Urgent Question

[Lasting_faith]

Yes. This is a ridiculously legalistic conversation. And no, you are not still in a state of mortal sin. God is a God of love and mercy.

The formula of absolution was defined at Trent as a prescription for the Latin Church only. The reason they did so was to make sure that all sorts of odd things were not added into the formula. This is not dogma. Confession is, but the precise wording takes different forms in each Catholic rite. Greek Catholics use a different form. If it were dogma, then how do other rites use a different form? The point is you repented of your sins. God loves you, and doesn’t want you to stay hung up on them. Continue to live the Christ life and trust in God’s forgiveness

I agree. It can not be a question about a few words that someone may say in the wrong way. That is not God’s mercy, God know our intention and forgive us no matter what the priest may mumble. A confessed sin is a forgiven sin.

 

[devoutchristian]

I’m so glad that we modern Catholics know so much more about the faith than all of those primitive, backwards, and don’t forget legalistic Council fathers.

 

[FrDavid96]

I do wish that before trying to answer something, and especially before accusing people of bad motives (like calling them pharisees), that the people who do so would first get their own facts straight and actually know what they’re writing before hitting the “submit” button.

I would suggest that people learn the definitions of the words “forgiveness” and “absolution.” They are not the same thing, even though Catholics (and non-Catholics) often use the words interchangeably.

Here’s a few hints.

Absolution is a juridic act of the Church. As such, it is entirely within the Church’s powers to determine the exact form that absolution must take, and likewise, to determine that nothing other-than that exact form constitutes a valid absolution—a valid juridic act of the Church.

In the Latin Church, sui iuris, the only valid form of absolution is “ego te absolvo…” This applies to both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms. Certainly, the approved English translation of “I absolve you…” is equally valid (as well as other approved vernaculars). Nothing else, no other words, constitute a valid absolution; a valid juridic act of the Church.

Other Catholic Churches sui iuris, have their own forms of valid absolution (some have several forms). These forms are valid within the Churches sui iuris, which have approved them as valid juridic acts; but only within those specific Churches sui iuris.

Absolution is a juridic act of the Church. I truly wish that people would first learn this, and understand what it means, before posting incorrect and misleading information.

 

[Evan]

I keep reading about valid and invalid. I think the accidental use of the wrong words would make the confession illicet rather than invalid.

Just as if the words of consecration can be mis-spoken (like “Dis is mine body” rather than “This is my body”) may give an illicet celebration rather than invalid.

If the exact use of the words were required, why do we allow priests to offer confession in English, I should be Latin so there is no confusion that the proper words, the magical formula, was correctly pronounced. Since the failure of receiving absolution can result in eternal condemnation.

 

[FrDavid96]

I keep reading about valid and invalid. I think the accidental use of the wrong words would make the confession illicet rather than invalid.

Just as if the words of consecration can be mis-spoken (like “Dis is mine body” rather than “This is my body”) may give an illicet celebration rather than invalid.

If the exact use of the words were required, why do we allow priests to offer confession in English, I should be Latin so there is no confusion that the proper words, the magical formula, was correctly pronounced. Since the failure of receiving absolution can result in eternal condemnation.

There is no confusion because the proper, necessary, juridic form, in each approved vernacular translation, has been approved only after careful consideration by competent authority.

 

[holyfamily1]

There is no confusion because the proper, necessary, juridic form, in each approved vernacular translation, has been approved only after careful consideration by competent authority.

Father, am I still in a state of mortal sin, was the confession valid, and do you suggest that I write to the local ordinary?

In regards to the Holy Mass that he said … he certainly had a hard time (very hard time) saying the black and doing the red.

Thanks and God bless!

 

[mafh]

There is no confusion because the proper, necessary, juridic form, in each approved vernacular translation, has been approved only after careful consideration by competent authority.

We seem to get a lot of these sorts of threads, where people listen intently to the absolution phase of the confession, and then are worried that they are not absolved if the absolution part is not said quite right, or if the words are unintelligible. I have been starting to wonder whether this worrying is necessary, or whether it is what you guys call scrupulosity? I wonder if it would be helpful if a priest, such as yourself (assuming the Fr in FrDavid96 means Father) could let people know what they ought to do in such situations? Should they assume by default that they are absolved when they complete their confession, or do they really need to listen closely and then re-confess with someone else if the absolution form is incorrect? If it is the former, I think letting people know that could save people a lot of unnecessary anxiety.

Anyway, just a thought from a non-Catholic.

 

[FrDavid96]

Father, am I still in a state of mortal sin, was the confession valid, and do you suggest that I write to the local ordinary?

In regards to the Holy Mass that he said … he certainly had a hard time (very hard time) saying the black and doing the red.

Thanks and God bless!

The only “suggestion” I have is that you talk person-to-person to a priest you know you can trust. That priest will know what to tell you.

 

[FrDavid96]

We seem to get a lot of these sorts of threads, where people listen intently to the absolution phase of the confession, and then are worried that they are not absolved if the absolution part is not said quite right, or if the words are unintelligible. I have been starting to wonder whether this worrying is necessary, or whether it is what you guys call scrupulosity? I wonder if it would be helpful if a priest, such as yourself (assuming the Fr in FrDavid96 means Father) could let people know what they ought to do in such situations? Should they assume by default that they are absolved when they complete their confession, or do they really need to listen closely and then re-confess with someone else if the absolution form is incorrect? If it is the former, I think letting people know that could save people a lot of unnecessary anxiety.

Anyway, just a thought from a non-Catholic.

Because of the very personal nature of Confession, the best I can respond is to say “read my post just before this one”

By that I mean that there is no way I can respond to your questions without getting “personal” about the OPs very private situation.

 

[Evan]

The only “suggestion” I have is that you talk person-to-person to a priest you know you can trust. That priest will know what to tell you.

Maybe a better suggestion would be to ask to priest to absolve you again, and again, and again, till he gets the words right. Or you can bring him a card with the proper words and have him read it! You could help him with his pronunciation, in case he has an accent, and the words are not coming out right. Just pray he does not have a speech impediment or grew up in another country. Apparently intention is not part of the picture.

I suppose, the priest should also repeat the words of institution over each chalis and ciboria during the mass to make sure ALL the bread and wine is transubstantiated.

or maybe I’m a little scrupulous or maybe a better word is rediculous.

 

[maryjk]

Maybe a better suggestion would be to ask to priest to absolve you again, and again, and again, till he gets the words right. Or you can bring him a card with the proper words and have him read it! You could help him with his pronunciation, in case he has an accent, and the words are not coming out right. Just pray he does not have a speech impediment or grew up in another country. Apparently intention is not part of the picture.

I suppose, the priest should also repeat the words of institution over each chalis and ciboria during the mass to make sure ALL the bread and wine is transubstantiated.

or maybe I’m a little scrupulous or maybe a better word is rediculous.

That was my thought too.

 

[mafh]

Because of the very personal nature of Confession, the best I can respond is to say “read my post just before this one”

By that I mean that there is no way I can respond to your questions without getting “personal” about the OPs very private situation.

I truly meant no offense, and I hope you didn’t take it as such.

I was speaking in general terms, not in specifics. There have been other threads where posters were worried (extremely so in some cases) because some words were omitted or they couldn’t hear them, and I was just hoping there was a standard response we could just link to them.

It sounds like the correct answer is that it’s specific to each case, and we should just tell them to talk to a priest, right?

 

[holyfamily1]

Sorry everyone… I just though that my confession wasn’t valid because I heard that for it to be the priest must say, “Ego te absolvat, in nomine…” or, “I ablsolve you in the name of the the Father…” which this priest clearly didn’t do. And IMHO this priest made the prayer up “on purpose”, not because he forgot or stuttered because I saw the same thing happen at the Holy Mass later with him. Anyway… thanks everyone for your responses! God bless!!

 

[zab]

Sorry everyone… I just though that my confession wasn’t valid because I heard that for it to be the priest must say, “Ego te absolvat, in nomine…” or, “I ablsolve you in the name of the the Father…” which this priest clearly didn’t do. And IMHO this priest made the prayer up “on purpose”, not because he forgot or stuttered because I saw the same thing happen at the Holy Mass later with him. Anyway… thanks everyone for your responses! God bless!!

IMHO I’m not sure that you really wanted an answer from us non-experts or whether it was just an opportunity to sack a priest. Just my opinion.

 

[FrDavid96]

I truly meant no offense, and I hope you didn’t take it as such.

I was speaking in general terms, not in specifics. There have been other threads where posters were worried (extremely so in some cases) because some words were omitted or they couldn’t hear them, and I was just hoping there was a standard response we could just link to them.

It sounds like the correct answer is that it’s specific to each case, and we should just tell them to talk to a priest, right?

No offense taken (not even remotely).

Yes, every situation is different. A person in the OPs situation should talk to a qualified priest (meaning one who has faculties to hear confessions), specifically one who can be trusted not to fool around with the essential words of absolution. That priest will then know exactly what to do.

My response here is intentionally vague because since I am a priest, it’s necessary for me to make a clear distinction between discussing this with a priest on the internet and doing so with one in person. In person, I would know just what to do, and that would start with asking some questions which simply should not be asked/answered in this public way. I hope you see what I’m driving-at here; internet forums are no substitue for a live priest and that’s what the OP needs.

What the OP does not need though, and the reason why I posted here in the first place, is for posters (and no, this is not directed at you) who do not understand the difference between forgiveness and absolution, and who do not understand precisely what’s meant when the Church says that absolution is a juridic act of the Church, to offer uninformed opinions and label people as pharisees–that helps no one and only makes things worse.

 

[zab]

Your Confession was valid. The person who said the absolution words are not a magic formula, and those who quote chapter and verse of the catachism to say that your confession was not valid are like the Pharasees in the New Testament who nit picked and insisted that every letter of Mosaic Law be observed and regaled the masses with great shows of piety.This is the very thing that Christ preached against.
What really matters is that you were truely contrite for your sins - regardless of what they were- and the Priest was sincere in giving you penance and absolution.
One question: What would you do if you had to confess in a foreign country to a priest with little or no English, and you couldn’t understand a word of the absolution? If you think that it would be invalid, then you are terribly misinformed about confession.
If a priest responds to this query, I am quite sure he would agree with me,

OK, I hope you learned your lesson. The next time, if there is one, just type- IMHO which means “In my humble opinion”. It doesn’t have to be humble, but as long as you state that it is just your opinion it should be OK . After all, people should not expect expert answers from non-experts. With the exception of describing some of your fellow posters as “…like the Pharasees”, your post really wasn’t that bad, IMHO.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

So much misinformation in this thread.

Please read this link to Jimmy Akin’s treatment of the matter.

“Trent references the words of absolution in passing but doens’t quote them completely. It says ‘I absolve thee, etc.’ In making these references, Trent is not attempting to specify the minimal form necessary for absolution. It is simply stressing that the absolution takes effect when the minister says the words that constitute its form. Part of the formula is provided simply to indicate when this occurs.”

A lot of non sequiturs follow in this thread, too.

For instance, valid form is indeed necessary for a Sacrament’s validity, but it does not follow from this fact that the OP’s absolution was invalid. “I absolve you” is the normative, licit formula prescribed in the Latin Church, but the fact that other rites have different phrasing that doesn’t contain “I absolve you” proves that the absence of “I absolve you” does not render the absolution invalid.

Father Vincent Serpa agrees with Jimmy Akin here. Check it out.

 

[FrDavid96]

So much misinformation in this thread.

Please read this link to Jimmy Akin’s treatment of the matter.

“Trent references the words of absolution in passing but doens’t quote them completely. It says ‘I absolve thee, etc.’ In making these references, Trent is not attempting to specify the minimal form necessary for absolution. It is simply stressing that the absolution takes effect when the minister says the words that constitute its form. Part of the formula is provided simply to indicate when this occurs.”

A lot of non sequiturs follow in this thread, too.

For instance, valid form is indeed necessary for a Sacrament’s validity, but it does not follow from this fact that the OP’s absolution was invalid. “I absolve you” is the normative, licit formula prescribed in the Latin Church, but the fact that other rites have different phrasing that doesn’t contain “I absolve you” proves that the absence of “I absolve you” does not render the absolution invalid.

Father Vincent Serpa agrees with Jimmy Akin here. Check it out.

No. It is not the “normative, licit formula.”
It is the essential forumla required for a valid absolution. An important difference.

Other Catholic rites have different forms because they have their own particular laws with regard to what constitutes a valid absolution. The laws are different, therefore the form necessary for that juridic act of absolution will likewise differ. What constitutes a valid juridic act under one code of laws does not constitute a valid juridic act under a different code (unless of course, the forms are coincidentally the same).

 

[zab]

So much misinformation in this thread.

Please read this link to Jimmy Akin’s treatment of the matter.

“Trent references the words of absolution in passing but doens’t quote them completely. It says ‘I absolve thee, etc.’ In making these references, Trent is not attempting to specify the minimal form necessary for absolution. It is simply stressing that the absolution takes effect when the minister says the words that constitute its form. Part of the formula is provided simply to indicate when this occurs.”

A lot of non sequiturs follow in this thread, too.

For instance, valid form is indeed necessary for a Sacrament’s validity, but it does not follow from this fact that the OP’s absolution was invalid. “I absolve you” is the normative, licit formula prescribed in the Latin Church, but the fact that other rites have different phrasing that doesn’t contain “I absolve you” proves that the absence of “I absolve you” does not render the absolution invalid.

Father Vincent Serpa agrees with Jimmy Akin here. Check it out.

Regarding the same question asked by the OP, Father Vincent Serpa stated on the link that you provided: “The Church accepts most variations of the formula for absolution as valid for the benefit of penitents. However, no priest has the authority to change the formula in any way.” There is a big difference between the priest saying “I absolve you…” and “May God the Father absolve you…” The priest uses “I” because he is acting “in persona Christi” in the person of Christ. I really don’t see a difference between saying “I absolve you” or “I absolve thee”

The question that Jimmy Akin was responding to had to do with the omission of the words “…from your sins” which is understood. It could be that the priest was saying them in his mind but didn’t make it to his lips. I would think that this is of lesser concern than the question posted by the OP.

 

[Lasting_faith]

Just for the sake of argument, why would a priest by intention use the wrong words?