacraments are valid”.97

These conditions, from which no dispensation can be given, must be carefully respected, even though they deal with specific individual cases, because the denial of one or more truths of the faith regarding these sacraments and, among these, the truth regarding the need of the ministerial priesthood for their validity, renders the person asking improperly disposed to legitimately receiving them. And the opposite is also true: Catholics may not receive communion in those communities which lack a valid sacrament of Orders.98

Ecclesia de Eucharistia

Fix,

Thank you for this information. This was in fact what I was looking for. For some reason I got wrapped up in the argument of the whole thing.

When discussing the situation of someone (another Christian) going to a priest for absolution I ment a person who was in much spiritual pain and suffering due to the sins that he has committed against God and man. Should the priest turn him away from absolution?

It should also be understood that if this Christian come before a priest for absolution then he in his mind would believe that the Priest would have the power to absolve him of his sins and in understanding the power of the church would surely search for reconcilation with the church. These two points would be inherent to the person’s decision.

The power to forgive sins which was given to the priesthood is in my opinion second only to the sacrament of the Mass. This power is again in my opinion the most intrinsic to the mission of the Church and to its founder, Christ.

Forgiveness = healing. That is the reason for why Christ in many cases would use these terms interchangably during His ministry on Earth. Sometimes when He healed someone He would tell them their sins are forgiven and sometimes when He forgave he would say that you are healed.

Fix, you answered my question and again thank you. For some reason I did not see it at the time but I see it now.

 

[ERose]

It is not a “horse going nowhere.” A person coming to confession would at least believe in the authority of the Priest to pronounce absolution. That comes from Apostolic Succession, so it would be necessary to believe in that (at least implicitly). Apostolic Succession also goes to the teaching authority of the Church as well. A person might not be required to understand all of Catholic teaching in order to receive the sacrament but the presumption is that he is prepared to accept it.

A non-Catholic cannot be presumed to understand anything of the kind. If he did, he would seek to become Catholic so that he could receive the Sacrament of Penance in its fullness, and not just as an exercise in unburdening his conscience.

A non-Catholic who comes to confession should be encouraged to explore the rest of the package. If a non-Catholic expects to remain unrepentant in schism, then his purpose of amendment is defective. When Catholics come to confession, we repent of ALL of our sins, not just the ones that trouble our conscience most.

I do not understand your difficulty in understanding this.

Mercygate,

I agree with your points. Thank you for helping to square me away.

 

[ERose]

I don’t believe I said that you had said anything that contradicted church teaching. If I did then please point it out.
Why is it very easy to see that I know very little about the teaching of the Church?

Reconciliation is NOT a rite, it is a Sacrament, you have been told this over and over but you refuse to hear this for some reason.

You must be baptised in the Catholic Church, you must have religious instructions in the Catholic faith to recieve the Sacrament of Reconciliation. This is so you can continue to have instructions to learn and recieve The Sacrament of The Holy Eucharist in that you will be recieving the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation does NOT stand alone it is united with the Sacraments of The Eucharist and Confirmation. those Sacraments are ALL part of the Church as a whole.

There is NOTHING unclear about it, you just do not wish to hear what is being said. Non Catholics may talk to a priest about their sins If a priest is willing to listen to them. They cannot however recieve the absolution that the Sacrament gives,

I apologize for my comments. After you hit me below the belt I in my weakness returned to favor and I shouldn’t. The comments were poorly spoken and not very Christian of me. So please forgive me for my sin against you.

Concerning the discussion on reconcilation for non-Catholics I have received the answer to my question from Fix which you can see in the posts above this one.

Thank you for your comments. God bless.

 

[Seamus_L]

Father Robert Levis of EWTN was asked this question, and he said that in his many years as a priest he’s had several non-Catholics come into his confessional. He explained to them that the sacrament of penance only applied to Catholics and that therefore they weren’t confessing their sins to a priest but rather to an old man, BUT did add that he always attempted to give them spiritual guidance, prayed for them and assured them that what they told him in the confessional would still be kept in the strictest confidence the same as if they were Catholic.

 

[LilyM]

When discussing the situation of someone (another Christian) going to a priest for absolution I ment a person who was in much spiritual pain and suffering due to the sins that he has committed against God and man. Should the priest turn him away from absolution?

It should also be understood that if this Christian come before a priest for absolution then he in his mind would believe that the Priest would have the power to absolve him of his sins and in understanding the power of the church would surely search for reconcilation with the church. These two points would be inherent to the person’s decision.

Firstly - yes, all sin causes pain and suffering. Part of ceasing the pain and suffering is to cease the sin. If a person is turned away from absolution it is because of their own decision not to accept the fullness of Catholic teaching and not to enter full Communion with the Catholic Church. Therefore their own doing and free choice, assuming that they are adult and mentally capable.

As to your second point - it can’t be taken for granted that a non-Catholic DOES presume the ability of the Catholic priest to absolve sins in the name of God.

If someone of a non-Catholic Christian denomination doesn’t believe that their OWN priests or pastors have power to forgive sins in God’s name (and most don’t, otherwise presumably they would go to them and not to a Catholic priest for the absolution) then why would they believe it of a Catholic priest?

For some it’s no more than a free therapy/spiritual-direction session, certainly not a sacrament. Sadly, some Catholics see it in the same way too, but at least they have a fighting chance of truly understanding the nature of Reconciliation.

 

[mercygate]

Just another anecdote. Many years ago, a young priest (who is now very old) was visiting his mother at home, when a neighbor came running up to the house, panting and in terror. The guy, who was not Catholic, asked for confession. My friend heard his confession and absolved him. The man had committed a murder! How would you like to be presented with THAT dilemma?

 

[LilyM]

Just another anecdote. Many years ago, a young priest (who is now very old) was visiting his mother at home, when a neighbor came running up to the house, panting and in terror. The guy, who was not Catholic, asked for confession. My friend heard his confession and absolved him. The man had committed a murder! How would you like to be presented with THAT dilemma?

A Catholic priest cannot absolve a non-Catholic, though he certainly would be able to hear his confession and offer advice, as well as praying for his forgiveness.

Certainly a murder would be a real jam of a pickle though, and you wouldn’t want to upset someone who’s capable of murder by saying you won’t absolve him, would you!

 

[Nordar]

I apologize for my comments. After you hit me below the belt I in my weakness returned to favor and I shouldn’t. The comments were poorly spoken and not very Christian of me. So please forgive me for my sin against you.

Concerning the discussion on reconcilation for non-Catholics I have received the answer to my question from Fix which you can see in the posts above this one.

Thank you for your comments. God bless.

Oh please stop! I was in no way hitting you below the belt (as you put it). I was quite simply being factual and stating the truth when I said " It is clear you do not have the full understanding of Catholic Church teaching". It was not an attack it was a truthfull statement to a Non Catholic.

Fix’s answer was referring to someone who is sick ( close to the end of their lives) in the Annointing of the sick, it is understood they have the desire to be in full communion with The Church.

So no he did not answer your question, Confession/Absolution CANNOT be given to a Non Catholic no matter how much pain they are in. Why don’t you make an appointment with a Catholic Priest and ask him?

 

[fix]

Fix’s answer was referring to someone who is sick ( close to the end of their lives) in the Annointing of the sick, it is understood they have the desire to be in full communion with The Church.

So no he did not answer your question, Confession/Absolution CANNOT be given to a Non Catholic no matter how much pain they are in. Why don’t you make an appointment with a Catholic Priest and ask him?

My post mentioned in very specific circumstances these sacraments may be offered:

§3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.

§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

§5. For the cases mentioned in §§2, 3, and 4, the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops is not to issue general norms except after consultation at least with the local competent authority of the interested non-Catholic Church or community.

1. In case of danger of death, Catholic ministers may administer these sacraments when the conditions given below (n. 131) ate present. In other cases, it is strongly recommended that the diocesan Bishop, taking into account any norms which may have been established for this matter by the Episcopal Conference or by the Synods of Eastern Catholic Churches, establish general norms for judging situations of grave and pressing need and for verifying the conditions mentioned below (n. 131 ).[135] In accord with Canon Law,[136] these general norms are to be established only after consultation with at least the local competent authority of the other interested Church or ecclesial Community. Catholic ministers will judge individual cases and administer these sacraments only in accord with these established norms, where they exist. Otherwise they will judge according to the norms of this Directory.

1. The conditions under which a Catholic minister may administer the sacraments of the Eucharist, of penance and of the anointing of the sick to a baptized person who may be found in the circumstances given above (n. 130) are that the person be unable to have recourse for the sacrament desired to a minister of his or her own Church or ecclesial Community, ask for the sacrament of his or her own initiative, manifest Catholic faith in this sacrament and be properly disposed.[137]
   Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity

 

[jblake]

LilyM:

If someone of a non-Catholic Christian denomination doesn’t believe that their OWN priests or pastors have power to forgive sins in God’s name (and most don’t, otherwise presumably they would go to them and not to a Catholic priest for the absolution) then why would they believe it of a Catholic priest?

Both Roman Catholic Canon Law, and Orthodox Christian Canon law define when, why, and how a Priest of either group can grant Penance to a member of the other group.

The situation vis-a-vis Oriental Christians is less clear, but appears to follow that of Orthodox Christianity.

I’ve forgotten what the situation is regarding The Church of England.

For Protestant Christianity, I’d suggest that factors other than believing that Protestant Priests or Pastors can’t forgive their sins are the critical issues. The major one being what that Protestant equivalent entails one to do.

xan

jonathon

 

[benedictgal]

Both Roman Catholic Canon Law, and Orthodox Christian Canon law define when, why, and how a Priest of either group can grant Penance to a member of the other group.

The situation vis-a-vis Oriental Christians is less clear, but appears to follow that of Orthodox Christianity.

I’ve forgotten what the situation is regarding The Church of England.

For Protestant Christianity, I’d suggest that factors other than believing that Protestant Priests or Pastors can’t forgive their sins are the critical issues. The major one being what that Protestant equivalent entails one to do.

xan

jonathon

The big caveat with the Anglicans and Episcopalians is that they do not have Apostolic Succession. Therefore, in the eyes of the Church, they are not validly ordained. On top of that, the Church does not recognize the ordination of women to the priesthood, something the Anglicans and Episcopalians have done.

Now, the Church does recognize that the Orthodox have Apostolic Succession. Recall that when the Holy Father visited Constantinople (Istanbul) on the occasion of the Feast of St. Andrew, he said that “Peter was visiting his brother, Andrew.” The Orthodox do have unity, although they consider “Andrew” first among equals while the Church reinforces the Primacy of Peter in the person of the Pope.

Protestants generally believe that they can go directly to God.
Even if you were to quote them St. John’s account of Jesus empowering the Apostles to forgive sins, they won’t accept it. The argument that I have personally heard is “Why should you to a man who is also a sinner to have your sins forgiven when you can go directly to God?” This statement was made by one of my aunts who left the Church many years ago.

 

[ERose]

My post mentioned in very specific circumstances these sacraments may be offered:

Thanks again Fix.

 

[ERose]

So no he did not answer your question, Confession/Absolution CANNOT be given to a Non Catholic no matter how much pain they are in. Why don’t you make an appointment with a Catholic Priest and ask him?

Why can it not? Should I believe this because you, who claim to be far superior to me in the understanding of the Catholic faith, just said so?

Where is your proof? Where are quotes? I don’t go off of “I said so statements” only a fool would do so. So show me proof of your comments please?

 

[benedictgal]

Why can it not? Should I believe this because you, who claim to be far superior to me in the understanding of the Catholic faith, just said so?

Where is your proof? Where are quotes? I don’t go off of “I said so statements” only a fool would do so. So show me proof of your comments please?

ERose, in order to validly receive the Sacraments, you must be a baptized Catholic. That takes some common sense to come to that conclusion. While a non-Catholic may receive the sacrament of matrimony, by virtue of the Catholic spouse, this does not entitle the person to receive the other sacraments. They have to be in full communion with the Church, meaning they need to go through the RCIA process.

Perhaps it would do you well to consult with a priest or a diocessan official who is well versed in this issue. It is apparent that we are not offering you sufficient answers because you find ways to refute what all of us havei been telling you.