Is my confession valid if my confessor has heretical views?

[SuscipeMeDomine]

So you think it’s not possible ? With clown Masses, lazer light rock Masses, and the like, you think it’s not possible because you’ve never encountered it ?

You are making a quite liberal assumption of the OP.

I’ve never encountered a clown Mass or lazer [sic] light Mass. Have you? Or is it simply one of those throw-away lines that’s intended to negate everything about the Ordinary Form of the Mass? (Which, by the way, is not what this thread is about.)

And have you also encountered mocking, sarcastic priests in the confessional? Who also “sound gay” and deny hell?

You must live in quite a diocese.

 

[laszlo]

Just went to confession today, bad experience. It started with the priest mocking me when I told him I had committed mortal sins.
Going to this confession by this priest, who sounded homosexual, got me really upset. I’ve been reading Malachi Martin and Marcel Lefebvre and I am really tempted to go to the SSPX although something in me says don’t. .

There are many different types of the wrong, but only one type of the evil.

There are many good confessors either among those who say the Ordinary form as Mass, as also many who say the Extarordinary form accepting fully the decisions of the Magisterium.

You should search for a good confessor.

Otherwise the principle ‘ex opere operato’ means that the confession is valid, the grace is coming not through the mind or morals of the priest, but through the Holy Spirit from Jesus Christ.

 

[Timothysis]

Doesn’t matter what I cite to those who despise the SSPX. I can cite a Roman Catholic Bishop who said it, but you won’t believe it, short of a MP. So why bother ?

So, you’ve got nothing. That settles it.

 

[At_Trent]

I’ve never encountered a clown Mass or lazer [sic] light Mass. Have you? Or is it simply one of those throw-away lines that’s intended to negate everything about the Ordinary Form of the Mass? (Which, by the way, is not what this thread is about.)

And have you also encountered mocking, sarcastic priests in the confessional? Who also “sound gay” and deny hell?

You must live in quite a diocese.

Do you deny documentation ? I don’t.

I won’t defend sacrilege either. Read this:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=47322

 

[At_Trent]

So, you’ve got nothing. That settles it.

Your inquisition is what is nothing Never has been, nor ever will mean much. Hate on brother. Great way to spend a Sunday.

Now, I’m going to go hang out with some Roman Catholics at a TLM and pray for an end to the accessorizing of sin displayed here.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Do you deny documentation ? I don’t.

I won’t defend sacrilege either. Read this:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=47322

In other words, “no I haven’t encountered any of these things.”

Thank you.

 

[Romanova]

Your inquisition is what is nothing Never has been, nor ever will mean much. Hate on brother. Great way to spend a Sunday.

Now, I’m going to go hang out with some Roman Catholics at a TLM and pray for an end to the accessorizing of sin displayed here.

I’m kind of confused – what is the accessorizing of sin here, in your opinion? Is everyone who is asking questions of the OP and isn’t immediately jumping on the “your priest is awful” bandwagon a sinner?

 

[PaulinVA]

Your inquisition is what is nothing Never has been, nor ever will mean much. Hate on brother. Great way to spend a Sunday.

Now, I’m going to go hang out with some Roman Catholics at a TLM and pray for an end to the accessorizing of sin displayed here.

Hmmm. I really am interested in this. Have the talks produced some fruit?

I think your pronouncement is very bold and either needs to be proven or retracted. If it can be proven, then this is indeed is good news for the SSPX priests.

To be on topic - we all know that the views of a validly ordained priest with faculties don’t affect the sacraments he administers.

 

[laszlo]

Recently, it has come to light Rome has indeed granted permission to the SSPX to hear confessions. No general public statement… yet, but true nonetheless.

Would you so kind to be more specific.

Here is what Msgr Camille Perl wrote related to the SSPX Mass

Unfortunately, as you will understand, we have no way of controlling what is done with our letters by their recipients. Our letter of 27 September 2002, which was evidently cited in The Remnant and on various websites, was intended as a private communication dealing with the specific circumstances of the person who wrote to us. What was presented in the public forum is an abbreviated version of that letter which omits much of our pastoral counsel. Since a truncated form of this letter has now become public, we judge it appropriate to present the larger context of our response.

In a previous letter to the same correspondent we had already indicated the canonical status of the Society of St. Pius X which we will summarize briefly here.

1.) The priests of the Society of St. Pius X are validly ordained, but they are suspended from exercising their priestly functions. To the extent that they adhere to the schism of the late Archbishop Lefebvre, they are also excommunicated.

2.) Concretely this means that the Masses offered by these priests are valid, but illicit i.e., contrary to the law of the Church.

Points 1 and 3 in our letter of 27 September 2002 to this correspondent are accurately reported. His first question was “Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass” and our response was:

“1. In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.”

His second question was “Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass” and we responded stating:

“2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin.”

His third question was: “Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass” to which we responded:

“3. It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified.”

I my view the confession (and witnessing marriages) requires more than the Mass, explicit jurisdiction from the local Ordinary or equivalent superior.

 

[Biedrik]

Just went to confession today, bad experience. It started with the priest mocking me when I told him I had committed mortal sins. He asked me sarcastically, are you a theologian? Before I even told him the sins he said, I doubt very much you committed a mortal sin. He then said that before vatican II eating meat on the wrong day was a mortal sin so I shouldn’t be concerned with black and white stuff. He then whistled around the alter later. It really bugged me.

Hmmm, this is rather strange. Honestly, I don’t know what happened here. I find it weird that the priest would criticize you for saying that you committed mortal sins, given that priests know that that is what confession is for. Well, if this is how this priest reacted then that doesn’t affect the validity of the absolution that he gave you. St. Augustine settled this matter with the Donatists 1600 years ago, when he argued that a priest’s moral behavior and any heretical views do not affect the validity of the sacraments performed by him, such as absolution, Mass, marriage, etc. This is a long settled issue. As for whistling around the altar, don’t let it bother you so much. It’s a minor thing, and really not something one should be getting worked up about. If this priest’s behavior is this rude though, I’d simply recommend going to another parish or simply going elsewhere for confession.

Going to this confession by this priest, who sounded homosexual, got me really upset. I’ve been reading Malachi Martin and Marcel Lefebvre and I am really tempted to go to the SSPX although something in me says don’t. I am sick of this new church. No mention of hell, no mention of confession, no mention of Fatima. Nobody goes to confession anymore. Whenever I go its like me and 3 old ladies. Thats it. It seems like there is this dont ask dont tell policy regarding masturbation, pre-marital sex, and contraception.

First of all, don’t say things like “this priest sounded really homosexual.” It is not your place to judge, and even if his voice does fit with the homosexual stereotype, it is not your place to talk about it. It’s unkind and utterly irrelevant to his moral character.

Second of all, why go to SSPX? They are a group that is not fully in union with the church. You can find a good parish with the TLM that has been fully loyal to the church.

Also, why should anyone be required to mention Fatima? Certainly, I understand why Fatima is important, but it is not dogma, nor is it necessary for our salvation. There are worse things that a parish can gloss over, such as what you mentioned. Don’t get hung up on it.

In the end, there is something important to keep in mind at all times. Remember, no matter how bad a parish is, Mass is still Mass. Jesus is still present, even if one goes to something as outrageous as a “clown mass.” Jesus himself, our Lord and God. None of the bad could ever outweigh the greatness of that single thing, and for this reason Mass is always extremely holy, and always worth going to, no matter what. Don’t forget that.

Another question, I just remembered another mortal sin I forgot to confess. Is this ok if I confess it next saturday? I really need to receive tomorrow.

Sins that you do not intentionally conceal, such as by forgetting, are still forgiven. You don’t even need to confess it next Saturday, but of course there is no harm in doing so. So you may receive.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Just went to confession today, bad experience. It started with the priest mocking me when I told him I had committed mortal sins. He asked me sarcastically, are you a theologian? Before I even told him the sins he said, I doubt very much you committed a mortal sin. He then said that before vatican II eating meat on the wrong day was a mortal sin so I shouldn’t be concerned with black and white stuff. He then whistled around the alter later. It really bugged me.

Going to this confession by this priest, who sounded homosexual, got me really upset. I’ve been reading Malachi Martin and Marcel Lefebvre and I am really tempted to go to the SSPX although something in me says don’t. I am sick of this new church. No mention of hell, no mention of confession, no mention of Fatima. Nobody goes to confession anymore. Whenever I go its like me and 3 old ladies. Thats it. It seems like there is this dont ask dont tell policy regarding masturbation, pre-marital sex, and contraception.

Anyway’s, is my confession valid if I received it from a priest who doubts the realities of hell and the interpretation of mortal sin?

Another question, I just remembered another mortal sin I forgot to confess. Is this ok if I confess it next saturday? I really need to receive tomorrow.

Go to a church where you feel comfortable that is in full communion with Rome if you are that upset with where you are going now.

Having said that, what, exactly, did he say that was heretical? Because he does not preach on hell, does that mean he doubts the realities of it? Did he actually stand in the pulpit and publicly teach the people there is no hell, against the doctrine of the Church? Does not preaching on Fatima (which is a private revelation and not binding on any Catholic) mean the priest has heretical views? Does not preaching on masturbation, pre-marital sex, and contraception mean he agrees with them? Because you and he may disagree on what is a mortal sin automatically mean he is heretical? Perhaps you are in the wrong on this. Perhaps what you think is mortal sin, does not actually meet the conditions for a mortal sin and he is trying to tell you that. And what, exactly, does a homosexual sound like? And who isn’t showing up for confession–the priest or the people? Are you going to put all the blame on the priest for people not showing up for confession? They have some responsibility in this too.

All you are doing is complaining about the priest because he does not meet what your expectations of what a priest should be. The priest deserves more respect than that. He is a priest, after all, a man who has dedicated his life to Jesus Christ and his Church, a man who has received Holy Orders and is empowered to stand in the person of Jesus Christ and forgive your sins and change the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Savior. You may not like him, but you need to show more respect toward him. After all, it was God Himself who called this man to the priesthood. The great Saints never showed such disrespect for priests, even when the priests were known sinners. They respected their priesthood. And by the way, only the Church has the power to actually name a person a heretic and declare the Sacraments he confects invalid–not you. If you have proof he is teaching heresy, then you bring it to the attention of the Bishop to take care of. But you better have solid proof and not just rumor or your own interpretation of what heresy actually is.

And just remember, if you feel called to the priesthood, that some day you may be in the position of having people criticizing you because you don’t meet their expectations of what a priest should be. Most likely you will. Have some mercy on your priest, God does.

 

[notredame_999]

Went to a latin mass today, and I really felt at peace. Its pretty ridiculous liberals at the top have been hiding the latin mass and almost succeeded in making it extinct the last 40 years. As to some of the comments I’ve been getting, yes I shouldn’t have said anything about the priest’s sexual orientation (although it does matter as to the function of a priest). When I said he sounded gay I meant he spoke kind of feminine. This was minor.

What was major was his condoscending tone and heretical views. He said flat out that in order for a mortal sin to occur we have to intentionally seperate ourselves from God. Thats not true. For example, I could knowingly blow off mass one sunday not because I wanted to seperate myself from God, but because I wanted to watch an NFL Game on tv. Another example could be having pre-marital sex. A catholic might have pre-marital sex not because they wanted to seperate themselves from God, but because they surrendered to evil and temptation. His interpretation of sin is very liberal.

 

[At_Trent]

I’m kind of confused – what is the accessorizing of sin here, in your opinion? Is everyone who is asking questions of the OP and isn’t immediately jumping on the “your priest is awful” bandwagon a sinner?

Do you consider sacrilege sin ? If one dismisses documentation sacrilege has occurred, is the person flirting with one of the 9 ways below ? Perhaps one of the bolded ones ?

1. By Counsel
2. By Command
3. By Consent
4. By Provocation
5. By Praise or Flattery
6. By Concealment
7. By Partaking
8. By Silence
9. By Defense of the Ill Done

 

[At_Trent]

Hmmm. I really am interested in this. Have the talks produced some fruit?

I think your pronouncement is very bold and either needs to be proven or retracted. If it can be proven, then this is indeed is good news for the SSPX priests.

To be on topic - we all know that the views of a validly ordained priest with faculties don’t affect the sacraments he administers.

I’ll pm you a link.

 

[challam2010]

Went to a latin mass today, and I really felt at peace. Its pretty ridiculous liberals at the top have been hiding the latin mass and almost succeeded in making it extinct the last 40 years. As to some of the comments I’ve been getting, yes I shouldn’t have said anything about the priest’s sexual orientation (although it does matter as to the function of a priest). When I said he sounded gay I meant he spoke kind of feminine. This was minor.

What was major was his condoscending tone and heretical views. He said flat out that in order for a mortal sin to occur we have to intentionally seperate ourselves from God. Thats not true. For example, I could knowingly blow off mass one sunday not because I wanted to seperate myself from God, but because I wanted to watch an NFL Game on tv. Another example could be having pre-marital sex. A catholic might have pre-marital sex not because they wanted to seperate themselves from God, but because they surrendered to evil and temptation. His interpretation of sin is very liberal.

Seriously – you need to get some updated tnstruction on the nature of sin, the relationship between you and God and the difference between a loving Father and a stern judge who sits on your shoulder with a clipboard, checking off your actions in neat little columns of “venial” and “mortal” sins.

By your postings, you appear to have the understanding of a very, very young, untrained and immature (in the faith) person. If you’re at least 16, do yourself a favor and delve deeper into moral theology. There’s more to a relationship with God than what you’re describing.

 

[Kingbear]

Seriously – you need to get some updated tnstruction on the nature of sin, the relationship between you and God and the difference between a loving Father and a stern judge who sits on your shoulder with a clipboard, checking off your actions in neat little columns of “venial” and “mortal” sins.

By your postings, you appear to have the understanding of a very, very young, untrained and immature (in the faith) person. If you’re at least 16, do yourself a favor and delve deeper into moral theology. There’s more to a relationship with God than what you’re describing.

Whilst you are correct in your last statement, The OP has some genuine concerns.
This preist seems to be very lassai faire. He appears to be washing over sins and hell as if they were not important!
I have debated and questioned myself the actions of some preists who are humanly frail.
Some, and thankfully few, appear to have some idea that Hell is metaphorical, That we should not concern ourselves with it. That God is not rightous and that sin can exist without some reckoning. They water down the teachings of 2000 years to fit sensibiltys of a corrupt generation.

The Lord is coming soon, who wishes to put that carelessness to the test?

 

[Biedrik]

Went to a latin mass today, and I really felt at peace. Its pretty ridiculous liberals at the top have been hiding the latin mass and almost succeeded in making it extinct the last 40 years. As to some of the comments I’ve been getting, yes I shouldn’t have said anything about the priest’s sexual orientation (although it does matter as to the function of a priest). When I said he sounded gay I meant he spoke kind of feminine. This was minor.

What was major was his condoscending tone and heretical views. He said flat out that in order for a mortal sin to occur we have to intentionally seperate ourselves from God. Thats not true. For example, I could knowingly blow off mass one sunday not because I wanted to seperate myself from God, but because I wanted to watch an NFL Game on tv. Another example could be having pre-marital sex. A catholic might have pre-marital sex not because they wanted to seperate themselves from God, but because they surrendered to evil and temptation. His interpretation of sin is very liberal.

Sounding feminine is still irrelevant. You shouldn’t be bringing it up. It is sinful to do so.

As for mortal sin, it is an intentional separation from God. You may not necessarily be thinking to yourself “I am now going to separate myself from God” but that is what’s going on. It’s not that you intend to separate yourself from him, but that is what your action does. Surrendering to evil and temptation is a willful separation from God. The priest was not being a heretic.

 

[JReducation]

Just went to confession today, bad experience. It started with the priest mocking me when I told him I had committed mortal sins. He asked me sarcastically, are you a theologian? Before I even told him the sins he said, I doubt very much you committed a mortal sin. He then said that before vatican II eating meat on the wrong day was a mortal sin so I shouldn’t be concerned with black and white stuff. He then whistled around the alter later. It really bugged me.

Going to this confession by this priest, who sounded homosexual, got me really upset. I’ve been reading Malachi Martin and Marcel Lefebvre and I am really tempted to go to the SSPX although something in me says don’t. I am sick of this new church. No mention of hell, no mention of confession, no mention of Fatima. Nobody goes to confession anymore. Whenever I go its like me and 3 old ladies. Thats it. It seems like there is this dont ask dont tell policy regarding masturbation, pre-marital sex, and contraception.

Anyway’s, is my confession valid if I received it from a priest who doubts the realities of hell and the interpretation of mortal sin?

Another question, I just remembered another mortal sin I forgot to confess. Is this ok if I confess it next saturday? I really need to receive tomorrow.

One does not go to confession to put the priest on trial. One goes to confession to seek absolution for one’s sins. You’re taking another path here, that should be avoided.

Whatever the faults of the priest, this does not change the fact that he is a priest.

Any priest, with faculties can absolve sins, even heretics. That’s why you go there. Take your mind off the priest and focus on your sins and on asking for forgiveness.

Whether there are three people on the line or three hundred is irrelevant to your confessioin. Do not let that become a determining factor in your quest for grace and forgiveness.

A priest withoiut faculties cannot validly absolve sins, except in cases of life and death, in which case the Church supplies.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Kingbear]

Sounding feminine is still irrelevant. You shouldn’t be bringing it up. It is sinful to do so.

You are forgetting Beidrik that many openly and unashamed Homosexuals deliberatly affect a feminine accent. How in warning against this, is a sin being committed?

 

[notredame_999]

Seriously – you need to get some updated tnstruction on the nature of sin, the relationship between you and God and the difference between a loving Father and a stern judge who sits on your shoulder with a clipboard, checking off your actions in neat little columns of “venial” and “mortal” sins.

By your postings, you appear to have the understanding of a very, very young, untrained and immature (in the faith) person. If you’re at least 16, do yourself a favor and delve deeper into moral theology. There’s more to a relationship with God than what you’re describing.

The apostles creed states that Jesus will come again, to judge the living and the dead. He himself said so in the scriptures. Seems pretty black and white to me.