Question for anyone

[Socrates]

[quote name='TLJC' date='Jul 16 2005, 03:14 PM']Very true,

but maybe someone can answer me this quick question.
If the priest thinks your just confessing but your not really sorry he doesnt have to grant you a seal and can turn you into the police?

God only takes away our sins if we truly are sorry...   

If someone does a crime in the eyes of the law such as drink driving but not a sin under the church or God is that a sin? If we kill someone we have taken a life though a crime of DUI and caused death so is this a sin to be confessed to even though we are serving say 20 years prison for an "earth crime"
[right][snapback]645633[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


According to the old Baltimore Catechism, reckless or drunk driving is a sin against the fifth commandment, because it needlessly endangers lives. One must sacramentally confess one's sins for the purpose of obtaining Christ's forgiveness. This is a seperate matter from whether one has done his time for his crimes under the law.

Also, the Church teaches that the fourth commandment commands us to obey the civil law as long as the law in question does not go against God's law.

Edited July 16, 2005 by Socrates

[Norseman82]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jul 12 2005, 02:21 PM']For example, (and someone can correct me here) I do not believe someone can be immediately absolved of abortion.  I think there is a formal process that must be taken.  [right][snapback]641024[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

You are correct. Abortion incurs an automatic excommunication, and that is probably why normally the bishop must do the absolution. See canons 1398 and 508.

Now, here is something interesting that I found in the 1983 code of canon law regarding sanctions and penalties. In canon 1357 section 2 it states (regarding "emergency" confessions for automatic excommunications):

"In granting a remission, the confessor is to impose on the penitent the burden of having recourse within a month to a superior or priest endowed with the faculties and obeying his mandates under pain of reincidence of the penalty; in the meantime he should impose an appropriate penance and the reparation of any scandal or damage to the extent it is imperative; recourse can also be made by the confessor without mentioning any names."

Although this seems to be limited to certain situations, what I find interesting are the notions of "reincidence of penalties" if the penitent does not follow the mandate of the confessor and the "recourse without mentioning any names". At first glance these seem to be giving the confessor options of repairing damage without breaking the seal of confession.

Perhaps Frs. Pontifex or Cappie can comment on this?

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jul 16 2005, 04:47 PM']According to the old Baltimore Catechism, reckless or drunk driving is a sin against the fifth commandment, because it needlessly endangers lives.  [right][snapback]645725[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I've seen it in the new Catechism as well....

[Briguy]

I'll wait for my other question to be answered before I continue.

Thanks for the good answers.

In Christ,
Brian

[jasJis]

Briguy,
I'm not sure exactly what your specific question is/was that has not been answered.

A Catholic believes in God. A Christian believes that God will achieve perfect Justice. In the scenario you used, it seems impossible for humans to effect perfect Justice here on earth and still provide a real avenue of repentance and forgiveness. God will punish and reward with perfect Mercy and perfect Justice in our life with Him. "Vengance is mine, sayeth the Lord".

[Briguy]

Hi jasJis, This was the question from above:

""Second, you said a person can ask for a different penance. How many times? What if all they want is to say 100 "hail Mary's" and so they hold out for that because it is all they can handle. Is that Justice? Holy Justice?""

[Laudate_Dominum]

confusing your statement is. mercy do you not consider? much anger I sense in you, the path to the dark side this is.

[Quietfire]

Thank you Yoda

[Briguy]

Hi guys, Hey, I like Star Wars also. Did you watch Return of the Jedi, Special Edition lately. They did a real cool thing at the end but I won't say what it is in case you haven't seen it yet. Ok, back to the subject. I was not angry at all when I wrote that question. I am sorry it seemed like that. It is a real question that I have because I don't understand. As a Dad I gave my children the punishment I think they deserve. They cannot ask for a different one. well, then again they could ask but I most likely would not change the punishment. Also I would NEVER give a punishment they could not handle. I know my children well enough to not do that. Which come to think of it begs a second question. If the priest is "Jesus on earth" in terms of granting forgiveness should "Jesus" not know his children well enough to know what they can handle for penance? Lets face it Jesus would know but if the priest doesn't doesn't that show a flaw in the process? I have more to say but will wait for a response to both questions before I go on.

In Christ who saves,
Brian

[son_of_angels]

Actually, in the early church penances were given in front of the whole congregation, and absolution was reserved to the Bishop, so the seal of the confession is something which, possibly, is something imposed as a discipline in the Church.
It is, however, a discipline that is so serious, as it regards the content of someone's sin that it bars the priest from the Sacraments, making his soul in danger of hell.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Briguy' date='Jul 19 2005, 08:37 AM']Hi jasJis, This was the question from above:

""Second, you said a person can ask for a different penance. How many times? What if all they want is to say 100 "hail Mary's" and so they hold out for that because it is all they can handle. Is that Justice? Holy Justice?""
[right][snapback]649492[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Bri I have asked for different penances if the penance was already something I was doing, such as attending daily Mass. I obviously couldn't attend two daily Massses so I requested a different one.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Briguy' date='Jul 20 2005, 07:39 AM']If the priest is "Jesus on earth" in terms of granting forgiveness should "Jesus" not know his children well enough to know what they can handle for penance?  Lets face it Jesus would know but if the priest doesn't doesn't that show a flaw in the process? [right][snapback]650805[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Flaw? OF COURSE!! We're human, as are the priests. Jesus gave His 'authority', not His divine powers. God knows how and what He let's us do and will over-rule as He deems is proper. Suffice to say, humans can't see the entire picture, and we have to have faith in God's perfection to ultimately perfect things in the time frame God wants.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Briguy' date='Jul 19 2005, 07:37 AM']Hi jasJis, This was the question from above:

""Second, you said a person can ask for a different penance. How many times? What if all they want is to say 100 "hail Mary's" and so they hold out for that because it is all they can handle. Is that Justice? Holy Justice?""
[right][snapback]649492[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
God can and will answer t hat question. The idea that we humans must be able to answer that question now is a sign that we lack proper humility or lack trust in God.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='TLJC' date='Jul 11 2005, 10:24 AM']very good points there people... nicely put.

Lets say the man did repent and was sorry and could see the error in his ways. He still wasn't ready to go to the police.

Keeping in mind in England the law says no special requirement is given to any religion. Could this be classed as "with holding evidence" from the police.

As Catholics do we help a family that really needs help and also put an evil person somewhere he cant hurt again, or do we protect him.
Its a hard question....
[right][snapback]639251[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The Catholic Church is the oldest organization on earth given authority by God Himself. The Catholic Church only answers to God. No government on earth has authority over the Catholic Church... governments can persecute us but will never have authority.

Anything said in the confessional is between the sinner and Christ. The Priest is Christ's stand in. The speaking of the sin to a priest is the seal. The Church has spoken and there is nothing to debate.

What is more important a law by men or a law from God? God must come first. If the government attacks the Church for keeping it's loyalty to God, then that government will have to deal with God. There is much more to reality than this world. If we make it to Heaven, this life will seem like a distant dream.




[b]1467 [/b]
Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons, the Church declares that [u][b]every priest who hears confessions is bound under very severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy [/b][/u]regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him. He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents' lives.72 This secret, [b]which admits of no exceptions, is called the "sacramental seal,"[/b] because what the penitent has made known to the priest remains "sealed" by the sacrament.



God Bless,
ironmonk

[Briguy]

Interesting stuff, thanks for the answers. Here is a follow up question to my first question. Can a person in confession keep asking for another penance or will the priest at some point say take it or leave it?

I have always said that humans are flawed and that to me is the danger in confession. On one hand the confession is between God/Jesus and the person (the priest being Jesus). On the other hand you have no problem saying that the human priest can flaw the process. Why is God not able to make this sacrament perfect? If the priest is acting for God, why does God not miraculously (sp? - mind blank) come to the confessional and make the whole thing perfect? as Catholics you believe a miracle takes place ever time you have Communion (Lord's supper). I am not being a wise guy. I really think that is a good question. God can manifest himself in one sacrament but not in another. You say there is an unbreakable seal but also that there can be flawed men and a flawed process. Just trying to dig deep here and understand. Please just be challanged and not offended. I, by nature, take very deep looks at things to gain understanding. Thanks for helping me take a good look at this.

In Christian love and concern,
Brian

[Briguy]

Hmmmmm - no response.

I know I have not stumped everybody. If I do have you stumped just let me know so I don't keep checking this thread for answers. Thanks and God Bless,

Brian

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Briguy' date='Jul 21 2005, 09:48 AM']Interesting stuff, thanks for the answers. Here is a follow up question to my first question. Can a person in confession keep asking for another penance or will the priest at some point say take it or leave it? 

I have always said that humans are flawed and that to me is the danger in confession. On one hand the confession is between God/Jesus and the person (the priest being Jesus). On the other hand you have no problem saying that the human priest can flaw the process. Why is God not able to make this sacrament perfect?  If the priest is acting for God, why does God not miraculously (sp? - mind blank) come to the confessional and make the whole thing perfect?  as Catholics you believe a miracle takes place ever time you have Communion (Lord's supper). I am not being a wise guy. I really think that is a good question. God can manifest himself in one sacrament but not in another. You say there is an unbreakable seal but also that there can be flawed men and a flawed process. Just trying to dig deep here and understand. Please just be challanged and not offended. I, by nature, take very deep looks at things to gain understanding. Thanks for helping me take a good look at this.

In Christian love and concern,
Brian
[right][snapback]652288[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Confession is only as good as the intentions of the sinner. The priest is a stand in for Christ. Anything the priest hears, the priest cannot repeat, even if absolution is not given.

As far as the thought that since the Church is being run by men and since men are not perfect that maybe the Church could be wrong says that Christ was wrong. Either the Church is correct on morals and faith or there is no God....

Let me explain....

Christ said that the Church would be guided in all truth by the Holy Spirit. Chist said that He would be with the Church for all time. Christ said that the Church would never be overcome. Christ said that the Church would be like a city on a mountain for the world to see. Christ said those who hear the Church hear Him. Those who reject the Church reject Him. The Scriptures state to remain in unity and to have One Faith.

[quote][b]John 14:16 [/b]
[color=red]And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, [/color]
[b]17 [/b][color=red]the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you. [/color]
[b]18 [/b][color=red]I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. [/color]
...
[b]26 [/b][color=red]The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name--he will teach you everything and remind you of all that (I) told you.[/color]

[b]St. Matt 28:18 [/b] Then Jesus approached and said to them, "[color=red]All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. [/color]
[b]19 [/b][color=red]Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, [/color]
[b]20 [/b][color=red]teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age[/color]."

[b]Luke 10:16[/b] "[color=red]He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me[/color]"

[b]Matt 5:13 [/b]
"[color=red]You are the salt of the earth. But if salt loses its taste, with what can it be seasoned? It is no longer good for anything but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.[/color]
[b]14 [/b]    [color=red]You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden. [/color]
[b]15[/b]      [color=red]Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house. [/color]
[/quote]



Can Christ be wrong? No. If Christ was wrong then that would mean that there is no God.

The only way for what Christ said to be true is if the Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ, and that would mean that the Catholic Church is correct on all matters of faith and morals.

If the Catholic Church is not right, then there is no God.

Some like to argue that the bible is speaking to all Christians. If that was so that would mean that there is no God because all Christians contradict each other.... truth cannot contradict truth.... Christ cannot contradict Himself.... If the bible was speaking to all Christians and meaning all Christians then that would mean that the independant baptists, the community baptists, the lutherans, the pentacostals, the Catholic Church, and the church in the garage down the street that has a bible..... all are guided in all truth, or there is no God. If they all were guided in truth they would all agree, or there is no God. Since they all disagree on little things to big things. They cannot be considered one faith because they all have different faiths.... all of this means one of two things....

1) There is no God.
OR
2) The Catholic Church is right.


I know there is a God. I know His Church is the Catholic Church. There is only one Catholic Church which has the successor of Peter as Shepard just as Jesus requested.....

[quote][b]John 21:15 [/b]
When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "[color=red]Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?[/color]" He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "[color=red]Feed my lambs[/color]."
[b]16 [/b]He then said to him a second time, "[color=red]Simon, son of John, do you love me?[/color]" He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "[color=red]Tend my sheep[/color]."
[b]17 [/b]He said to him the third time, "[color=red]Simon, son of John, do you love me?[/color]" Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, "[color=red]Do you love me?[/color]" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." (Jesus) said to him, "[color=red]Feed my sheep[/color]."
[/quote]


Humans are flawed, but the Church established by God was not built by Humans and is guided by the Holy Spirit... therefore it can never be wrong. It is the Catholic Church, with Pope Benedict XVI as the successor of Peter.

This is what has been taught since 33 AD. No one believed that the bible was talking to every Christian until about 200 years ago. Think about it, how can it be every Christian if God is real? It can't. And if someone says "well, some are not real Christians.", then who decides who a real Christian is? How do we know who is right? All roads lead to Rome.

Ask yourself why do so many people lie about the Catholic Church and ignore the facts about the Catholic Church that anyone can lookup online.


[quote][b]Pope Clement I[/b]

"Through countryside and city [the apostles] preached, and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the Spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers. Nor was this a novelty, for bishops and deacons had been written about a long time earlier. . . . Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry" (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).

"Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy" (Letter to the Corinthians 1, 58–59, 63 [A.D. 80]).

[b] Hermas[/b]

"Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty" (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [A.D. 80]).

 
[b]Ignatius of Antioch[/b]

"Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father" (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]).

"You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force" (ibid., 3:1).

[b]Hegesippus[/b]

"When I had come to Rome, I [visited] Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. And after Anicetus [died], Soter succeeded, and after him Eleutherus. In each succession and in each city there is a continuance of that which is proclaimed by the law, the prophets, and the Lord" (Memoirs, cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4:22 [A.D. 180]).

 
[b]Irenaeus[/b]

"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known to us throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times, men who neither knew nor taught anything like what these heretics rave about" (Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189]).

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul—that church which has the tradition and the faith with which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world. And it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (ibid., 3:3:2). [/quote]



Listen to what the first Christians have to say about it if you will not listen to us. Please note the dates.

God Bless,
ironmonk

[Briguy]

Thanks for the post Iron Monk. A lot was not really related to the questions I was asking but I thank you for the content and the work you put into it. I appreciate your passion. I will hopefully be able to generate some follow up questions. You did not answer my first question. Everyone has kind of dodged it. The question about whether a person in confession can just keep asking for new penance. I'll be back!!

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Briguy' date='Jul 25 2005, 09:40 AM']Thanks for the post Iron Monk. A lot was not really related to the questions I was asking but I thank you for the content and the work you put into it. I appreciate your passion. I will hopefully be able to generate some follow up questions. You did not answer my first question. Everyone has kind of dodged it. The question about whether a person in confession can just keep asking for new penance. I'll be back!!
[right][snapback]657975[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The priest has the authority to refuse absolution because if the person is keeps asking for a different penance obviously has no intent of repenting. So if a priest believes the confession not to be pure and the sinner does not have the intention of changing then the sinner is not forgiven. If you think about it, someone who does not intend to change is not seeking forgiveness, but approval.

If someone confesses he is a serial killer or molester, and if he refuses to go to the police or undergo therapy, most people would expect the priest to refuse absolution. Even in this extreme case, the priest must respect the seal of confession.


Refs:
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/EXCOMMUN.TXT"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/EXCOMMUN.TXT[/url]
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/PENANCE.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/PENANCE.HTM[/url]
[url="http://landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/penance.htm"]http://landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/penance.htm[/url]


[quote][b]Canon Law[/b]
Can.  980 If the confessor has no doubt about the disposition of the penitent, and the penitent seeks absolution, absolution is to be neither refused nor deferred.

Can.  981 The confessor is to impose salutary and suitable penances in accord with the quality and number of sins, taking into account the condition of the penitent. The penitent is obliged to fulfill these personally.

Can.  982 Whoever confesses to have denounced falsely an innocent confessor to ecclesiastical authority concerning the crime of solicitation to sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue is not to be absolved unless the person has first formally retracted the false denunciation and is prepared to repair damages if there are any.

Can.  983 §1. The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason.

§2. The interpreter, if there is one, and all others who in any way have knowledge of sins from confession are also obliged to observe secrecy.

[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3G.HTM"]http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3G.HTM[/url][/quote]



I hope that helps answer your question.

God Bless,
ironmonk

Edited July 25, 2005 by ironmonk

[Briguy]

Ironmonk, Above I asked the question about why a miracle does not occur during confession. Lets face it for Connunion and baptism you believe a miracle takes place every time the sacrament is practiced. why not confession? You just said in your long post that Christ can't be wrong. You have said before that the priest acts in Christ's place in terms of hearing sin and giving penance. Why would Jesus not miraculously make the confessional perfect? - leaving no room for a flawded priest to do the wrong thing. That would be logical. It seems if Christ has "real presence" in the bread and wine of communion He could also manifest his presence in something as important as the confessional. At least in terms of perfectly guiding the priest to do exactly what is best for the confesser. Does that make logical sense to you? Why would Christ leave the priest, who is acting on His behalf, the ability to blow it? Why not work directly through the church?

I know, questions questions questions but you can't learn well without them.

In Christ,
Brian