K
Kansasdad
Guest
I was asked by a protestant, what would be a circumstance where a priest would hear a confession but hold the sins bound. Can anyone give me a good answer for him.
Thanks,
Kansas Dad
Thanks,
Kansas Dad
- Status
R
ralphinal
Guest
If the person refused to be sorry. If there was an issue of “making reporations” that the person refused to do.
A big reason is if there is no firm purpose of amendment. For example, a man having an affair will not stop.
D
d_floyd77
Guest
If the person was refusing to be sorry why would he/she have went to confession?
R
ralphinal
Guest
I added no purpose of amendment, too.
They might want to get it off of their chest. There are some people who know that it is a sin to do something, but will not say that they are sorry for doing it, but they want forgiveness from God.
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
There are folks who are in a sinful state, for instance having an affair who goto confession weekly or something so they didnt go to hell - in their minds - but they would intend to keep up the sin… in other words they don’t plan on changing at all, just on going to confession for some misubderstood reason.
R
ralphinal
Guest
And if the priest finds this out, he can refuse absolution
J
jmcrae
Guest
One of the most common examples is when a couple is living together without the benefit of being in a valid marriage, either because they didn’t receive a Declaration of Nullity for a previous marriage, or for reasons relating to finances and convenience.
These can’t be absolved of their sins until they stop living together.
R
ralphinal
Guest
Note that none of these are permanant conditions…all could be fixed and then absolution can be given
D
d_floyd77
Guest
I read that Padre Pio would often not grant absolution because he could read the penitent’s soul and tell if they were truly sorry or not.
A
AHapka
Guest
Because I’m in the wedding party and need to receive communion tomorrow. It’ll look weird if I don’t. And no, I’m not moving out or stopping having sex with my girlfriend.
U
ufamtobie
Guest
Hi there AHapka,
What looks weird to Jesus, is that you are puting your girlfriend ahead of him.
It’s not what you or I think cause we can’t judge but there is one who will judge and when you are in front of him, it will be too late to find a priest.
Ufamtobie
A
AHapka
Guest
Umm…I hope I didn’t come across as saying that that’s something I actually said. It was actually something I came across on Dr. Italy, on his talk of “Who Needs Confession.”
I was merely attempting to provide to d_floyd77 a possible instance where someone would confess where they were not really sorry.
Trust me, I stood up for Jesus when me and my wife had the debate about ABC and she almost divorced me over it (me being against it).
P
Paul2274
Guest
Stay-at-Home Dad of 3… is me!
Well I found this in the CCC
1463 Certain particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place or priests authorized by them. In danger of death any priest, even if deprived of faculties for hearing confessions, can absolve from every sin and excommunication.
This is in the Code of Cannon Law
***Can. 982 ***A person who confesses to having falsely denounced to ecclesiastical authority a confessor innocent of the crime of solicitation to a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue, is not to be absolved unless that person has first formally withdrawn the false denunciation and is prepared to make good whatever harm may have been done.
Can. 987 In order that the faithful may receive the saving remedy of the sacrament of penance, they must be so disposed that, repudiating the sins they have committed and having the purpose of amending their lives, they turn back to God.
I know that the main thing is that you are to have true contrition for the sins you have commited and confessed. It is also to be your intent not commit those sins again and to avoid the occasion of all sin. But, we are human and we will fall again.
I hope this helps a little.
Paul
Well I found this in the CCC
1463 Certain particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place or priests authorized by them. In danger of death any priest, even if deprived of faculties for hearing confessions, can absolve from every sin and excommunication.
This is in the Code of Cannon Law
***Can. 982 ***A person who confesses to having falsely denounced to ecclesiastical authority a confessor innocent of the crime of solicitation to a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue, is not to be absolved unless that person has first formally withdrawn the false denunciation and is prepared to make good whatever harm may have been done.
Can. 987 In order that the faithful may receive the saving remedy of the sacrament of penance, they must be so disposed that, repudiating the sins they have committed and having the purpose of amending their lives, they turn back to God.
I know that the main thing is that you are to have true contrition for the sins you have commited and confessed. It is also to be your intent not commit those sins again and to avoid the occasion of all sin. But, we are human and we will fall again.
I hope this helps a little.
Paul
K
Kansasdad
Guest
thanks gang. I gave him some of those examples and it made perfect sense to him 
I appreciate your help
God Bless,
K.D.
I appreciate your help
God Bless,
K.D.
J
Jennifer_G
Guest
Well, if they said something like, “I got back at so-and-so because they deserved it and I’d do it again!”, that would be one reason.
Also, if the person is living in a constant state of sin (i.e., invalid marriage, or never got a previous marriage annulled), then the confession is stopped there until the person can correct that situation.
H
HouseArrest
Guest
I got it the way you meant it. Just FYI
M
MCL
Guest
I can remember once a friend of the family being furious that the priest would not absolve him. The reason: incomplete examination of conscience. The penitent confessed to using the Lord’s name in vain. When asked to clarify the frequency (remember having to give number of times the offense was committed?), the penitent wouldn’t/couldn’t give a number. The priest asked him to prayerfully reflect on how serious the sin was and return when the penitent could answer as to frequency.
D
DL82
Guest
At the risk of hijacking this thread, is the confessor allowed to bring up something said OUTSIDE confession INSIDE the confessional?
For example, if the priest saw someone commit blasphemy, or if his wife came and confessed that they had both agreed to use contraception, and the person didn’t confess to it, would the priest be allowed to refuse absolution, based on the knowledge that a mortal sin had been ommitted? Would he at least be allowed to prompt the penitent - ‘are you sure these are all the sins you can remember, including all the sins against the 6th commandment?’ for example.
For example, if the priest saw someone commit blasphemy, or if his wife came and confessed that they had both agreed to use contraception, and the person didn’t confess to it, would the priest be allowed to refuse absolution, based on the knowledge that a mortal sin had been ommitted? Would he at least be allowed to prompt the penitent - ‘are you sure these are all the sins you can remember, including all the sins against the 6th commandment?’ for example.
R
ralphinal
Guest
This one is a little more complicated. Let us start with “What if the preist knew of a sin that was not confessed because he saw it committed?” Yes, he can prompt for it. Most good confessors do, anyway. He can even mention that he saw it committed and ask about it. If the person still refuses to confess, he can with hold absolution, I think.
Now, if a wife confesses something that she and her husband were involved in, the priest cannot bring it up. It is covered by the seal of the confessional. The priest cannot bring it up. I would say that he cannot even hint at it. Now, there is never anything wrong with reminding someone that intentionally omitting a sin invalidates the confession.
B
BamaRider
Guest
I would think stealing might be grounds for withholding absolution. I can see a confessor instructing a penitent, to make things right to best of his ability before absoultion could be granted.
Meaning the penitent in question must return to the person/company he stole from to make amends, which could be the return of the item, restition, or just forgiveness from the person wronged.
But I don’t know enough to know if that is correct or not, but it would be consistent. If a guy stole his neighbor’s weed eater I don’t know how you get absoultion without going back to fix things. Along those lines, I don’t know if returning the weed eater annoymously, is the same as ringing his doorbell and coming clean. Someone marter than me would have to answer that.
My guess is a penitent would have to return to the confessional after making things right, to receive God’s mercy.
Meaning the penitent in question must return to the person/company he stole from to make amends, which could be the return of the item, restition, or just forgiveness from the person wronged.
But I don’t know enough to know if that is correct or not, but it would be consistent. If a guy stole his neighbor’s weed eater I don’t know how you get absoultion without going back to fix things. Along those lines, I don’t know if returning the weed eater annoymously, is the same as ringing his doorbell and coming clean. Someone marter than me would have to answer that.
My guess is a penitent would have to return to the confessional after making things right, to receive God’s mercy.
- Status