Rwoehmke - Many thanks for your post and please forgive me (especially Easterjoy) if I come over as belligerent. My sincere apologies. Many, many years of fighting my clients’ corners in criminal courts have left me with an aggressive attitude to most things. One day, instead of some weak, wishy-washy self promoting, self important, failure in private practise, cowardly, politically correct judge: the police, who make it up as they go along, will be judged by the one true judge, for perjury and that will be well worth watching!!! That being said brother, when you say – “The forgiveness of mortal sin when one deals directly with God is not as sure as one can be in the confessional as only God can judge the degree of our “perfect contrition.” - Then, frankly in my humble opinion (I don’t mean that sarcastically) that simply does not make sense. If only God can judge the degree of our perfect contrition (and I agree that is completely correct) and the priest cannot, then how is our forgiveness any more sure when confession is made to a priest as, by your own admission only God knows the reality of our confession? Our contrition is a matter for us, not anyone else. It is our soul, and yes, we should be very, very careful that our contrition is complete and only God knows if it is. But, in the hour of us passing from this life, I doubt we would be stupid enough to lie to either God or ourselves. What is the point?
This is what I meant by “magical” powers. Yes the Priest undoubtedly has the power to forgive, standing as he does in persona Christi, but he is not a mind reader and so is no better equipped to know if we are truly sorry than we are. In fact, if we examine our conscience properly, we are in the better position to know. Although I would agree that we come close to Christ in the sacrament of penance, we also come close to Christ when on our knees with a contrite heart pleading for his forgiveness. I keep on saying I’m not knocking confession. I go to confession, but it is not the only way by which we can be forgiven.
Further, your statement that one can be imperfectly sorry and be absolved, what’s that all about? You’re either sorry or you’re not. If you’re not then there’s no absolution. if you are and repent, with the intention of not committing the sin again you are absolved.
Quiet 52 you state - This is NOT the priest’s “magic” – through Holy Orders, he is ordained to do these things – I agree entirely and hope my explanation above about what I meant by magic clears things up for you. Of course through Holy Orders the priest baptises (confirms in some circumstances) absolves, offers the mass etc.
However when you state - “He (the priest) is God’s instrument – incidentally, no matter how sinful he may personally be.” – then I’m going to come out and say that I don’t agree with that assertion. Please don’t think I’m being naïve or don’t understand the argument as it has been presented over the centuries. I understand Luther supported this argument, but in all conscience, as a fellow lawyer, I don’t. Yes a priest can be sinful (he’s human) and get up to all sorts of personal mischief and still may remain God’s instrument, standing in persona Christi.
To use the words of EasterJoy – with which I agree – “Through fidelity to his priestly office however he (the priest) does have the power to forgive sins. This is a gift that does not come from his own personal holiness, but from the one perfect Priesthood of Jesus Christ, of which he is a minister.” But - also to use the words of Easterjoy, with which I also concur - “The mark of baptism may not be removed from you, but you are perfectly capable of removing yourself from the truth into which you were baptized.
Amen to that! It is not from his personal holiness his (the priest’s) power comes, but to say, as you do – “the priest is God’s instrument …. NO MATTER HOW SINFUL HE MAY BE”, is in my opinion misguided and only adhered to because it is thought, how else is one able to be sure that the priest is fit to absolve? So it is forced upon those holding this utterly untenable postion and one which conflicts with the ideas of holiness and sanctification of the priesthood as taught in scripture, to assert that no matter what evil this priest does, even if he is an abonination and a slave of satan, until he has been discovered, by the justice system or whoever, he is always able to act “in persona Christi”.
In my view this is nothing short of blasphemy and the fact that there is a difficulty about this vital matter does not mean we simply adopt an untenable position. Surely, if a priest shows no fidelity, and is utterly unfaithful to his priestly office apart from going through the motions, and sins to the extent he involves himself in heinous sin such as paedophilia, or devil worship, or some such great evil, then surely he no longer stands in persona Christi as he effectually turns his back on his ordination, and even excommunicates himself from Christ’s Church, and I would submit he cannot be said to be acting in persona Christi. I think these forums are to examine truthfully the concerns we have and I frankly do not believe that such a priest as outlined above, carrying out evil acts would be used by the Holy Spirit to test people’s state of contrition, offer advice, help and absolve them from sin when he has so clearly turned his back on his Faith.
I go to my own confessor (lpriest) and confess, but I also confess to God almighty who sent his son to die on the cross on my behalf and I know he hears me.
Further , Quiet 52, you state - . Count your blessings, Jimmy, in the early days of the church, people confessed their mortal sins out loud, publicly (and the priest, the Lord’s agent, loosed or bound them)" So, why do we now have private confession, and the unbreakable seal of the confessional?
God bless Benedict XV!
JTG’S
