Foreign Priests and the Words of Absolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter Barricade
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Barricade

Guest
I’ve been reading more recently about the absolutely necessary words of absolution and I’m finding that I cannot find a definitive answer about which words are truly necessary for the sacrament to be valid. Some say “I absolve you” is all that is necessary others say it is “I absolve you from your sins” and I’m not sure if others say “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” is all necessary.

We have a priest at our parish from another country (who speaks a bit of broken English) and when I go to confession with him it sounds like at the words of absolution he says **“I absolve you for your sin” **(using for instead of from and sin instead of sins) in the context of traditional form. Is the priest in this case giving valid absolution if he’s not strictly saying the right words likely due to language issues?

What if instead of saying “I absolve you FROM your sins” the priest says “I absolve you OF your sins” which is something I believe I’ve heard as well from even native English speakers.

How much of a change to the words of absolution renders the sacrament invalid?

It’s a topic that’s getting to annoy me because the last thing I want on my mind in the confessional are doubts due to its validity due to sheer mistakes in the words being said in spite of my desire to confess and the priest’s desire to absolve.
 
Is it possible that because of his accent he is saying “from” but it sounds like “for?” Surely “I absolve you” are the key words. I would be stunned if from/for invalidated the sacrament, especially since the nicety of that distinction in English may not even exist in many of the other languages in which Reconciliation is offered.
 
Barricade said:
I’ve been reading more recently about the absolutely necessary words of absolution and I’m finding that I cannot find a definitive answer about which words are truly necessary for the sacrament to be valid.
Click to expand...
The thing is, though, is that this isn’t magic. It isn’t that the priest must have perfect diction or perfect intonation; it isn’t that, if the priest intends to absolve but makes a normal, human mistake then you aren’t absolved.
We have a priest at our parish from another country (who speaks a bit of broken English) and when I go to confession with him it sounds like at the words of absolution he says **“I absolve you for your sin” **(using for instead of from and sin instead of sins) in the context of traditional form. Is the priest in this case giving valid absolution if he’s not strictly saying the right words likely due to language issues?
Click to expand...
Yes, he is.
 
I think you should give a more credit to an ordained priest to know how to administer the sacrament of reconciliation. You are being scrupulous and a bit paranoid. Talk to your pastor about your scrupulous thoughts.
 
Barricade said:
What if instead of saying “I absolve you FROM your sins” the priest says “I absolve you OF your sins” which is something I believe I’ve heard as well from even native English speakers.
Click to expand...
Its semantics. Forget about it. There are 9473 other things you should be worrying about.

Avoiding things that lead you to sin, growing closer to God through prayer, thanksgiving that you have received God’s mercy in the confessional and cooperating with the grace you have received in the sacrament are a few that come to mind.
 
Barricade said:
I’ve been reading more recently about the absolutely necessary words of absolution and I’m finding that I cannot find a definitive answer about which words are truly necessary for the sacrament to be valid. Some say “I absolve you” is all that is necessary others say it is “I absolve you from your sins” and I’m not sure if others say “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” is all necessary.

We have a priest at our parish from another country (who speaks a bit of broken English) and when I go to confession with him it sounds like at the words of absolution he says **“I absolve you for your sin” **(using for instead of from and sin instead of sins) in the context of traditional form. Is the priest in this case giving valid absolution if he’s not strictly saying the right words likely due to language issues?

What if instead of saying “I absolve you FROM your sins” the priest says “I absolve you OF your sins” which is something I believe I’ve heard as well from even native English speakers.

How much of a change to the words of absolution renders the sacrament invalid?

It’s a topic that’s getting to annoy me because the last thing I want on my mind in the confessional are doubts due to its validity due to sheer mistakes in the words being said in spite of my desire to confess and the priest’s desire to absolve.
Click to expand...
According to the liturgically correct Catholic blogger “Father Z” invalid absolution is incredibly rare. This from yesterday is worth reading: wdtprs.com/blog/2015/06/ask-father-father-didnt-make-sign-of-the-cross-at-absolution/
 
1ke said:
I think you should give a more credit to an ordained priest to know how to administer the sacrament of reconciliation. You are being scrupulous and a bit paranoid. Talk to your pastor about your scrupulous thoughts.
Click to expand...
That’s hilarious I have only been to one priest who has actually followed the book which lays out what to say during confession. 1 that’s it. Similarly I’m yet to find priest who follows the rubrics at mass. Its not scrupulous its an expectation of orthodoxy and obedience [edited].
 
So let me ask this question then…

If a Priest changes the words of consecration from what is prescribed by the church for him to say is it valid?

I’m not talking a slip of speech here if he deliberately changes the rubric.

If that’s not acceptable then why would the sacrament where our sins are cleansed be any different?

Again if the priest changes the words of absolution from what is written for him to say to what he wants them to be.

Are we really in a time where we just say well whatever happens as long as the intent is there its ok? Even though mother church says this is how you will do this, here’s a book containing what you will say, and expects obedience to remain in union with it. Isn’t that exactly why we are not protestant? The more I read into these posts from people and the responses the more I begin to think many here have fallen some serious errors. If were really into this era of who gives a hoot about rubrics and what the church gives us for guidance (which in our theology is the body of Christ and protected by him) into what we want it to be (not guaranteed) we are in a world of hurt. Its like were selectively obedient but only when it affects us.
 
eightydeuce82 said:
So let me ask this question then…

If a Priest changes the words of consecration from what is prescribed by the church for him to say is it valid?

I’m not talking a slip of speech here if he deliberately changes the rubric.

If that’s not acceptable then why would the sacrament where our sins are cleansed be any different? …
Click to expand...
Hello,

If the change in words results in an essential change in meaning, then the Sacrament is invalid. That is how St. Thomas explained the matter. newadvent.org/summa/4060.htm#article8

As for the question of/in the OP, I don’t even know what “I absolve you for your sin…” means. It doesn’t make any sense. But, since he is saying “I absolve you” then it can be argued that the absolution is valid.

Nevertheless, it would certainly behoove any priest who is not a native speaker of a language to make sure he knows, and correctly says, the entire formula. If there is a way to help him do this, one should try to do so.

Dan
 
Regarding absolution:

I absolve you from your sins" is generally considered the necessary part of the form of absolution (in the Latin Church) to be validly absolved. Though the Council of Trent (and St Thomas Aquinas) seem to suggest that “I absolve you” is all that is actually necessary for correct form

[edited]
 
MtnDwellar said:
Regarding absolution:

I absolve you from your sins" is generally considered the necessary part of the form of absolution (in the Latin Church) to be validly absolved. Though the Council of Trent (and St Thomas Aquinas) seem to suggest that “I absolve you” is all that is actually necessary for correct form

Regarding valid consecration: There are four requirements,
  1. Validly ordained priest
  2. Valid matter (bread and wine)
  3. Intent of the priest
  4. Valid form.
The form is the words of consecration:

The key phrases which confect the Eucharist are “This is My Body” and “This is … My Blood,” which when said by a priest with the proper intention and matter (explained above), truly show the priest acts in the Person of Christ. Other parts of the Eucharistic prayer are, according to St. Ambrose (also quoted in Summa Theologica).

Changing the words of the preparatory parts of the Eucharistic prayer is illicit and gravely sinful for the priest, but would not invalidate the Eucharist as long as “This is My Body” and “This is … My Blood” are said.

ourladyswarriors.org/articles/badliturgy.htm
Click to expand...
Guys I know what the requirements are lol! You missed the point!
 
eightydeuce82 said:
If a Priest changes the words of consecration from what is prescribed by the church for him to say is it valid?
Click to expand...
eightydeuce82 said:
Guys I know what the requirements are lol! You missed the point!
Click to expand...
I thought that you would know, but from your question, I inferred otherwise.
Anyway, it’s out there for anyone who needs it.

I stopped attending Mass at my parish because of the liturgical irregularities. When I asked Father where he got the consecration prayer, he said that he prayed from his heart and a prayer from the heart is always better than reading from a book. He also assured me that he is an “expert liturgist” and I shouldn’t be concerned.

As lay people we need to learn what constitutes a true liturgy and also a licit sacrament. We have the right to participate in both. Pope Francis once said that the laity need to teach the priests to be priests and the bishops to be bishops.
 
:
MtnDwellar said:
I thought that you would know, but from your question, I inferred otherwise.
Anyway, it’s out there for anyone who needs it.

I stopped attending Mass at my parish because of the liturgical irregularities. When I asked Father where he got the consecration prayer, he said that he prayed from his heart and a prayer from the heart is always better than reading from a book. He also assured me that he is an “expert liturgist” and I shouldn’t be concerned.

As lay people we need to learn what constitutes a true liturgy and also a licit sacrament. We have the right to participate in both. Pope Francis once said that the laity need to teach the priests to be priests and the bishops to be bishops.
Click to expand...
:banghead: seriously you’re preaching to the choir…at least some of us realize what’s happening.

The liturgy expert thing was pretty epic thou. 🤷
 
There is a young foreign priest here who says " The BOD of Christ." when he gives out communion…We all know what he means.
 
Barricade said:
How much of a change to the words of absolution renders the sacrament invalid?

It’s a topic that’s getting to annoy me because the last thing I want on my mind in the confessional are doubts due to its validity due to sheer mistakes in the words being said in spite of my desire to confess and the priest’s desire to absolve.
Click to expand...
You’re being silly. The priest is confirming the SACRAMENT of reconciliation upon you; he is NOT casting a magic spell. He’s obligated to follow a rubric, but in this instance the language gap should not pose a problem or render the absolution invalid.

The priest is absolving you. His English isn’t perfect; the words are in his head in his native language and that is the meaning he fully intends to convey. Pray for this priest and be thankful you have him. Spiritual neurosis and obsession with form is a sign of insecurity and lack of faith. Dispel that. Trust God and his priest.
 
I don’t understand some of the reactions here. The OP asked reasonable questions so let’s just give an answer without psychoanalysis and/or name calling.

If the priest says “I absolve you” then the absolution is given. This was stated by the Council of Trent. If the words are changed so much that the essential meaning of a Sacramental form is destroyed, then it is invalid, no matter what the priest intended to say. This is what St. Thomas, among others, have said.

Dan
 
1ke said:
I think you should give a more credit to an ordained priest to know how to administer the sacrament of reconciliation. You are being scrupulous and a bit paranoid. Talk to your pastor about your scrupulous thoughts.
Click to expand...
Not all pastors are helpful with scrupulous parishoners.
 
In my opinion, if the foreign priest was trying to use the English formula of absolution and possibly slipped up on a few words, same with the words of consecration during the Mass I believe it would be valid, if he mispronounced a word he was trying to say because it was his intention to say them properly
 
camkutz said:
In my opinion, if the foreign priest was trying to use the English formula of absolution and possibly slipped up on a few words, same with the words of consecration during the Mass I believe it would be valid, if he mispronounced a word he was trying to say because it was his intention to say them properly
Click to expand...
Yes, but he said them in vernacular so that the penitent could understand them. So what could possibly go wrong? :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top