SPLIT: If confirmed in mortal sin does one need to be reconfirmed?

[SilverCamellia]

Perhaps the priest in this case has valid reasons to believe that these particular candidates were not capable of full knowledge, and/or full consent to grave matter prior to their journey in RCIA.

We have been taught the difference between mortal sins and grave sins. We have been told that we need the sacrament of confession to confess our sins to Christ. We were told that we need to confess mortal sins before receiving the Eucharist. Why this would be different before we are confirmed, I don’t know - too many time constraints for him perhaps? I believe I am not making a mistake over us confessing after First Communion, rather than before, because it has been mentioned several times over a few weeks.

Now I am not saying that I know loads more than my fellow candidates, but I have been reading this website for a while and I know that we are not supposed to receive Communion while in a state of sin, because of that phrase somewhere in the NT which says (paraphrasing) that we would eat and drink condemnation on ourselves. Because I know this, I would be guilty of this, but I think the other candidates, if they aren’t aware of this, would not be culpable of a sin. But it says it in the Bible and that is why I have got confused over it. Our priest is otherwise ‘orthodox’ in his teaching ie not going against the Bible or Catholic traditions. So perhaps he knows of some acceptable reason for this?

 

[Zekariya]

1. What is necessary to receive Holy Communion worthily?

To receive Holy Communion worthily it is necessary to be free from mortal sin, to have a right intention and to obey the Church’s laws on the fast required before Holy Communion out of reverence for the body and blood of Our Divine Lord. However, these are some cases in which Holy Communion may be received without fasting.

(a) Venial sin does not make us unworthy of receiving Holy Communion; but it does prevent us from receiving the more abundant graces and blessings which we would otherwise receive from Holy Communion.

Source: ewtn.com/faith/teachings/euchb2a.htm
(Modified slightly from The Baltimore Catechism, Lesson 28)

 

[Bookcat]

We have been taught the difference between mortal sins and grave sins.

Note: grave sins and mortal sins are the same thing. They are synonyms.

Sometimes one can get the impression that such is a distinction or some may mis-speak regarding such. But they are synonyms.

What was meant was one can do something that is a “grave matter” but without the needed knowledge and consent --and thus it be a venial sin.

One can say such and such is a mortal sin (grave sin) but due to the lack complete consent I did not commit a Mortal (grave) sin.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Here is an excerpt from the RCIA text as adapted for the United States. I don’t know if the UK offers the same adaptation.

1. If the profession of faith and reception take place within Mass, the candidate, according to his or her own conscience, should make a confession of sins beforehand, first informing the confessor that he or she is about to be received into full communion. Any confessor who is lawfully approved may hear the candidate’s confession.

And from the National Statutes for the Catechumenate (which is definitely for the US):

1. The celebration of the sacrament of reconciliation with candidates for confirmation and eucharist is to be carried out at a time prior to and distinct from the celebration of confirmation and the eucharist. As part of the formation of such candidates, they should be encouraged in the frequent celebration of this sacrament.

Paragraph 36 in the National Statutes appears to duplicate paragraph 27.

 

[SilverCamellia]

Note: grave sins and mortal sins are the same thing. They are synonyms.

Sometimes one can get the impression that such is a distinction or some may mis-speak regarding such. But they are synonyms.

What was meant was one can do something that is a “grave matter” but without the needed knowledge and consent --and thus it be a venial sin.

One can say such and such is a mortal sin (grave sin) but due to the lack complete consent I did not commit a Mortal (grave) sin.

Oops, you are right! I meant to say mortal and venial sins rather than mortal and grave and now it is too late to edit my post but thank you for pointing it out.

 

[triumphguy]

We have been taught the difference between mortal sins and grave sins. We have been told that we need the sacrament of confession to confess our sins to Christ. We were told that we need to confess mortal sins before receiving the Eucharist. Why this would be different before we are confirmed, I don’t know - too many time constraints for him perhaps? I believe I am not making a mistake over us confessing after First Communion, rather than before, because it has been mentioned several times over a few weeks.

Now I am not saying that I know loads more than my fellow candidates, but I have been reading this website for a while and I know that we are not supposed to receive Communion while in a state of sin, because of that phrase somewhere in the NT which says (paraphrasing) that we would eat and drink condemnation on ourselves. Because I know this, I would be guilty of this, but I think the other candidates, if they aren’t aware of this, would not be culpable of a sin. But it says it in the Bible and that is why I have got confused over it. Our priest is otherwise ‘orthodox’ in his teaching ie not going against the Bible or Catholic traditions. So perhaps he knows of some acceptable reason for this?

If you were a Catholic and you are coming home, AND you specifically know of some mortal sins, then go to confession. No priest will refuse you - just say that you have been away for x amount of time.

Now, the Blue Book - “The Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults” says this on page 303.

In the case of the baptized who have completed a period of formation and are ready to complete their initiation, the sacrament of penance may occupy a place similar to the sacrament of baptism for he elect.

Candidates are encouraged, according to their individual consciences, to make a confession of sins before being received into full communion or completing their initiation.

 

[triumphguy]

I said, “If…” and “Hopefully, this is just a miscommunication.”

I was probably overacting - which is unusual since I don’t usually overract on forums

 

[Bookcat]

Oops, you are right! I meant to say mortal and venial sins rather than mortal and grave and now it is too late to edit my post but thank you for pointing it out.

I noted it cause some do get confused on this subject and think they are different…

 

[Bookcat]

Again there is a large misunderstanding here.

Catechism:

1310 To receive Confirmation one must be in a state of grace. One should receive the sacrament of Penance in order to be cleansed for the gift of the Holy Spirit. More intense prayer should prepare one to receive the strength and graces of the Holy Spirit with docility and readiness to act.128

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a2.htm#III

One may refer him to the Catechism.

 

[revert_jen]

We have been taught the difference between mortal sins and grave sins. We have been told that we need the sacrament of confession to confess our sins to Christ. We were told that we need to confess mortal sins before receiving the Eucharist.

This is all true, and I’m glad people are being taught it.

Why this would be different before we are confirmed, I don’t know - too many time constraints for him perhaps?

Confirmation is not the Eucharist. But in any case, it is possible to receive the Eucharist even in a state of mortal sin. The Eucharist does not stop being Jesus Christ just because we are in a state of mortal sin. That is why it is a sacrilege to do it.

The canon law for Confirmation says this:
"Code of Canon Law:

Can. 889 §1. Every baptized person not yet confirmed and only such a person is capable of receiving confirmation.

§2. To receive confirmation licitly outside the danger of death requires that a person who has the use of reason be suitably instructed, properly disposed, and able to renew the baptismal promises.

#1 says what is necessary for confirmation to be valid.
#2 says what is necessary for confirmation to be licit.

So you should not be confirmed if you are not in a state of grace, just like you should not receive the Eucharist if you are not in a state of grace. But you can do both. You would just need to confess it, because doing so (knowingly) is a mortal sin.

But if you think about it, it would be very difficult if this were not the case. Confirmation is like Matrimony and Holy Orders in that they all are indelible sacraments that it is possible to receive in a state of mortal sin. If that made the sacraments invalid, how would you ever know you were married? Even if you can be 100% sure that you were in a state of grace, you cannot likewise be 100% sure of your spouse.

And how could you possibly know for 100% sure that your priest was in a state of grace at his ordination? You couldn’t.

Now I am not saying that I know loads more than my fellow candidates, but I have been reading this website for a while and I know that we are not supposed to receive Communion while in a state of sin, because of that phrase somewhere in the NT which says (paraphrasing) that we would eat and drink condemnation on ourselves. Because I know this, I would be guilty of this, but I think the other candidates, if they aren’t aware of this, would not be culpable of a sin. But it says it in the Bible and that is why I have got confused over it. Our priest is otherwise ‘orthodox’ in his teaching ie not going against the Bible or Catholic traditions. So perhaps he knows of some acceptable reason for this?

There is no acceptable reason for encouraging people who are not near death to go to communion in a state of sin. OTOH, there is no requirement to receive the Eucharist at the Mass where you are confirmed. Plus, you said you were taught that you need to confess mortal sins before receiving the Eucharist. Weren’t the others in the class taught the same thing at the same time? NOBODY should be confirmed without knowing this. Your priest is not orthodox if he is considering confirming non-infants who don’t know this.

What is a bit trickier and perhaps less well-known (because it comes up much less often), is that it is a mortal sin to receive any of the “sacraments of the living” (Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony) in a state of mortal sin. It’s clearer in the old baltimore catechism:
Baltimore Catechism #312:

What sin does one commit who knowingly receives a sacrament of the living in mortal sin?

He who knowingly receives a sacrament of the living in mortal sin commits a mortal sin of sacrilege, because he treats a sacred thing with grave irreverence.

So, it is a mortal sin to receive Confirmation in a state of mortal sin, but it does not make the sacrament invalid.

You have the right to receive the sacrament of Confirmation licitly. You can insist on beng allowed to go to Confession first. Keep in mind that going to Confession is different from going to a counselling session or receiving spiritual direction. There are many online and published aids to examination of conscience. Use those for preparation for your first confession, so that it doesn’t take up much time, and let the priest do whatever counselling or help he likes after the sacraments, for your second confession.

–Jen

 

[Bookcat]

This is all true, and I’m glad people are being taught it.

Note

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10425745&postcount=23

 

[1ke]

Disclaimer: I am not saying you are wrong

Can you prove this? I can see the argument that if you went to confession then the priest offered absolution to you for all past sins. However, what if you intentionally misled the priest during confession?

Again, not saying you’re wrong.

The validity of confirmation is dependent upon proper form and proper matter:

Can. 880 §1. The sacrament of confirmation is conferred by the anointing of chrism on the forehead, which is done by the imposition of the hand and through the words prescribed in the approved liturgical books.

Can. 882 The ordinary minister of confirmation is a bishop; a presbyter provided with this faculty in virtue of universal law or the special grant of the competent authority also confers this sacrament validly.

If one is anointed on the forehead with chrism, receives imposition of hands, and the words are spoken by a bishop or a priest with faculties, then one is **validly **confirmed.

Being in a state of grace does not impact validity. And one who is already confirmed cannot be “reconfirmed”. Being in a state of grace (i.e. properly disposed) is a matter of **licity **only:

Can. 889 §1. Every baptized person not yet confirmed and only such a person is capable of receiving confirmation.

§2. To receive confirmation licitly outside the danger of death requires that a person who has the use of reason be suitably instructed, properly disposed, and able to renew the baptismal promises.

 

[thomasf]

I honestly don’t remember going to confession prior to confirmation when I was a kid. In fact, I only remember going to confession twice in total prior to confirmation when I was younger, and once was my first confession. When I came back to the church, the first confession I made was probably the 4th time I had ever been.

 

[revert_jen]

Note

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10425745&postcount=23

Sorry, I wasn’t reading what the post said, I was reading what the poster later said was meant.

–Jen

 

[GangGreen]

As far as I know you cannot receive ANY sacrament (except Baptism) without confessing your sins prior to doing so. I’m not exactly sure how it works if you get married or receive confirmation in a state of mortal sin. It’s an interesting question.

 

[1ke]

As far as I know you cannot receive ANY sacrament (except Baptism) without confessing your sins prior to doing so. I’m not exactly sure how it works if you get married or receive confirmation in a state of mortal sin. It’s an interesting question.

You do not receive the graces that flow from the sacrament until you have been to reconciliation. It does not impact validity.

 

[buc_fan33]

You do not receive the graces that flow from the sacrament until you have been to reconciliation. It does not impact validity.

This.

To the OP…are you SURE you’re understanding your priest correctly? If you are, then others who have already noted this are correct. He is in very serious error. But, perhaps you have misunderstood. My personal advice is to make sure you are very clear on how the process will happen in your particular parish.

My bet is that Confession will be made available to all candidates for Confirmation prior to their reception into full communion. If it is not, then I would speak, charitably, with your priest and ask him why it is being done that way.

 

[oxoSarahoxo]

This.

To the OP…are you SURE you’re understanding your priest correctly? If you are, then others who have already noted this are correct. He is in very serious error. But, perhaps you have misunderstood. My personal advice is to make sure you are very clear on how the process will happen in your particular parish.

My bet is that Confession will be made available to all candidates for Confirmation prior to their reception into full communion. If it is not, then I would speak, charitably, with your priest and ask him why it is being done that way.

I’m
Not the “OP”
I was not raised catholic.
But, I have helped bring other members of my family into the church. & led stray Catholics back… I can tell you all… You have a serious & wide spread issue here!
My mother & fiancé were not even offered their first confession before confirmation.
I was shocked and spoke up…
I was blown off by the priests
Told nah “not a big deal”
I’ve been blown off by several preists on (what i feel are) serious issues like this
When I tried to go to other parish for guidance
I didn’t realize how if you aren’t a “parishioner” they can turn you straight away
I have some nasty letters stating “we have enough people in our own parish to deal with”

I have the ability to bring ppl into the church with the guidance of the holy spirit…
But I can’t get help from the preists to straighten out some serious issues.
The things disscussed here are one…

It’s no excuse
But I’m not motivated to bring people into this damaged structure.

I’ve never been treated so badly by any other preacher or faith as I have been by catholic preists
Especially over this issue.

It is shameful to ppl coming into your organization
& to the process of confirmation!

 

[oxoSarahoxo]

Let me rephrase “it is shameful to OUR organization”
& disrespectful to the spirit of it

We speak strongly on these issues yet
So many members blow them off easily

The whole group of candidates in my mom & several friends rica’s
Never received
Never were taught or offered confession before confirmation
There was several couples living in sin together wanting help
So 1/2 the group was living in mortal sin & I was told not a big deal by my parish
& “you are not a parishioner at this parish. I have enough members of my own. Go back to your own parish” by the priests I reached out to for help…

That is when I stopped bringing ppl in & promoting the church.
It’s a flaw on my part but… It seriously bothers me to bring ppl to that point and to be stopped at the gate by the ones who are suppose to be welcoming…

 

[1ke]

Sarah,

It is wrong of you to stop evangelizing. We are called always and everywhere to evangelize.

If there is a serious theological issue at a parish that you have attempted to address unsuccessfully, the next place to go is the Bishop. If it is still not resolved after that, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Or in this case, perhaps the Congergation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments. Or both.