Receiving absolution

[Maria3m]

I’m hoping my second guessing what my priest did isn’t from the evil one. I just need to make sure before receiving Holy Communion.

I approached my priest about receiving communion, planning to ask about making an appt for confession. He absolved me of all my past sins on the spot. I didn’t even tell him what I had done.

I feel so bad questioning it.
I just don’t know if I should receive or wait until I have a “real” confession.

TIA

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I’m hoping my second guessing what my priest did isn’t from the evil one. I just need to make sure before receiving Holy Communion.

I approached my priest about receiving communion, planning to ask about making an appt for confession. He absolved me of all my past sins on the spot. I didn’t even tell him what I had done.

I feel so bad questioning it.
I just don’t know if I should receive or wait until I have a “real” confession.

TIA

I can’t tell you what to do. But if it were me. I would realize that my sins were forgiven, however, I did not participate in the Sacrament of Reconciliation because all the elements of a Sacramental Confession were not there. I would return to receive the Sacramental graces available to me, by proper reception of the Sacrament.

 

[Maria3m]

I I would return to receive the Sacramental graces available to me

You were able to put into words what I couldn’t even put my finger on. I believed my sins were forgiven by his absolution, however I felt something was lacking…I was missing out on something.
It was supposed to be my first confession (that’s why I wanted to make an appt). My family thought it was great that he did it. After reflecting on it, it must be the graces from actually confession my sins that I want.

Thank you, Br. Rich.

 

[awalt]

This advice is wrong.

I am looking at the Code of Canon Law, and 960 and its comments specifically requires confession for absolution of mortal sins, with the exception - “Physical or moral impossibility alone excuses from such confession, in which case reconciliation may be attained by other means also.”

The notes say – "Since therefore, the integral confession of serious sins is by divine decree a constitutive part of the Sacrament, it is in no way subject to the discretion of pastors (dispensations, local customs, etc.)

This couldn’t be more clear.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

This advice is wrong.

I am looking at the Code of Canon Law, and 960 and its comments specifically requires confession for absolution of mortal sins, with the exception - “Physical or moral impossibility alone excuses from such confession, in which case reconciliation may be attained by other means also.”

The notes say – "Since therefore, the integral confession of serious sins is by divine decree a constitutive part of the Sacrament, it is in no way subject to the discretion of pastors (dispensations, local customs, etc.)

This couldn’t be more clear.

You need to be more specific as to what you find wrong with the advice. Keeping in mind that it was her intent to confess her sins and not her fault that she was prevented from doing so at the time. Why would you conclude the absolution to be invalid instead of illicit on the part of the priest. I would agree that she did not participate in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, which I do believe I stated and recomended that she return to receive the Sacrament and it’s Graces ASAP.

 

[awalt]

It was not clear from the advice that any mortal sins on her soul were not absolved by this act. IMHO I also did not think it was clear that there is no absolution of mortal sins without confession.

Why would you conclude the absolution to be invalid instead of illicit on the part of the priest

Because Canon Law says this:

…specifically requires confession for absolution of mortal sins…

I am not a Canon Lawyer but that seems to be invalid not illicit. Whatever you call it, mortal sin is still on the soul and that’s important to know, right? Worth taking a chance on in our advice?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

It was not clear from the advice that any mortal sins on her soul were not absolved by this act. IMHO I also did not think it was clear that there is no absolution of mortal sins without confession.

Because Canon Law says this:

…specifically requires confession for absolution of mortal sins…

I am not a Canon Lawyer but that seems to be invalid not illicit. Whatever you call it, mortal sin is still on the soul and that’s important to know, right? Worth taking a chance on in our advice?

None of us can judge another’s soul or limit God’s ability to act outside the Sacraments. Our sins are forgiven when we are sorry (contrite) for them and ask for God’s forgiveness and are prevented from participating in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, such as by sudden death. Which she was by the priests action. As I suggested if it were me, I would return to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation ASAP and to receive it’s graces. However I would rest assured in God’s mercy tonight, since my inability to make a Sacramental Confession was outside of my control.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Because Canon Law says this:

…specifically requires confession for absolution of mortal sins…

I am not a Canon Lawyer but that seems to be invalid not illicit. Whatever you call it, mortal sin is still on the soul and that’s important to know, right? Worth taking a chance on in our advice?

I’ve had priests stop me and give me absolution before I had a chance to confess everything. Are you saying that I’m still walking around with those unconfessed mortal sins?

I’m not looking to disagree with you – just looking for further clarafication.

I’m not even sure if I remember all of them and couldn’t confess them even if I had to.

 

[awalt]

I am not a Canon Lawyer but I know what I read, and it sounds pretty clear. While through God’s mercy we may have been forgiven somehow that is not explicitly stated here, this Canon Law seems VERY CLEAR. I would NEVER take a chance on this, I would go to confession if in doubt - it’s just not worth risking our immortal souls!

If it was me, I would go to confession, tell the Priest that I have had 1 or more absolutions without confessing, and they included several mortal sins that I may or may not remember. That is a confession, and the priest will likely take it from there.

One time I remembered an old mortal sin that I never confessed, and I told the Priest that. I also said I feared I had others not confessed, that I remembered back then but not now. He said Jesus wants us looking forward and not back, that was ample confession enough for him, time to move on. So I still think given such explicit statements in the Canon it is VERY wise to go to confession about any possible mortal sins.

My .02

 

[TomS]

This happened to me a while ago. I asked the priest to hear my confession and he said he didn’t have the time but he would give me absolution, so he recited the formula of absolution over me. I was shook up and the next time I went to confession I brought it up and specifically asked if my previous confession counts. He said that it did. My advice would be to consider yourself forgiven and go to confession (the regular way) at your earliest convenience.

The Lord knows what is in our heart and He knows our sorrow and contrition.

Tom

 

[asquared]

you were absolved of all your sins, with the understanding that you would go to confession and confess them all at the earliest opportunity. the priest did this so you could receive communion, as he probably did not have time for a full confession at that moment.

nobody here on this forum has the authority to second guess any priest in matters for confession.