This is why I have confession PTSD

[Acolyte]

"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.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

Just 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.

[Baylee]

"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.

[Acolyte]

Just 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 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)

[diaduit]

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.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

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)

Take this with you:

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08069b.htm

The 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.

[LausTibiChriste]

"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.

[Baylee]

"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?

[TandJ]

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

[Baylee]

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

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

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

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

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.

[LausTibiChriste]

"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.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

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.

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.

[Baylee]

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.

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. 

[LausTibiChriste]

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.