What does a priest do about going to confession

[drafdog]

What was that about ex opere operato?** The priest who is not morally just (not in the state of grace) can still celebrate a valid Eucharist. I seem to recall that the Albigentian heresy was about just this sort of question. Do the sacraments work when coming from a public and notorious sinner?
The priest goes to confession when and as he can just as you or I.

Matthew

 

[gvogt4]

Obviously the ‘celebrate Mass’ bit can only refer to a priest - lay people don’t ‘celebrate’ Mass, they assist at or attend it.

.

Dear Lily,

I truly enjoy your posts in these forums. Please note, however, what the CCC says about celebrating or celebration.

1140 It is the whole community, the Body of Christ united with its Head, that celebrates. "Liturgical services are not private functions but are celebrations of the Church which is ‘the sacrament of unity,’

1141 **The celebrating assembly is the community of the baptized **who, "by regeneration and the anointing of the Holy Spirit, are consecrated to be a spiritual house and a holy priesthood, that through all the works of Christian men they may offer spiritual sacrifices."9 This “common priesthood” is that of Christ the sole priest, in which all his members participate:10

 

[Seatuck]

I found a Homily on the subject.

web2.airmail.net/carlsch/MaterDei/Homilies/homily040718.htm

The subject is -

1. May a Catholic in mortal sin freely receive holy Communion as long as he intends to go to confession afterwards?

Many Catholics are under the impression this may be done. This is false…

In the 1982 Code of Canon Law, canon 916 states,
“Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make a perfect act of contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.”

Notice the canon requires a grave reason which will differ for priest and laity as is evident from Trent’s decree. The priest must offer Mass every Sunday and holy day while the faithful are obliged to receive holy Communion at least once a year during Easter time. And I interpret “grave reason” with these differences in mind.

Perhaps someone is dying and an extraordinary eucharistic minister is sent to them… under such circumstances I would favor this type of reception. If someone spends 15 minutes in confession line but then the priest has to offer Mass… in this case I would say do not receive but wait until you confess properly; someone wants to go to confession but the priest is a good friend… in this case I would say wait until you confess to another priest then receive.

It explains the church teaching quite well.

 

[Seatuck]

Dear Lily,

I truly enjoy your posts in these forums. Please note, however, what the CCC says about celebrating or celebration.

1140 It is the whole community, the Body of Christ united with its Head, that celebrates. "Liturgical services are not private functions but are celebrations of the Church which is ‘the sacrament of unity,’

1141 **The celebrating assembly is the community of the baptized **who, "by regeneration and the anointing of the Holy Spirit, are consecrated to be a spiritual house and a holy priesthood, that through all the works of Christian men they may offer spiritual sacrifices."9 This “common priesthood” is that of Christ the sole priest, in which all his members participate:10

That’s all very nice and true but the Priest is the Celebrant. That is his liturgical role. The word celebrate in the canon refers to the Priestly role.

archstl.org/links/gloss-mass.htm

We are not discouraged from attending Mass and “celebrating” it when we are in a state of mortal sin.

 

[gvogt4]

That’s all very nice and true but the Priest is the Celebrant. That is his liturgical role. The word celebrate in the canon refers to the Priestly role.

archstl.org/links/gloss-mass.htm

We are not discouraged from attending Mass and “celebrating” it when we are in a state of mortal sin.

Dear Seatuck,
Please note that I never stated that the Priest is not the Celebrant (Presider). LilyM stated “Obviously the ‘celebrate Mass’ bit can only refer to a priest - lay people don’t ‘celebrate’ Mass, they assist at or attend it” I merely wished to convey that I believe the language of the CCC includes the laity as those who celebrate Mass. My reading of that was that while I am not the Celebrant of the Mass, I do celebrate the Mass.
P: My brothers and sisters,
to prepare ourselves
to celebrate the sacred mysteries,
let us call to mind our sins.
Additionally, from the link you provided:
** Participants in Celebrating Mass**
Acolytes

Ones who assist in the celebration (i.e., carrying candles, holding the Pope’s staff, miter, etc.).

**Assembly

Those present to celebrate the liturgy. Other terms: to use: “The Community,” “The Church (as people not building),” “The Worshippers,” “The Faithful,” or “the congregation**.” Avoid: Spectators, Crowd, Audience—all passive words which do not reflect what those present at Mass do. NOTE: It is the entire assembly (ordained and nonordained) that celebrates the liturgy of the Mass, therefore avoid: The Pope’s Mass, The Bishop’s Mass, His Mass, etc.–all terms which would give the impression that it is only the Pope or clergy who celebrate Mass.

Hope this helps to calrify.

 

[Seatuck]

Ok. I thought you didn’t understand that in Canon 916 when it mentions Celebrate it refers to the Priest. From the Homily I linked to-

In the 1982 Code of Canon Law, canon 916 states,
“Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make a perfect act of contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.”

Notice the canon requires a grave reason which will differ for priest and laity as is evident from Trent’s decree. The priest must offer Mass every Sunday and holy day while the faithful are obliged to receive holy Communion at least once a year during Easter time. And I interpret “grave reason” with these differences in mind.

The celebrate Mass part has to refer to the priest otherwise it states that we can’t attend Mass and we know that is not so.If the Assembly cannot celebrate then they can’t be there. See the problem?How do they not participate- not sing, not stand , sit ,kneel?

I do take your point about the lay ministers though. This was a situation I came upon as and EMOC. There were a couple of times I could not serve.

 

[gvogt4]

Dear Seatuck and LilyM,

Well, it turns out I do have to take a step back here.
The CCC and the GIRM and the words of Priest introducing the Penitential Rite all include the laity as celebrating participants.

However, after doing a search in the Canon, it seems that “celebrate” does always refer to the Priest:shrug:

Now here is what confuses me (besides the difference in wording of the instructional documents).

As the Celebrant of the Mass, the Priest must partake of the Eucharist. (Long time ago in a Catholic school far far away I was taught that the Priest’s partaking of the Eucharist was very different from the laity - unfortunately I do not remember why that was.:banghead: ) Also, if the Priest is acting in persona Christi I thought the matters of his personal state were not of consequence when Presiding, Celebrating the Mass.

This is exactly why I try to be careful when throwing out opinions without any back-up (seems even the back-up can be confusing some time). :doh2:

 

[LilyM]

Ok. I thought you didn’t understand that in Canon 916 when it mentions Celebrate it refers to the Priest. From the Homily I linked to-

The celebrate Mass part has to refer to the priest otherwise it states that we can’t attend Mass and we know that is not so.If the Assembly cannot celebrate then they can’t be there. See the problem?How do they not participate- not sing, not stand , sit ,kneel?

I do take your point about the lay ministers though. This was a situation I came upon as and EMOC. There were a couple of times I could not serve.

Interesting. Is there any reason why a lay EMHC, for example, must receive before distributing? I’m not aware of any per se, not that I’ve seriously researched into the matter.

 

[mosher]

The legal jargon that is used in that canon does specifically refer to a priest/bishop. Any commentary would confirm that position. Legal language is at times more precises and sometimes apparently at odds with common theological “phraseology” - for lack of a better term.

Concerning the main point and question that is being asked concerning a priest in mortal sin there are two aspects that have already been touched upon. The first is the aspect of ex opere operato which is roughly translated as “operation out of the operation itself” which is lay terms means that the holiness of the minister is, to a point, external to the confecting of the sacrament. There is a limit to this but only when the minister of the sacrament deliberately places a barrier to effecting what the Church does in the Sacrament.

From this (and other things) the canon cited mentions the issue of grave necessity. This wisely foresees the event of a priest who for some grave reason does not have recourse to confession but must celebrate mass per his canonical obligations. In this case a priest is to make, in so far as he is able, and as a function of justice the Church will make up for what is lacking in that contrition - hence the axiom “ecclesia supplicis”. This is similar to the event when a truly penitent person goes to confess but for some reason he is unable to have his confession heard leaves and dies in a car accident. In such a case the bona fide intention to go to confession will effect the grace necessary for that person albeit different than the sacramental grace imparted in confession. Thus, in this case as with the priest with mortal sin on his conscious as long as the intent is true as a function of justice will not be held accountable for the failing of celebrating mass with that sin. But, the priest must make every effort to have his confession heard as soon as is physically possible - even if the act of contrition is perfect.

I would find this aspect of grave necessity difficult to find in the situation where the priest is in the city however as we know there are many priests even in the US that find themselves in rural areas that are near missionary conditions and it is toward this situation that the exception, if it can be called an exception, is directed.

 

[Seatuck]

This is exactly why I try to be careful when throwing out opinions without any back-up (seems even the back-up can be confusing some time). :doh2:

You and me both! Makes me realize as hard as I’ve studied and as much as I think I know, on some subjects I know very little.

 

[Seatuck]

Interesting. Is there any reason why a lay EMHC, for example, must receive before distributing? I’m not aware of any per se, not that I’ve seriously researched into the matter.

Being in communion with the church ( which is being in a state of grace) and able to receive the sacraments is part of the requirements to serve in that position in my paperwork . In general, in most Parishes the EMOHC receive in a public fashion. I have served at a Mass that I did not receive at and I was told to come up after communion was served to the EMOHC.

It just seems to be common sense to me. Only in a grave circumstance would I serve or receive in a state of mortal sin.

I have heard of a case where a woman in an invalid marriage was serving as EMOHC and when this was finally discovered and told to the Priest he told her she could not serve in that capacity. Somehow she didn’t realize she was not supposed to be receiving communion either.

Seems to me we need a mass teaching on reverance for the Eucharist.

 

[LilyM]

Being in communion with the church , which is being in a state of grace, is part of the requirementsto serve in that position in my paperwork . In general, in most Parishes the EMOHC receive in a public fashion. I have served at a Mass that I did not receive at and I was told to come up after communion was served to the EMOHC.

It just seems to be common sense to me. Only in a grave circumstance would I serve or receive in a state of mortal sin.

Fair enough

I don’t think any of us can know all there is to know about Catholicism - the Church has a 2,000-odd year headstart on us after all I think all we can do is do our best with the knowledge we do have and keep on studying the faith :yup:

 

[Seatuck]

I don’t think any of us can know all there is to know about Catholicism - the Church has a 2,000-odd year headstart on us after all

I Agree. It’s why I was drawn to message boards several years ago when I got serious about practicing the faith.

I’ve gotten my doses of humility over the years.

 

[LilyM]

I’ve gotten my doses of humility over the years.

Happens to the best of us