S
Sir_Knight
Guest
And salvation to you is a set of strict rules which must be followed exactly or they will not work. That’s not what Jesus taught.
- Status
D
Dauphin
Guest
It’s not what I’m proposing either.
S
Sir_Knight
Guest
Then please clarify your position.
D
Dauphin
Guest
I’ve made myself perfectly clear. Just read through my posts again.
K
krissy343
Guest
Wow! Now I’m even more confused than I was in the beginning! Off to “Ask an Apologist”. Thanks for trying guys…
S
Sir_Knight
Guest
You made yourself so “clear” that’s why I and others …
*
… are confused by your reply
T
thistle
Guest
Actually its not prudent. It is required. An act of perfect contrition must be followed by getting to Confession as soon as possible thereafter. The act of perfect contrition simply means that should the person die before getting to Confession their sins would be forgiven.
J
Joysong
Guest
Gen. 3:1 Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the Lord God had made. The serpent asked the woman, “Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?”
And thus we have the first temptation in scripture and the resultant fall of man.
NOTE WELL, friends, that the serpent’s attack was to cast doubt in the mind of the woman.
"Did God really …
It is my belief that the same cunning and insidious evil is being perpetrated today whenever someone delivers the same temptation to doubt, causing a fall from belief and trust in those whom God appoints as His ministers to carry on the work of salvation. And they may be doing it without full knowledge of the deceit or evil underpinning their words.
Did the priest ***really *** … absolve you?
Was this really valid?
What if the priest did not really have the right intention to do as the Church does? [And WHO can know his intention?]
Is this or that action of my priest really an abuse?
We can make ourselves absolutely ill from worry and destroy the Church from within by casting doubt on the very ministers of God’s sanctifying grace. It is an evil that is so cunning as to be unnoticed by the great majority.
There is ONE truth, and it subsists in the Church. Do not listen to this propaganda, for many trolls infiltrate Catholic forums …especially! They wear sheep’s clothing and have ambitions to destroy our faith in the sacraments and Her ministers.
And thus we have the first temptation in scripture and the resultant fall of man.
NOTE WELL, friends, that the serpent’s attack was to cast doubt in the mind of the woman.
"Did God really …
It is my belief that the same cunning and insidious evil is being perpetrated today whenever someone delivers the same temptation to doubt, causing a fall from belief and trust in those whom God appoints as His ministers to carry on the work of salvation. And they may be doing it without full knowledge of the deceit or evil underpinning their words.
Did the priest ***really *** … absolve you?
Was this really valid?
What if the priest did not really have the right intention to do as the Church does? [And WHO can know his intention?]
Is this or that action of my priest really an abuse?
We can make ourselves absolutely ill from worry and destroy the Church from within by casting doubt on the very ministers of God’s sanctifying grace. It is an evil that is so cunning as to be unnoticed by the great majority.
There is ONE truth, and it subsists in the Church. Do not listen to this propaganda, for many trolls infiltrate Catholic forums …especially! They wear sheep’s clothing and have ambitions to destroy our faith in the sacraments and Her ministers.
S
Spirithound
Guest
Hi Krissy, the absolution you received in the later confession would have absolved your previous sins, if they had not already been forgiven.
Perfect contrition must be followed either by death or a sacramental confession, otherwise it’s another sin, probably presuming on God’s mercy.
S
Sir_Knight
Guest
Exactly. Have faith in our church and do not second guess those that the church appoints to minister to us.
B
bilop
Guest
Krissy,
Remember that even if you weren’t properly absolved at that one confession, in any subsequent confession, the absolution would have forgiven all those sins.
Absolution forgives ALL sins except those you intentionally withhold. Since you believed those old sins to be absolved, you weren’t withholding anything, and any unabsolved sins would have been forgiven.
God Bless
D
Dauphin
Guest
I present a case based on what the Church actually teaches, and you compare me to Satan. Based on your argument, the Church is Satanic by insisting on certain forms for baptism and the Eucharist. According to you, the Pope and Bishops are really just serpents whispering doubts into the ears of us poor laity. It’s complete nonsense, based on absurd reasoning and grave ignorance of Catholic theology.
The reason that you resort to this is that you have no reasoned refutation to what I’ve said.
We must have our sins sacramentally absolved. It isn’t one option among many.
D
Dauphin
Guest
They’re thrown off by the deceptions and empty arguments thrown up by you and others. What I’ve presented has been entirely clear, to anyone who cares to examine it honestly.You made yourself so “clear” that’s why I and others …
… are confused by your reply
D
Dauphin
Guest
What an incredible statement. The Church teaches that a form is needed for sacramental absolution. Acting on this teaching is an expression of faith in the Church.
Can your arguments get any more vacuous??
J
Joysong
Guest
Let’s review your posts, as you suggested.
:
but I was really thrown off by this brand new prayer he had invented.
Was I wrong to be so insistent on the proper formula of absolution? What would you have done?
“Something like?” Obviously you did not remember the exact words, so there is a probability of error. “Invented” the prayer? You know this to be a fact, when you cannot even remember the priest’s exact words?
There was absolutely no question in your original post asking for help “to discover the Church’s teaching on the validity of absolution.” You use doubletalk. In fact there is no evidence of inquiry in any of your posts, but rather a firm decision that the priest was wrong. Read your words, please. Looks like a definite judgment to me and anyone else with ability to read.
Speaking of ability to read, you want us to believe you heard the priest correctly, even though your words were “something like” … when you cannot even read correctly a statement elsewhere. Observe.
Dauphin: I think the argument is that faculties are revoked automatically if the illicit form is used, rendering the confession invalid.
Joysong: Where did you read THAT!?
Dauphin: … in the Catholic Encyclopedia article on absolution.
Joysong, from the C.E.'s words: Some, not pronouncing judgment on the real merits of the case, think that the Holy See has withdrawn faculties from those who do not use the indicative form, but in the absence of positive ordinance this is by no means certain.
You undeniably stretched the true wording of the C.E. to fit your opinion, that faculties are automatically revoked, which meant that subsequent confessions to this priest are all invalid, in your humble 20-year-old opinion. Talk about pontificating! coming from such a young one with no formal theological studies whatsoever, and advising an entire forum of members whose salvation may hinge on your misinformation, not only in this instance above, but all throughout your posts on confession.
Clearly, you never changed your mind from your original post, as you stated this multiple times, indicating your firm judgment had already been made, and no advice is wanted.
Here’s a good post you apparently chose to ignore:
So now the question is,
Did the bishop really say …
Was he really an orthodox bishop?
Did this poster really report what the bishop said?
Do you see how the mind works when doubt is rampant, as it is with your thinking, Dauphin? Nothing will satisfy you. Your mind is made up. I will no longer respond to you, as your mind is completely closed.
D
Dauphin
Guest
I remember with absolute certainty that his words were not a licit form.
I’m talking about my intent, and I’m the only one who knows my intent. My intent in posting this thread was to learn more about the Church’s teaching on the validity of sacramental absolution.
The topic has been discussed, and I’ve joined in the discussion, so to say that it doesn’t come up in posts is evidence that you haven’t read this thread.
Your argument is absurd. I have absolute certainty that the form was not licit.
[Edited] My words were not a stretch of what the Catholic Encyclopedia said.
If the faculties are not revoked automatically (according to that argument), then when are they revoked? The next day? The week before? I simply presented the argument as I interpreted it. [Edited]
The fact that uncertainty exists about the validity more than validates the fact that I looked for licit absolution.
It’s your arguments which risk peoples’ salvation, and which trivialize the sacrament.
My position has been entirely consistent.
This is complete nonsense. I looked for valid sacramental confession. You would have me treat confession like a game.
Please give up. This is one of the most absurd and poorly argued posts I’ve encountered on these forums. It’s almost embarrassing to have to refute you.
This is a matter of credible doubt of valid absolution. It’s a matter of exercising my right to a valid confession. You are 100% incorrect on everything you’ve said on this thread. Your ignorance of Catholic doctrine and discipline is stunning. You’re presenting a faith which simply isn’t Catholic.
[Edited]
J
Jean_Anthony
Guest
Please keep the discussion civil and charitable. Thank you all.
S
Sir_Knight
Guest
First you accused me of comparing you to the pharisies when I made no such comparison and now you accuse somebody else of comparing you to Satan when, again, no such comparison was made.
Given your habit of jumping to invalid conclusions, the accuracy of what happened in your confession is placed in serious doubt.
S
Sir_Knight
Guest
You offer up conflicting comments. Refuse to clarify them when asked and when others also express confusion over what it going on, you place the blame on somebody else. Again, your creditability is being placed in serious question.
S
Sir_Knight
Guest
And what makes your more qualified to make this determination than a priest? As I’ve said repeatedly, the shepard does not answer to the sheep.
We need to stand in solidarity with our priests because without them, there would be no church.
- Status