This is why I have confession PTSD

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

Intention, 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

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.

You are now corrected.

[LausTibiChriste]

Intention, 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

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.

You are now corrected.

Thank you.

[Baylee]

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.

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]

[Baylee]

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.

[LausTibiChriste]

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.

Absolution sure.

But Baptism anyone can do.

[Heinrich]

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.

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.

[Bonaventure]

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.

[Bonaventure]

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 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.

[TandJ]

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. 

[TandJ]

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 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

[TandJ]

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 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.

[Bonaventure]

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 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...

[Baylee]

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 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

 

[TandJ]

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

[Baylee]

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

Can you rephrase this?  I don't think I'm understanding.