Words of Absolution: Sacramental Validity

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Recently in confession after the priest gave me helpful and encouraging advice, three odd things happened:

(a) He did not ask for an Act of Contrition. I said it afterwards.
(b) He did not assign a penance. I asked for one, so he gave me one. They were prayers that I said afterwards following my act of contrition.

(c) This is the part that more slightly concerns me. He ad-libbed the words of absolution. It was something to this effect (I think this is correct): “May God bless you and absolve you of your sins.”

Is that form valid? Perhaps more importantly, am I comically shortsighted and legalistic for worrying about this instead of having faith because I was genuinely sorry, confessed as completely as I could, etc.? Surely I can receive Holy Communion now, right? Is there any question of that?

 

[Jguerra]

I have a problem with the words “May God bless you…” It’s a petition to the Lord that He might bless and possibly absolve one from sin. It leaves you hanging. If it were me and I heard those words from an unfamiliar priest I would go immediately to another priest for proper absolution. I don’t buy the argument that where the priest is lacking, the Church provides. If it’s a priest I know and am comfortable with I go so far as to ask for the proper form of absolution.

Then I make it a point not to go to confession with that priest again (the one providing the faulty form of absolution).

My pastor also believes in penance-less confessions and when I pressed the matter I did not prevail. So, after my weekly confession, I pray an Our Father, one Hail Mary and one Glory Be and offer a prayer for Pope Benedict XVI.

Hope this helps,

Joe

 

[Digitonomy]

(c) This is the part that more slightly concerns me. He ad-libbed the words of absolution. It was something to this effect (I think this is correct): “May God bless you and absolve you of your sins.”

I’m guessing you are Latin Catholic, although you didn’t say. Many Eastern churches use similar words of absolution to what you described.

 

[Bookcat]

If that is what he said …(did not say something like “May God bless you and I absolved you from your sins” or maybe “may God absolve you…and I absolve you from your sins…”?)

…I would seek out confession again…from another Priest.

The Priest should not change the words of absolution…some changes though retain enough for validity…others do not.

I once had an older Priest get confused and say “I bless you in the name…” I brought it to his attention and he quickly corrected himself and gave me absolution.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Thank you, everyone, for your (name removed by moderator)ut. I’ll continue to check this thread for additional answers and suggestions.

I’m guessing you are Latin Catholic, although you didn’t say. Many Eastern churches use similar words of absolution to what you described.

I am a Latin Catholic (this priest is too), and you raise an excellent point: can that formula be invalid simply because it didn’t include the phrase “I absolve you” when many eastern churches’ rites use a different construction as well (like the passive voice “You are absolved of your sins…”)?

Thing is, I asked another priest about it and he told me not to worry… so I just don’t know what to do. I’m afraid if I go to yet another priest I’ll simply be assured again that I shouldn’t worry about it. I’m also at war with myself on the matter, because part of me demands certainty and another part berates me for thinking in a legalistic manner… don’t know which side to listen to.

 

[puzzleannie]

(a) He did not ask for an Act of Contrition. I said it afterwards

.not necessary, many priests simpy assume you will pray this on your own, to save time
(b)

He did not assign a penance

. also not necessary that he actually assign it, many priests assume you will assign yourself one, or will wait for you to ask, and only assign a penance for those coming for the first time, or very young people. for instance our priest here who visits always assigns a slow, prayerful meditation on the Our Father, so if you are from here you don’t need to ask.

(

c) This is the part that more slightly concerns me. He ad-libbed the words of absolution. It was something to this effect (I think this is correct): “May God bless you and absolve you of your sins.”

if his formula included those words you are good to go. Unless you had a copy of the correct form in front of you, and clearly heard every word he said, even under his voice, then you cannot say for sure he ad-libbed.

in general, it is very unhelpful to second guess your confession in this manner
if you have a concern, ask the priest at that time, or call him the next day, since nobody here knows what he was thinking or doing, and why.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

not necessary, many priests simpy assume you will pray this on your own, to save time

That makes sense. I have had priests simply tell me to pray it afterwards before; this was just the first time it went unmentioned.

also not necessary that he actually assign it, many priests assume you will assign yourself one, or will wait for you to ask, and only assign a penance for those coming for the first time, or very young people. for instance our priest here who visits always assigns a slow, prayerful meditation on the Our Father, so if you are from here you don’t need to ask.

That makes sense too. As I said, I did ask for one and he happily assigned it.

Let me clarify: I wasn’t trying to imply he was doing something wrong with those first two points. I had no idea; it was just unique in my experience as a penitent.

if his formula included those words you are good to go. Unless you had a copy of the correct form in front of you, and clearly heard every word he said, even under his voice, then you cannot say for sure he ad-libbed.

in general, it is very unhelpful to second guess your confession in this manner if you have a concern, ask the priest at that time, or call him the next day, since nobody here knows what he was thinking or doing, and why.

Thank you, puzzleannie. I’ve always thought your posts on this forum have displayed good sense, perspective, and compassion; I am, therefore, relieved that that is your assessment. I know you’re right that it’s just really counterproductive to worry about something like this; as I said, I didn’t know which side of my mind to listen to - the one that berated me for violating my own anti-legalism principles, or the side that said, “The details matter, so worry!”

 

[Benadam]

Bookcat’s Priest error was not even close but unintentional. Fone Bone’s Priest was in the ball park so I wonder if unintentional, does intent make it valid? It seems to me if he intended what the Church intends and was experiencing a senior moment, I believe the saying , The Church will provide.:twocents:

 

[Bookcat]

Thank you, everyone, for your (name removed by moderator)ut. I’ll continue to check this thread for additional answers and suggestions.

I am a Latin Catholic (this priest is too), and you raise an excellent point: can that formula be invalid simply because it didn’t include the phrase “I absolve you” when many eastern churches’ rites use a different construction as well (like the passive voice “You are absolved of your sins…”)?

Thing is, I asked another priest about it and he told me not to worry… so I just don’t know what to do. I’m afraid if I go to yet another priest I’ll simply be assured again that I shouldn’t worry about it. I’m also at war with myself on the matter, because part of me demands certainty and another part berates me for thinking in a legalistic manner… don’t know which side to listen to.

This is not a “legalistic” question. It is a Sacramental one! (though one should note that the Sacrament of Confession does have a juridical character …)

Either a the absolution was valid or it was not.

YES the omitting of the words of absolution in Roman Rite can make the attempted absolution invalid.

If he said what you said he said…I would do as I noted above.

 

[Bookcat]

Bookcat’s Priest error was not even close but unintentional. Fone Bone’s Priest was in the ball park so I wonder if unintentional, does intent make it valid? It seems to me if he intended what the Church intends and was experiencing a senior moment, I believe the saying , The Church will provide.:twocents:

The Eccelesia supplex …“the Church will provide” does not mean that a Sacrament will be made valid when in reality it is not…as I understand it such refers to other things really …such as facilties etc…

God can of course forgive a person and not hold them accountable …who does not realize the Priest did not give them absolution.

But if I know the Priest did not give me absolution…well I need to seek absolution.

 

[Benadam]

The Eccelesia supplex …“the Church will provide” does not mean that a Sacrament will be made valid when in reality it is not…as I understand it such refers to other things really …such as facilties etc…

God can of course forgive a person and not hold them accountable …who does not realize the Priest did not give them absolution.

But if I know the Priest did not give me absolution…well I need to seek absolution.

That makes sense. The sign is the guarantee that God acted on our behalf.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Bookcat, Benadam, puzzleannie, and others,

I found this in the Ask an Apologist forum:

Is this form of absolution valid?

Fr. Vincent Serpa, whom I trust, says that the form of the Sacrament is flexible as long as it is compatible with the required intention to do what the Church does.

I found some opposing viewpoints from some other source - for instance, one asserted that “I absolve you” is at bare minimum a necessity, and it even claimed that a passive-voice “Be absolved” or “you are absolved” would be invalid because of the passive voice.

But that must be incorrect, since some entirely valid eastern-rite forms actually use the passive voice. So at this point… in light of how the arguments stack up objectively, and subjectively of what pastoral recommendations I found on scrupulosity assert, I’m thinking the right thing to do is to trust this priest and the Church…

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

This is not a “legalistic” question. It is a Sacramental one! (though one should note that the Sacrament of Confession does have a juridical character …)

Either a the absolution was valid or it was not.

Most sources that argue similarly claim that “I absolve you” is the bare minimum, yes?

If I were to worry about whether I heard this priest include the pronoun “I” (as my original post attests, I heard something like “May God bless you and absolve you of your sins”) then yes, that would be pretty legalistic or at least scrupulous of me…

If anyone has ever had similar doubts, I found a pretty great resource here.

I said in my original post that I worried whether to receive Holy Communion… that document has reassured me that the right thing to do is to receive when in doubt.

 

[Bookcat]

Bookcat, Benadam, puzzleannie, and others,

I found this in the Ask an Apologist forum:

Is this form of absolution valid?

Fr. Vincent Serpa, whom I trust, says that the form of the Sacrament is flexible as long as it is compatible with the required intention to do what the Church does.

I found some opposing viewpoints from some other source - for instance, one asserted that “I absolve you” is at bare minimum a necessity, and it even claimed that a passive-voice “Be absolved” or “you are absolved” would be invalid because of the passive voice.

But that must be incorrect, since some entirely valid eastern-rite forms actually use the passive voice. So at this point… in light of how the arguments stack up objectively, and subjectively of what pastoral recommendations I found on scrupulosity assert, I’m thinking the right thing to do is to trust this priest and the Church…

I do not think one can compare the rights here on this matter. (and I went in the past to a Melkite Priest …and their form uses both…“I absolve you” too…)

It is not a question here of trusting the Church. One is not trusting the Church by trusting this Priest who it seems made up his own words. The Priest if he did not use the words of absolution that are needful…did not absolve any sins. The Priest is not to *ever *ad-lib the words of absolution. Such is contrary to what the Church says is to happen.

Him doing so is not backed up by the Church. And a Priest who does not do what he Church gives him to do in such a matter…well is not one really to trust entirely.

Recommendation in terms of scrupulosity are not referring what you are discussing here.

 

[Bookcat]

Most sources that argue similarly claim that “I absolve you” is the bare minimum, yes?

If I were to worry about whether I heard this priest include the pronoun “I” (as my original post attests, I heard something like “May God bless you and absolve you of your sins”) then yes, that would be pretty legalistic or at least scrupulous of me…

In my original post…I noted that you may have misheard him. (though I see now I mistyped “absolve” there)

That little English word “I” can be said in such a way that is not always picked up by the human ear. So if it was just a worry of such…well that can be rather a different story.

Some Priests who were born elsewhere that the US in particular can sound like they are are not saying that wee little word.

And some who say it fast…or whose voice just drops off …can sound like they missed it.

Such can be a very different from a Priest just making up the words…

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

What I have never understood when questions like this have been posed is that why would a priest endure an hour or hours in “the box” or a Reconciliation Room, only to give an invalid or sloppy form of the Sacrament? What would such a motivation be, especially when it could leave some individuals so troubled? Priests accused of ad-libbing during the Mass are sometimes thought to be of the mindset that “it’s all about them.” But that wouldn’t seem to be an issue in the confines of the confessional.

 

[fred_conty]

What I have never understood when questions like this have been posed is that why would a priest endure an hour or hours in “the box” or a Reconciliation Room, only to give an invalid or sloppy form of the Sacrament? What would such a motivation be, especially when it could leave some individuals so troubled? Priests accused of ad-libbing during the Mass are sometimes thought to be of the mindset that “it’s all about them.” But that wouldn’t seem to be an issue in the confines of the confessional.

If it were me, and there were mortal sins involved, I would go to confession again, and tell the priest that I would also like to include these mortal sins of my past as well. And then there would be no doubt. Everyone has a right to their peace of mind barring scroupulosity.

 

[puzzleannie]

If it were me, and there were mortal sins involved, I would go to confession again, and tell the priest that I would also like to include these mortal sins of my past as well. And then there would be no doubt. Everyone has a right to their peace of mind barring scroupulosity.

there is no peace of mind, but the opposite, and the danger of falling into a scrupulous POV when we approach sacraments in a legalistic manner, with a stopwatch and a notebook and maybe a video camera, hoping to catch and record any mis-statement, error or “abuse” on the part of the priest during Mass and sacraments. That attitude, which assumes “because it was outside my experience” it must therefore be wrong, and the priest is guilty of abuse, is the most damaging spiritual demon good observant people can fall into. I caution against the need to repeat sacraments because of such fears. If this describes a lot of your concern and thinking that dominates your spiritual time, take it to your spiritual director because it is a tool of the evil one.

 

[At_Trent]

If it were me, and there were mortal sins involved, I would go to confession again, and tell the priest that I would also like to include these mortal sins of my past as well. And then there would be no doubt. Everyone has a right to their peace of mind barring scroupulosity.

I agree

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

That little English word “I” can be said in such a way that is not always picked up by the human ear. So if it was just a worry of such…well that can be rather a different story.

Agreed. Plus, as I keep reiterating, it’s been established to my satisfaction (for all the above reasons) that the exact phrase “I absolve you” is not necessarily an intrinsically necessary component for a valid form of the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Some Priests who were born elsewhere that the US in particular can sound like they are are not saying that wee little word.

Actually, this priest did indeed have a rather thick accent.

there is no peace of mind, but the opposite, and the danger of falling into a scrupulous POV when we approach sacraments in a legalistic manner, with a stopwatch and a notebook and maybe a video camera, hoping to catch and record any mis-statement, error or “abuse” on the part of the priest during Mass and sacraments. That attitude, which assumes “because it was outside my experience” it must therefore be wrong, and the priest is guilty of abuse, is the most damaging spiritual demon good observant people can fall into. I caution against the need to repeat sacraments because of such fears. If this describes a lot of your concern and thinking that dominates your spiritual time, take it to your spiritual director because it is a tool of the evil one.

Everything Puzzleannie has said is exactly what the orthodox spiritual resources I’ve found say, too… it just rings true. I’m still rather embarrassed that I ever worried about it in the first place…