Posted on 08/18/2011 7:18:16 AM PDT by marshmallow
So why is the seal of confession inviolable? Why does the seal bind under such a grave obligation that the Church excommunicates any confessor who directly violates it? (See: The seal of confession: some basics)
There are two principal reasons why the priest must preserve the seal: the virtue of justice and the virtue of religion. The motive of justice is evident because the penitent, by the very fact of entering the confessional, or asking the priest to hear his confession (we’ll deal with “reconciliation rooms” another day) rightly expects that the priest will observe the seal. This is a contract entered into by the fact of the priest agreeing to hear a person’s confession. To mandate the violation of the seal is in effect to prohibit the celebration of the sacrament of Penance.
Much more grave than the obligation of justice towards the penitent is the obligation of religion due to the sacrament. The Catholic Encyclopaedia gives a brief explanation of the virtue of religion which essentially summarises the teaching of St Thomas Aquinas. (Summa Theologica 2a 2ae q.81) Religion is a moral virtue by which we give to God what is His due; it is, as St Thomas says, a part of justice. In the case of the sacrament of Penance, instituted by Christ, Fr Felix Cappello explains things well [my translation]:
By the very fact that Christ permitted, nay ordered, that all baptised sinners should use the sacrament and consequently make a secret confession, he granted an absolutely inviolable right, transcending the order of natural justice, to use this remedy. Therefore the knowledge which was their own before confession, after the communication made in confession, remains their own for every non-sacramental use, and that by a power altogether sacred, which no contrary human law can strike out, since every human law is of an inferior order: whence this right cannot be taken away or overridden by any means, or any pretext, or any motive.
The penitent confesses his sins to God through the priest. If the seal were to be broken under some circumstances, it would put people off the sacrament and thereby prevent them from receiving the grace that they need in order to repent and amend their lives. It would also, and far more importantly, obstruct the will of God for sinners to make use of the sacrament of Penance and thereby enjoy eternal life. The grace of the sacrament is absolutely necessary for anyone who commits a mortal sin. To mandate the violation of the seal is in effect to prohibit the practice of the Catholic faith. Some secular commentators have spoken of the seal of confession as being somehow a right or privilege of the priest. That is a preposterous misrepresentation: it is a sacred and inviolable duty that the priest must fulfil for the sake of the penitent and for the sake of God's will to redeem sinners.
A possibly misleading phrase in this context is where theologians say that the penitent is confessing his sins as if to God "ut Deo." (You can easily imagine secularists deriding the idea that the priest makes himself to be a god etc.) In truth, the penitent is confessing his sins before God. The priest acts as the minister of Christ in a sacred trust which he may not violate for any cause - precisely because he is not in fact God. By virtue of the penitent’s confession ut Deo, the priest absolves the penitent and, if mortal sin is involved, thereby readmits him to Holy Communion.
There will be more to follow on the sacrament of confession. As I mentioned in my previous post, this series is not intended as a guide for making a devout confession but rather as an introduction to some canonical and theological questions regarding the sacrament which have become important recently. (For a leaflet on how to make a good confession, see my parish website.)
I have been told that the threat in Ireland to introduce a law compelling priests to violate the seal of confession has been withdrawn, at least for the time being. Nevertheless, I will continue with these posts because I think that the Irish proposal will be picked up by other secularists and may pose a problem for us. Further posts will look at the proper place, time and vesture for hearing confessions, one or two more particular crimes in canon law, the question of jurisdiction and the much misused expression “Ecclesia supplet”, and, of course, what to do if the civil authority tries to compel a priest to break the seal.
See post 1199
No it doesn't. Just because Luther exercised "poetic license" doesn't mean all Protestants get too.
The original word used in that verse means ministering “like the Priests used to do”.
I think that that is an over-specific translation which assumes what it seeks to prove. I don't think the word has the specificity of "used to do". It's like the KJV translation of Col 1:24 which clearly is a reach to avoid having to suggest that it is in anyway thinkable that there might somehow be something lacking the sufferings of Christ. You could jut barely justify the artifical KJV usage if you HAD to. But if you come to the words without an agenda, you get something else.
I would suggest you do more study on the Greek word usage. Part of it is included in the web site I gave you. Search out the truth. Don’t just try to fit it to the RCC or any other “church doctrine”.
The one whom they have tried to elevate above Jesus?? Fools have said smarter things than that.
As for Paul being a bishop, please re-read 2 Tim 1:6-12. He was what he said he was: a preacher, an apostle, and a teacher. Once again, try not to change God's word to suit your religion. It will be done in vain as long as there are people on this forum who SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES DAILY TO SEE IF THOSE THINGS WERE SO. You won't get away with it. But thanks for playing.
I was paraphrasing of course but the reference was to the Jewish Priests. My point was that it was in no way implying or stating an official New Testament priesthood had been instituted. You obviously didn’t go to the site I gave to read up. About half way down the page.
Oops, I missed the part where you said you had gone to the page. My bad. Sorry.
There can be no real reasoned discourse with those who state, emphatically, without reading Paul’s participation in the Jerusalem Council OR his letters or Epistles, that Paul was a Catholic priest. What kind of response do you expect from us? The notion is so ridiculous that the only response that can be given is a ridiculous one. Do you think I am going to spend my time explaining the color orange to a blind man? Or playing Bohemian Rhapsody for him to learn the words to?
Jesus called the Twelve *apostles* not priests. If He intended the priesthood to continue, then perhaps some Catholic could explain why He wasn’t more explicit about it and why neither He nor Peter left clearer instructions in the Scripture that the Catholic church claims it wrote?
For that matter, that applies to tons of Catholic doctrine. Much of what the church currently teaches can only be very tentatively supported by the loosest translations of only one or maybe two verses in the whole NT, and maybe some out of the OT.
1 John 5:9-11
King James Version (KJV)
9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
It could also involve how you do (or can) know you have truly (or sufficiently) "honored God by taking Him at His word."
Jesus said that if we have faith as the grain of a mustard seed, we could move mountains. It seems then, that the criteria is any amount of faith, that that is sufficient, because it's not how big our faith is but how big the God we put our faith in is.
Back to the being rescued at sea illustration. I'm not a big fan of heights. The thought of being lifted from the sea by a rope into a hovering helicopter is not one I would relish as I would worry about how strong the rope is, but my part in that is still just to rest and trust even if there is apprehension on my part, to have faith in the rescuers.
At the time that I became a Christian, I had been away from the Catholic church for a few years. When the crisis in my life pushed me towards God, I started talking to Him again, just in a conversational way, not anything I had been taught by Catholicism but I did sense that He was listening.
The turning point came when one day I told God, " If you can straighten out this mess of a life f mine, you can have it. I'll do whatever you want. I'll even become a missionary and go to Africa if you want, because I'd rather be happy doing what you want than keep on going the way I am." (and that's word for word. Even after all these years, that moment was burned into my memory) Not much changed in my circumstances, but something certainly changed inside and I felt a little bit better.
A few months later, a co-worker who had been sharing the Gospel with me was talking about the end times and that the way to avoid going through the Tribulation was to ask Christ into your heart as an act of your will.
My reaction was, *That's it!! That's what I want.* (Not even so much avoiding the Tribulation but the asking Jesus into my heart) So standing there I prayed silently in that moment saying, "I don't understand what asking you into my heart as an act of my will means, but I will You in". God answered that prayer because that's when a LOT changed inside, immediately.
I felt like a new person inside, clean. I felt the conviction that I needed to start reading the Bible and going to church. So I went out and bought my first Bible and started attending church. I *knew* I needed to start giving financially, not doing it because someone told me I needed to, so I did that.
I lost interest in going to bars, which BTW, I don't see either that or moderate drinking as sin, but I just wasn't interested in the bar scene any more.
If I sinned, it had a far different impact on me in the form of conviction that I needed to repent and ask forgiveness and keep short accounts with God, instead of blowing it off.
What it boils down to is that there was a dramatic and significant internal change in me that worked out in my life and the resultant works attested outwardly to others, and even to me, of the fact that I had exercised saving faith. I knew it from what I experienced internally but others could see it from the external changes.
And it was not an emotional response. I thank God that none of the significant spiritual experiences I've had have been during or the result of a church service. That way it CAN'T be attributed to some emotional experience because of being whipped up in an emotional frenzy as seems to happen in some groups.
It's not perfect faith. but it doesn't need to be God knows we can neer be perfect and there is one thing I'm absolutely convinced of and that is that He meets us where we are. If we have that desire, He responses and honors it.
Sure, I've had moments of doubt. Satan plants that in one's mind to prevent someone from being an effective, Spirit filled witness for God. However, I don't believe that God condemns us for that. Jesus was gracious and merciful with Thomas. He was the same for Peter who even denied Him.
I also believe that my continuing to trust Him and believe Him in the midst of less than ideal circumstances attests to the exercise of saving faith. I have struggled with this food disorder, of which you can find more information on a RF prayer thread. Not much has changed in the year since it was posted. I still feel like I'm living on borrowed time, but God has worked in my life in ways that I never expected. And that is sufficient for me.
I hope that answers adequately. If not, let me know.
Exactly, mm. The NT should be FULL of Catholic teachings and doctrines. If this was the Mother Church, then where are all the instructions that match up with Catholic rituals and rites? I’m pretty sure God would not have left such vague Catholic instructions between the lines of His PERFECT word to us. And gee-whiz, there would be NO need for catechism if Scripture was understood as God’s word to fallen man, and God’s reaching out to us. Who in their right mind would think they could add to or take from or change what God has clearly spoken in His word?
He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself
I see this as different than knowing " we exercised faith and honored God by taking Him at his word" and therefore elicits a different question of how it is known by us.
How do you or anyone know that you "hath the witness in himself."?
Amen! God bless you, Metmom, I continue to pray for you that God's will be done in your life, knowing that even if it means we continue or worsen in our suffering, it is all to his glory. There are unbelievers always watching us in how we deal with problems in our lives. They EXPECT us to do like they would do, reject God because he didn't "answer" our prayers the way WE expect him to. Yet what greater testimony is there than what Job said, "Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him."? That, to me, is the mark of true and surrendered faith - that through it all, we STILL continue to believe and trust the one to whom we know loves us and desires the best for us. Even when we go through trials, we trust that God works ALL things together for our good - just as he promised. He is faithful and true.
Amen. Beautiful!
You know what? Everyone has an answer for me or what I should do or how God wants to work in my life, as if they have some kind of in on God telling them specifically about me. That includes any number of people who hardly know me, have no ability to diagnose, have no clue what the disorder is, or what I know about it or have tried, and everybody has a different answer.
God has not yet shown me what the answer is. If someone wants to do something really useful, they can pray that God would heal me by whatever means, either miraculously or not.
If it's to be miraculously, that'd be great. If it's to be through some other means, then I'd appreciate it if they'd simply pray that God would reveal to ME how it is to be done, because I'm certainly not going to take just any stranger's word about it. I don't know the spiritual condition or any other person and if what they have to say is really a word from God for me or not, and I am not accepting that it is just on their say so. Some people seem to think that if they tell you that God told them something and you question it, you're some kind of heretic.
Sorry, just exercising spiritual discernment by NOT taking everything as face value.
And BTW, it's not celiac. I am not gluten sensitive, although I could wish it were something so simple. I've been tested every which way from Sunday for celiac and it's ALL come back negative.
I have been very blessed in my life as a Catholic.
As a Catholic wife I was singularly blessed to share life with a holy man.
Together we had many great kids.
All the children we brought into life have remained faithful Catholics. They have given us 24 grandchildren and 24 great-grandchildren.
I have had the blessing of becoming a Lay Carmelite, (who number over 10,000 worldwide). With my fellow Lay Carmelites in my geographical area, I have joined in public worship and private prayer, which is something we are committed to.
I have had two great Scripture teachers and owe these two men a debt of gratitude for all that I learned from them. One was a priest and one was a layman who is a naturalized citizen (born in Lebanon), has a doctorate, and is the father of 7 children.
Because my neighborhood church doors are open from 6 AM to 5PM every day, I’m able to go there on a daily basis, not only for daily Mass but to drop in anytime of day to spend time in prayer. If I want to go at any time in a 24-hour period, my neighboring parish has 24-hour Adoration in their chapel
I have been blessed with good friends and a good pastor, who along with my family, stood watch with me at my husband’s bedside when he was 18 months in home hospice.
I have given my life completely to the Lord; I ask Him daily to guide me in all I think, say and do, and I believe Him when He said “Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of time”.
That’s the short but clear explanation of the joy I have in being Catholic. I don’t need to go any further, because this will say it all for me.
.
There was hardly an "office" to make something "official, a priesthood or much else. Sometimes you have to DO something before you can sit back and dope out what it was you just did.
(I live in the land of dial-up and I'm making bread as we have the conversation so I probably won't be going to other sites unless it's desperately important.)
But I hope we can all share the humor of each side telling other not to read our prejudices into the translation.
Increasingly I think there is a not only the Nominalist/materialist/empiricist v Realist/idealist (or, better, substantialist)/metaphysical difference between our weltanchauungen but also a difference in the driving metaphors of which we are barely conscious. It's kind of, maybe, sort of related to how the meaning of words like "subjective" kind of flipped about 500 years ago.
(when I talk about this stuff, think of me as a little boy playing with his masters' tools. I'm probably at least as wrong as I am right about some of this stuff.)
Here's a suggestion of what I mean. We have no problem with the idea that our reverential behavior toward Mary and the saints does not detract from our worship of God. It would seem to us that a relevant and operative comparison would be SORT OF like a healthy family where the love of husband and wife is a feature of their love for their children and vice versa. Husband and wife love each other in their children and their children in each other.
But another metaphor, which tends in a kind of Lavoisier direction is that one has only so much love, and whatever love I give to my wife is love my children don't get. AND one has only so much reverence, and the reverence I give to Mary is reverence the Trinity does not get.
And so with priesthood. For you and us Christ is the Great High Priest, the last priest necessary,and what he did "back then" was "once and for all" atonement, etc.
And so, it seems natural to you that there would be no more priestly office and all the rest, for if there were, to you that would necessarily imply that there was something lacking (τὰ ὑστερήματα τῶν θλίψεων τοῦ Χριστοῦ) in what Hebrews and, sometimes it seems,practically everything else tells is superabundantly sufficient.
But to us, the "once for all" is -- through what I glibly call "the magic of eternity" -- right now. And the priest, as we say and your side mocks, is not a priest on his own toot,but by participation in the eternal and sufficient priesthood of Christ. And the "sacrifice of the Mass" is not added (heaven forbid!) to the sacrifice of Christ. For us rather, it IS that sacrifice, SORT OF as though there were a time/space warp right there.
So, if my description of the underlying metaphors and assumptions of those who oppose us is correct, that necessarily sounds ridiculous. And often my trying to state it has met with outraged dismissal, as though it were insulting of me to waste the time of wise people with such piffle.
Now when I say "materialist"or "empiricist"I don't mean to disparage the views as if it were somehow better of me to be something in the area of a "scholastic Realist." I DO, however mean to disparage the views because I think that, while they bring awesome results in the natural sciences, they really do not apply to the things we discuss.
But in any event, it is, I think, this difference of views rather than the parsing of the tense of a Greek word which makes the problem.
/end of obscure rant. I pinged Stfassisi and Quix because I'd be interested in any remark they cared to make (as long as it is in the default font and color ...:-) )
Wherefore we pray, early and often, "Jesus, I trust in you."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.