Spent hours examining my conscience and went to my local parish for confession and the priest said this
"God, the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and may I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
I asked him to say it again and he repeated the same way. I asked him again and showed my face and said "say I absolve you from your sins" please and he mumbled something so I left.
Now I have to wonder if I'm actually absolved
"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
I wouldn't worry about it. Even if he wasn't a priest your confession would still be valid if made in good faith.
Quote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He added his own word to the prayer. I bolded the addition. I'm just very picky about things being said correctly without embellishing
Quote from: TandJ on March 11, 2024, 10:16:27 PMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He added his own word to the prayer. I bolded the addition. I'm just very picky about things being said correctly without embellishing
He still didn't add anything to the absolution itself.
Welcome to the local Novus Ordo parish.
Do you have a certainly valid traditional Catholic priest in your area or within driving distance (Resistance/SSPX/Sedevacantist)? I would go to that priest and stop going to the NO.
Added: I would also discuss this "confession" with him. He may advise you to make another general confession.
Agreed. Don't sleep with dogs then complain you have fleas.
Quote from: Baylee on March 12, 2024, 05:10:33 AMWelcome to the local Novus Ordo parish.
Do you have a certainly valid traditional Catholic priest in your area or within driving distance (Resistance/SSPX/Sedevacantist)? I would go to that priest and stop going to the NO.
Added: I would also discuss this "confession" with him. He may advise you to make another general confession.
Besides the absolution what is wrong with my confession?
Quote from: TandJ on March 12, 2024, 07:16:01 AMQuote from: Baylee on March 12, 2024, 05:10:33 AMWelcome to the local Novus Ordo parish.
Do you have a certainly valid traditional Catholic priest in your area or within driving distance (Resistance/SSPX/Sedevacantist)? I would go to that priest and stop going to the NO.
Added: I would also discuss this "confession" with him. He may advise you to make another general confession.
Besides the absolution what is wrong with my confession?
Absolutely nothing wrong with your confession. I am speaking of the absolution. Sorry...I can see how that might have been misinterpreted.
I think a Traditional Catholic priest would probably advise you to do your general confession with him after learning of the so-called Novus Ordo "absolution". Even after you corrected him, he refused to say the right words.
What a farce.
Quote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Quote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Well that's distressing that there's nobody who can figure out things like this in regards to validity
Quote from: TandJ on March 12, 2024, 09:24:59 AMWell that's distressing that there's nobody who can figure out things like this in regards to validity
There is a Vatican office whose job is to answer questions regarding the validity of dubious sacramental forms, but it is not likely that you would be able to get their attention.
Quote from: TandJ on March 12, 2024, 09:24:59 AMWell that's distressing that there's nobody who can figure out things like this in regards to validity
It was almost certainly valid. The question of importance is whether it was licit. Even if it wasn't, the culpability is on him, not you. If your contrition was true, and you attempted to the best of your abilities to make a good confession, God is not going to withhold the absolution from you on a technicality that isn't even your fault.
Quote from: Melkite on March 12, 2024, 12:45:26 PMQuote from: TandJ on March 12, 2024, 09:24:59 AMWell that's distressing that there's nobody who can figure out things like this in regards to validity
It was almost certainly valid. The question of importance is whether it was licit. Even if it wasn't, the culpability is on him, not you. If your contrition was true, and you attempted to the best of your abilities to make a good confession, God is not going to withhold the absolution from you on a technicality that isn't even your fault.
The problem is the form of absolution is not "May I absolve......", but "I absolve.....". One wouldn't say that a person is almost certainly validly baptized if the form used was "May I baptize you..." rather than "I baptize you.....".
Quote from: Melkite on March 12, 2024, 12:45:26 PMIt was almost certainly valid.
And on what basis do you make this judgment?
Quote from: Melkite on March 12, 2024, 12:45:26 PMThe question of importance is whether it was licit.
Wrong. A man would be culpable for receiving a sacrament illicitly only if that man knew that it would be illicit and received it anyway, like receiving one's sacraments from one of the Eastern Orthodox churches.
Quote from: Melkite on March 12, 2024, 12:45:26 PMEven if it wasn't, the culpability is on him, not you. If your contrition was true, and you attempted to the best of your abilities to make a good confession, God is not going to withhold the absolution from you on a technicality that isn't even your fault.
Why rely on subjective assurances when one could have objective certainty simply by going to a priest who won't mangle the formula?
Quote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Understood but "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" is the exact form.
And the priest said that according to the OP. Just because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
That's all I'm saying. If Our Lord has an issue with it I don't think he would deny the penitent.
Quote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
Quote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Understood but "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" is the exact form.
And the priest said that according to the OP. Just because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
That's all I'm saying. If Our Lord has an issue with it I don't think he would deny the penitent.
Oh yes it does. The form of a sacrament must be exactly as the Church requires. As I said before, "may I baptize you ...." is NOT the same as the required form of "I baptize you...". The former would not be a valid baptism because the form was changed.
And just think of the absurdity that a lay person has to inform a priest what the proper form is to absolve. People need to stay far away from these men.
Quote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 13, 2024, 07:32:09 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
Quote from: Baylee on March 13, 2024, 09:42:57 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Understood but "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" is the exact form.
And the priest said that according to the OP. Just because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
That's all I'm saying. If Our Lord has an issue with it I don't think he would deny the penitent.
Oh yes it does. The form of a sacrament must be exactly as the Church requires. As I said before, "may I baptize you ...." is NOT the same as the required form of "I baptize you...". The former would not be a valid baptism because the form was changed.
And just think of the absurdity that a lay person has to inform a priest what the proper form is to absolve. People need to stay far away from these men.
I'll ask a priest I know. He's meticulous about proper form on anything liturgical or sacramental. (He takes a hour and a half or more to pray a Low Mass)
I would say the priest did wrong with adding 'may' like he was asking your permission to give absolution, modern bs of involving the layperson and omitting God.
However I definitely read a canon law about someone going in good faith confessing to a bad priest that God supplies jurisdiction and also not only that, if the person who is confessing suspects the priest of bad doings and is in two minds if the confession was valid, even if both sides of the argument are convincing, that is not the job of the layperson to figure it out and God supplies jurisdiction.
To this day I regret not recording those canons.
I think you were forgiven but I would never go back to that priest again.
p.s. I am just some random nobody on the internet and would advise going to a good priest.
Quote from: Acolyte on March 13, 2024, 04:26:45 PMI'll ask a priest I know. He's meticulous about proper form on anything liturgical or sacramental. (He takes a hour and a half or more to pray a Low Mass)
Take this with you:
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08069b.htm
QuoteThe opinion once defended by such theologians as Catharinus and Salmeron that there need only be the intention to perform deliberately the external rite proper to each sacrament, and that, as long as this was true, the interior dissent of the minister from the mind of the Church would not invalidate the sacrament, no longer finds adherents. The common doctrine now is that a real internal intention to act as a minister of Christ, or to do what Christ instituted the sacraments to effect, in other words, to truly baptize, absolve, etc., is required.
Quote from: Baylee on March 13, 2024, 09:42:57 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Understood but "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" is the exact form.
And the priest said that according to the OP. Just because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
That's all I'm saying. If Our Lord has an issue with it I don't think he would deny the penitent.
Oh yes it does. The form of a sacrament must be exactly as the Church requires. As I said before, "may I baptize you ...." is NOT the same as the required form of "I baptize you...". The former would not be a valid baptism because the form was changed.
And just think of the absurdity that a lay person has to inform a priest what the proper form is to absolve. People need to stay far away from these men.
How do you justify that?
Just curious
"
I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost" is the form....those 16 words.
If they say those 16 words exactly as is, and pour water over the head at the same time, form and matter are satisfied.
Quote from: LausTibiChriste on March 14, 2024, 03:22:25 PMQuote from: Baylee on March 13, 2024, 09:42:57 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Understood but "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" is the exact form.
And the priest said that according to the OP. Just because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
That's all I'm saying. If Our Lord has an issue with it I don't think he would deny the penitent.
Oh yes it does. The form of a sacrament must be exactly as the Church requires. As I said before, "may I baptize you ...." is NOT the same as the required form of "I baptize you...". The former would not be a valid baptism because the form was changed.
And just think of the absurdity that a lay person has to inform a priest what the proper form is to absolve. People need to stay far away from these men.
How do you justify that?
Just curious
"I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost" is the form....those 16 words.
If they say those 16 words exactly as is, and pour water over the head at the same time, form and matter are satisfied.
One cannot add, delete or change words. This Novus Ordo priest added the word "May" (in the case of absolution, not baptism...I was just using the form of baptism as an example). Did you miss that?
Unfortunately I live in an area with very little traditional priests. Our Latin mass got canceled recently. I'm pretty depressed about the state of the Church. I spent the day Tuesday ugly crying over it. I guess I have to shop around until I can get absolved properly
Quote from: TandJ on March 14, 2024, 06:02:47 PMUnfortunately I live in an area with very little traditional priests. Our Latin mass got canceled recently. I'm pretty depressed about the state of the Church. I spent the day Tuesday ugly crying over it. I guess I have to shop around until I can get absolved properly
Yeah. Unfortunately, we do need to do our due diligence these days.
In the morning I will post some links with Traditional priests. You may find one within a reasonable distance or one that could make the trek your way.
God will provide.
Take a gander here:
https://www.ecclesia.luxvera.org/Directory-USA.html
Quote from: TandJ on March 14, 2024, 06:02:47 PMUnfortunately I live in an area with very little traditional priests. Our Latin mass got canceled recently. I'm pretty depressed about the state of the Church. I spent the day Tuesday ugly crying over it. I guess I have to shop around until I can get absolved properly
For each parish in your area, go to their website, and look for the bulletin. The bulletin should list their confession times.
Pick the parish with the most confession times. Not for your convenience, but because the parish with the most confession times is probably the parish that takes confession most seriously.
Quote from: Baylee on March 14, 2024, 04:21:17 PMQuote from: LausTibiChriste on March 14, 2024, 03:22:25 PMQuote from: Baylee on March 13, 2024, 09:42:57 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 12, 2024, 09:16:04 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 11, 2024, 09:49:58 PM"I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Spirit."
You say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
He changed it from the first-person present tense to the first-person subjunctive tense.
Many people might say, "May I earn a million dollars per year," but very few of them can say, "I earn a million dollars per year."
OP: You will never get a definitive answer about whether the absolution was valid. If you don't find yourself at peace and want certainty, then find a TLM parish and make your confession there.
Understood but "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" is the exact form.
And the priest said that according to the OP. Just because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
That's all I'm saying. If Our Lord has an issue with it I don't think he would deny the penitent.
Oh yes it does. The form of a sacrament must be exactly as the Church requires. As I said before, "may I baptize you ...." is NOT the same as the required form of "I baptize you...". The former would not be a valid baptism because the form was changed.
And just think of the absurdity that a lay person has to inform a priest what the proper form is to absolve. People need to stay far away from these men.
How do you justify that?
Just curious
"I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost" is the form....those 16 words.
If they say those 16 words exactly as is, and pour water over the head at the same time, form and matter are satisfied.
One cannot add, delete or change words. This Novus Ordo priest added the word "May" (in the case of absolution, not baptism...I was just using the form of baptism as an example). Did you miss that?
No I didn't miss that. But the form is the specific words I mentioned, "I baptize you etc...""
THAT'S the form.
If he says "I may baptize you" form annulled, not valid,
But if he says, "May I baptize you..." the form is still valid
Someone who knows what they're talking about please correct me if I'm wrong.
Quote from: LausTibiChriste on March 15, 2024, 08:45:06 AMIf he says "I may baptize you" form annulled, not valid,
But if he says, "May I baptize you..." the form is still valid
Someone who knows what they're talking about please correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm not making the claim that it's definitely invalid. But it's also not definitely valid. It is somewhere in between: dubious. It could be that the priest is orthodox but careless with his words, or it could be that he doesn't believe that he's even confecting a sacrament. We don't know.
Quote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 15, 2024, 09:07:17 AMQuote from: LausTibiChriste on March 15, 2024, 08:45:06 AMIf he says "I may baptize you" form annulled, not valid,
But if he says, "May I baptize you..." the form is still valid
Someone who knows what they're talking about please correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm not making the claim that it's definitely invalid. But it's also not definitely valid. It is somewhere in between: dubious. It could be that the priest is orthodox but careless with his words, or it could be that he doesn't believe that he's even confecting a sacrament. We don't know.
Yes, I would say that
at the very least it is doubtful. Therefore, I wouldn't take a chance and assume it is valid (whether we're dealing with baptism or absolution).
I'm fairly certain that there can be
NO modifications to the form. Period. If I find something official, I will post it.
Baylee,
I agree with you, but my argument is that the form is the words "I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"
Anything outside that could make it dubious, of course, "This is bullshit but I'll do it anyways because God doesn't exist and Catholicism is fake and gay but may I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"
The form still exists in that sentence. Intention, as far as I know, does not influence the validity of Baptism but I am very happy to be corrected, as I've stated before.
Quote from: LausTibiChriste on March 15, 2024, 11:07:56 AMIntention, as far as I know, does not influence the validity of Baptism but I am very happy to be corrected
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08069b.htm
QuoteThe opinion once defended by such theologians as Catharinus and Salmeron that there need only be the intention to perform deliberately the external rite proper to each sacrament, and that, as long as this was true, the interior dissent of the minister from the mind of the Church would not invalidate the sacrament, no longer finds adherents. The common doctrine now is that a real internal intention to act as a minister of Christ, or to do what Christ instituted the sacraments to effect, in other words, to truly baptize, absolve, etc., is required.
You are now corrected.
Quote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 15, 2024, 12:18:54 PMQuote from: LausTibiChriste on March 15, 2024, 11:07:56 AMIntention, as far as I know, does not influence the validity of Baptism but I am very happy to be corrected
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08069b.htm
QuoteThe opinion once defended by such theologians as Catharinus and Salmeron that there need only be the intention to perform deliberately the external rite proper to each sacrament, and that, as long as this was true, the interior dissent of the minister from the mind of the Church would not invalidate the sacrament, no longer finds adherents. The common doctrine now is that a real internal intention to act as a minister of Christ, or to do what Christ instituted the sacraments to effect, in other words, to truly baptize, absolve, etc., is required.
You are now corrected.
Thank you.
Quote from: LausTibiChriste on March 15, 2024, 11:07:56 AMBaylee,
I agree with you, but my argument is that the form is the words "I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"
Anything outside that could make it dubious, of course, "This is bullshit but I'll do it anyways because God doesn't exist and Catholicism is fake and gay but may I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"
The form still exists in that sentence. Intention, as far as I know, does not influence the validity of Baptism but I am very happy to be corrected, as I've stated before.
But you've still added to the form.
This seems to deal with all of this. The examples at the start of the Note are certainly more egregious than the one we are talking about, but it still speaks to the not changing, adding or removing anything:
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20240202_gestis-verbisque_en.html#_ednref32
Excerpt:
17. For all the Sacraments, in any event, observance of both the matter and the form has always been required for the validity of the celebration. Arbitrary changes to one or the other—the severity and invalidating force of which must be ascertained on a case-by-case basis—jeopardize the effective bestowal of sacramental grace to the clear detriment of the faithful.[31] Both matter and form, summarized by the Code of Canon Law,[32] are established in the liturgical books promulgated by the competent authority. Those books must be faithfully observed; one may not "add, remove, or change anything."[33]
18. Related to matter and form is the intention of the minister who celebrates the Sacrament. Here, the issue of the minister's intention should be distinguished clearly from that of his personal faith and moral condition, which do not affect the validity of the gift of grace.[34] Indeed, the minister must have the "intention of doing at least what the Church does,"[35] which makes the sacramental action a truly human act, removed from any automatism, and a fully ecclesial act, removed from personal arbitrariness. Moreover, since what the Church does is precisely that which Christ has instituted,[36] the intention—together with matter and form—also contributes to making the sacramental action an extension of the Lord's saving work.
Matter, form, and intention are intrinsically united. They are integrated into the sacramental action such that intention becomes the unifying principle of the matter and form, making them into a sacred sign by which grace is conferred ex opere operato.[37]As to intention:
19. Unlike matter and form, which represent the perceivable and objective element of the Sacrament, the minister's intention—along with the recipient's disposition—represents the Sacrament's interior and subjective element. However, by its very nature, this element tends to be manifested externally by observance of the rite established by the Church. For this reason, the grave alteration of the essential elements also introduces doubt about the minister's real intention, vitiating the validity of the Sacrament celebrated.[38] For, as a principle, the intention to do what the Church does is expressed in the use of the matter and the form that the Church has established.[39]
Of course, the irony in all of this discussion is the question of the validity of the New Rites of Episcopal Consecration and Ordination (ie. the new priests and bishops) due to the changes made in the form of those sacraments by the conciliar Vatican II church. If they aren't real priests, then it doesn't matter whether they say the right form of absolution or not. But I understand that this topic can be very upsetting/unsettling.
Quote from: Baylee on March 15, 2024, 01:42:24 PMOf course, the irony in all of this discussion is the question of the validity of the New Rites of Episcopal Consecration and Ordination (ie. the new priests and bishops) due to the changes made in the form of those sacraments by the conciliar Vatican II church. If they aren't real priests, then it doesn't matter whether they say the right form of absolution or not. But I understand that this topic can be very upsetting/unsettling.
Absolution sure.
But Baptism anyone can do.
Quote from: Baylee on March 12, 2024, 05:10:33 AMWelcome to the local Novus Ordo parish.
Do you have a certainly valid traditional Catholic priest in your area or within driving distance (Resistance/SSPX/Sedevacantist)? I would go to that priest and stop going to the NO.
Added: I would also discuss this "confession" with him. He may advise you to make another general confession.
The SSPX priest who absolved me yesterday has to be 85+ years old. There is something comforting knowing he was ordained in Ye Olde Rite. T and J: God knows your heart. Hang in there.
I tend to usually not want to be scrupulous nor add fuel to the fire of one suffering from scruples or PTSD.
However, the adding of "may I" right before the essential form appears to change the meaning of the essential form. From a declaratory sentence to a question.
I cannot authoritatively say this was invalid, but I would recommend that you discuss this issue with a solid Catholic priest, ad cautelam.
Quote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 13, 2024, 07:32:09 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
I don't think intention is really the issue here, but the addition of words literally right before the essential form which appear to change the meaning of the essential form.
"May I baptize you..." is the same in my opinion.
If I were in this case, I would go to a priest I trusted with my family, explain, and request absolution for any and all sins made at said confession.
I'm going to try again tomorrow with a young priest. I'm fully prepared to threaten to send a letter to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith if I'm not taken seriously and given correct absolution.
Quote from: Bonaventure on March 19, 2024, 11:50:46 AMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 13, 2024, 07:32:09 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
I don't think intention is really the issue here, but the addition of words literally right before the essential form which appear to change the meaning of the essential form.
"May I baptize you..." is the same in my opinion.
If I were in this case, I would go to a priest I trusted with my family, explain, and request absolution for any and all sins made at said confession.
When I was questioning him to ask why he said *may* he said it made the sentences flow better instead of abruptly saying "AND I" He's an Indian Priest.
I emailed both the pastor of the Church and Bishop and never heard back. Guess I have to go to the Dicastery
Quote from: TandJ on March 19, 2024, 01:00:21 PMQuote from: Bonaventure on March 19, 2024, 11:50:46 AMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 13, 2024, 07:32:09 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
I don't think intention is really the issue here, but the addition of words literally right before the essential form which appear to change the meaning of the essential form.
"May I baptize you..." is the same in my opinion.
If I were in this case, I would go to a priest I trusted with my family, explain, and request absolution for any and all sins made at said confession.
When I was questioning him to ask why he said *may* he said it made the sentences flow better instead of abruptly saying "AND I" He's an Indian Priest.
I emailed both the pastor of the Church and Bishop and never heard back. Guess I have to go to the Dicastery. This has been a good learning opportunity for my family though because I made sure to tell my kids exactly how things are to be said and THEY need to be the ones to make sure sacraments are administered correctly.
Quote from: TandJ on March 19, 2024, 01:00:21 PMQuote from: Bonaventure on March 19, 2024, 11:50:46 AMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 13, 2024, 07:32:09 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
I don't think intention is really the issue here, but the addition of words literally right before the essential form which appear to change the meaning of the essential form.
"May I baptize you..." is the same in my opinion.
If I were in this case, I would go to a priest I trusted with my family, explain, and request absolution for any and all sins made at said confession.
When I was questioning him to ask why he said *may* he said it made the sentences flow better instead of abruptly saying "AND I" He's an Indian Priest.
I emailed both the pastor of the Church and Bishop and never heard back. Guess I have to go to the Dicastery
That's always an issue with priests using a different language than their mother tongue.
It's almost as if, the Church insisted upon Latin...for a reason...
Quote from: TandJ on March 19, 2024, 01:00:21 PMQuote from: Bonaventure on March 19, 2024, 11:50:46 AMQuote from: ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez on March 13, 2024, 07:32:09 AMQuote from: Acolyte on March 12, 2024, 07:45:34 PMJust because he said "may" before "I" doesn't change the text of the absolution itself.
What if the priest had said, "God doesn't exist, so this doesn't do anything, but I know you won't leave me alone until you hear it, so..." and then the words of absolution?
The text wouldn't have changed.
I don't think intention is really the issue here, but the addition of words literally right before the essential form which appear to change the meaning of the essential form.
"May I baptize you..." is the same in my opinion.
If I were in this case, I would go to a priest I trusted with my family, explain, and request absolution for any and all sins made at said confession.
When I was questioning him to ask why he said *may* he said it made the sentences flow better instead of abruptly saying "AND I" He's an Indian Priest.
I emailed both the pastor of the Church and Bishop and never heard back. Guess I have to go to the Dicastery
:doh:
Sadly my second confession didn't go well. The priest rushed me and I couldn't say all that I had wanted so I said I had a sin I hadn't confessed before so I could mention a circumstance I forgot about which is a lie. I think I made a bad confession
Quote from: TandJ on March 20, 2024, 11:21:32 AMSadly my second confession didn't go well. The priest rushed me and I couldn't say all that I had wanted so I said I had a sin I hadn't confessed before so I could mention a circumstance I forgot about which is a lie. I think I made a bad confession
Can you rephrase this? I don't think I'm understanding.
So the priest told me not to confess things from before my last confession however I know I didn't mention a circumstance that definitely needed to be confessed so I lied and said it didn't confess this sin so I could squeeze it in. He reminded me of the people waiting (I didn't think I had been very long) and seemed upset at me so I didn't say what I wanted to say. I'm really tempted to give up on confession because it's just too much for me. I always seem to make the confessors angry and I just don't know how much more I can handle
Quote from: Baylee on March 14, 2024, 08:05:39 PMQuote from: TandJ on March 14, 2024, 06:02:47 PMUnfortunately I live in an area with very little traditional priests. Our Latin mass got canceled recently. I'm pretty depressed about the state of the Church. I spent the day Tuesday ugly crying over it. I guess I have to shop around until I can get absolved properly
Yeah. Unfortunately, we do need to do our due diligence these days.
In the morning I will post some links with Traditional priests. You may find one within a reasonable distance or one that could make the trek your way.
God will provide.
Take a gander here:
https://www.ecclesia.luxvera.org/Directory-USA.html
I'm quoting my previous post in this thread. TandJ, please research. Given your tendency to scruples, I think you need to get spiritual direction from a certainly valid Traditional priest, not from any one of us on this site. Have you checked to see if any of these options are within a reasonable distance from your home? Also, I'm guessing that, although you cannot do confession via the phone, you could at least call them for advice.
QuoteYou say that's what he said. What's the problem ?
She has scruples.
The Lord doesn't set traps for you. He died, shedding every drop of His most Precious Blood for love of you.
Every day, look upon a crucifix and say , "I love you, Lord".
QuoteI'm really tempted to give up on confession because it's just too much for me.
Understand that this is the goal of the demons, to drag you away from the sacraments and prayer. Continue going to confession, and tell the priest up front: "I have scruples", and then confess.
And when the demons come and tell you: "You sin more by going to confession!", LAUGH at them and say, "Guardian Angel, what idiot demons. The Lord loved me so much, He died for my sins. He makes excuses to save me. I have hope in my salvation, unlike goofy demons who are lost for ever."