Is this a blantant lie and/or should this priest be repremanded

[Micael]

A poster stated that she left the Church when a priest told her it would take $350 to have her sins forgiven.

Could this have some validity, did it ever occur in Catholic history?

Is it or was it ever acceptable?

If it is unacceptable what should the parishoner do to report such an incedent?

 

[Church_Militant]

If (as you can see that’s a mighty big “if”) that is true then she should report it to the bishop. There is never a charge or stipend for confession.

There may have been some bad priests somewhere at some point who may have pulled something like that, but it has never been the teaching and practice of the Catholic Church. To be honest, it sounds more like the usual anti-Catholic rhetoric and allegations to me.

 

[Wisdom]

Micael:

A poster stated that she left the Church when a priest told her it would take $350 to have her sins forgiven.

Could this have some validity, did it ever occur in Catholic history?

Is it or was it ever acceptable?

If it is unacceptable what should the parishoner do to report such an incedent?

Probably a blatant lie I suspect such abuses might have possible 500 years ago and unless this person is 520 years old they are full of it.
I mean anything is possible but why not go to another priest who will forgive your sins for free if that is the case? That is why this makes no sense its not like you don’t have options on these type of things nowadays you may be one crazy priest but all of them in one dioceese? Hardly possible. A parishoner should report such a thing but as I think this person is lying I wouldn’t do it on behalf on that person which brings to the question as to why this person did not report the priest to a bishop whom the priest should answer to? Could it be because such an invent never happened.

 

[Palamite]

Micael,

A poster stated that she left the Church when a priest told her it would take $350 to have her sins forgiven.

I’ve never in my life heard of a Roman Catholic priest expecting a stipend for hearing a confession, let alone something as outrageous as a few hundred dollars.

I suspect this person was leaving something out (or otherwise not speaking accurately), or was in fact simply lying.

 

[VociMike]

When I read this I immediately thought of getting an annulment. I know that fees are (usually?) charged for processing an annulment (to pay for the time and research involved), and that an annulment is necessary if the person has remarried and wants to live with their new spouse not in adultery. So, by a very long stretch, that is the one interpretation I could imagine, though it is quite wrong to say that money is being charged to forgive sins. An annulment has nothing to do with forgiveness of sin.

 

[Orionthehunter]

This is absolutely prohibited. If it happened (I’m very skeptical), this Priest should have been reported.

From the Catechism:

2121 Simony is defined as the buying or selling of spiritual things. To Simon the magician, who wanted to buy the spiritual power he saw at work in the apostles, St. Peter responded: “Your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain God’s gift with money!” Peter thus held to the words of Jesus: “You received without pay, give without pay.” It is impossible to appropriate to oneself spiritual goods and behave toward them as their owner or master, for they have their source in God. One can receive them only from him, without payment.

2122 “The minister should ask nothing for the administration of the sacraments beyond the offerings defined by the competent authority, always being careful that the needy are not deprived of the help of the sacraments because of their poverty.” The competent authority determines these “offerings” in accordance with the principle that the Christian people ought to contribute to the support of the Church’s ministers. “The laborer deserves his food.”

However, please don’t confuse stipends agreed to by the Bishop like so much for a Mass to be said (I think it is $5 or $10 in our diocese and we use the money for Liturgical “luxuries” like new vestments for the Priests or decorations) or weddings (which is essentially to cover expenses). In both cases, the local priest is given the authority to waive the stipend if they are a hardship.

Also, don’t confuse simony w/ penance as in the form of restitution for theft or told to make a sacrificial gift in the poor box. I hope this isn’t a breach of the seal of the confessional (I’m not a Priest) so I don’t even know what applies to me but I remember that my penance for stealing a pack of baseball cards was to take $.50 (I think that was the amount) to the drug store owner and tell him what I did) and give another $.50 in the poor box. Father knew what to require becuase he first asked me what my weekly allowance was ($1). He knew how to make it hurt!!! Trust me, I was damn contrite.

 

[Brendan]

VociMike:

When I read this I immediately thought of getting an annulment. .

that was my first thought as well.

If a person was re-married without having her first ‘marriage’ annulled, then that person would be committing the sin of adultery.

The priest cannot absolve that person unless they have repented of their sin and have the intent not to commit it again.

So a person in such a state would have 2 options if they wish to be absolved.

1. Attempt to obtain an annulment, there usually are fees to cover expenses, but are waived in cases of financial hardship
2. Cease having marital relations with the current spouse and live together as ‘brother and sister’

I wonder if that was the case.

 

[Lazerlike42]

Maybe the priest was kidding, and the person was looking for an excuse. I know a priest and a deacon (they don’t know one another) who sometimes when they do certain services they’ll say, “$50 please,” but they are certainly kidding and usually say so before you even have the chance to reply.

 

[Kotton]

Micael:

A poster stated that she left the Church when a priest told her it would take $350 to have her sins forgiven.

Does this ever bring back memories of one very long debate on MB’s about six years ago. This woman claimed just that, and said she contacted about three priests who all told her the same thing. Some very knowledgable and orthodox Catholics spent a lot time explaining things to her. She remained ADAMANT in her belief and still holds to it, being very anti-Catholic in her posting today.

Brendan:

When I read this I immediately thought of getting an annulment.

that was my first thought as well.

And this was the question then as well, but she said she had never been married. She did have three children out of wedlock, and said she confessed this. However, every Catholic who has a discussion with her realizes, ‘we don’t know the rest of the story’.

The priest cannot absolve that person unless they have repented of their sin and have the intent not to commit it again.

She claimed she repented but they still wanted money for ‘the unforgivable sin’ of having children without being maried.

So a person in such a state would have 2 options if they wish to be absolved.

1. Attempt to obtain an annulment, there usually are fees to cover expenses, but are waived in cases of financial hardship

1. Cease having marital relations with the current spouse and live together as ‘brother and sister’

I wonder if that was the case.

Something of the kind has to be the reason, but without all the info it remains speculation.

Kotton

 

[BlestOne]

VociMike:

When I read this I immediately thought of getting an annulment. I know that fees are (usually?) charged for processing an annulment (to pay for the time and research involved), and that an annulment is necessary if the person has remarried and wants to live with their new spouse not in adultery. So, by a very long stretch, that is the one interpretation I could imagine, though it is quite wrong to say that money is being charged to forgive sins. An annulment has nothing to do with forgiveness of sin.

This is exactly what I thought of first too! When my husband got an annulment he had to pay for the counselling session (about $300) to assess his pevious marriage. When he lost his job at that same time, we notified the diocean office that was handling this and they waived it for him. When he got back on his feet, he sent them the money and a note of thanks for their generosity.
I would prefer to think that the poster was confused and not just being snarky or anti-catholic, but hey, I have been wrong many times before!

 

[Ignatius]

Micael:

A poster stated that she left the Church when a priest told her it would take $350 to have her sins forgiven.

Without having the ability to investigate the accusation, it would be hard to determine on this forum. The parishoner should absolutely report the incident is there is even a shred of truth to it.

 

[shannin]

**If **it really did happen he/she should have reported it to the Bishop instead of posting in here.

My hunch is that this is just more exageration and distortion directed towards the Church

 

[ChristsSoldier]

What if the person’s sin was stealing $350.00 from the offertory and it was in her pocket?
Peace,
CS

 

[BryPGuy89]

Micael:

A poster stated that she left the Church when a priest told her it would take $350 to have her sins forgiven.

Could this have some validity, did it ever occur in Catholic history?

Is it or was it ever acceptable?

If it is unacceptable what should the parishoner do to report such an incedent?

When and were did this happen for starters?

The Church did have some very corrupt officials in the past and still today there are some, so it is possible it might have happened.

Not sure if ever exceptible, doubt it though.

Go to bishop, or go to another priest, or someone else in the region in the chain of command.