The Papists

Yes. The priest cannot give any identifiable information about a person from a particular confession. Priests take the seal of confession extremely seriously, because it is an extremely serious matter! Breaking the seal of confession is grounds for excommunication and being stripped of one’s duties as a priest for life. 

As a side note, I have heard that priests often have a difficult time remembering what people confess to them, likely one of the graces of the sacrament. And they hear so many confessions, there’s almost no way they would remember who said what. 

When talking about things they hear in the confessional, the most I have ever heard a priest say are things along the lines of, “People who struggle with anger and lust usually are dealing with an underlying problem, which just manifests itself in that way,” for example.

Thank you for your question!

All the Sacraments must meet three criteria to be valid: they must have correct form & matter and there must be correct disposition.  If anyone of these is not present, the sacrament is deemed invalid.

Form: The priest must say some form of absolution. It is generally accepted that the words “I absolve you from your sins” are the essential words.

If these are not said, then the sacrament is invalid.

Matter: The matter is contrition, confession, and satisfaction. Essentially, is the person truly sorry?  Did they confess all their mortal sins as far as they can remember and in kind and number?  Are you steadfast in desire to amend for your sins, at the very least doing the penance assigned by the confessor if the confessor assigned one?  If the answer to any of these questions is no, the confession might be invalid.

Disposition: According to forums.catholic.com where I took a comment and adapted it for this post, this essentially means that the confessor needs to be a priest, and the person confessing must be Catholic.

“Even if there is some question about the validity, remember that Ecclesia supplet (the Church provides): if a priest accidentally forgets some of the words of the ritual or changes them, the Church recognizes the good faith of those gathered and their right to valid sacraments. She provides sacramental validity in the case of a human error or priestly malpractice.”

- Niko

(Adapted from a comment on Forums.Catholic.com)

Not at all!

While we should make a sincere effort to remember everything, absolution is not invalid because we legitimately forgot something. (As the last confession post shows, there’s a difference between genuinely forgetting, and deliberately concealing.)

However, it is our duty to remember it for next time, and confess it then. (Some priests will tell you that’s unnecessary, but that is inconsistent with the teaching of the Church. If we are conscious of a sin we have never confessed, it is our duty to confess it.)

Although it is encouraged to go to Confession after any type of sin, being able to receive the Eucharist depends on whether or not the sin was mortal or venial.

If you are in a state of grace (ie: have not committed a mortal sin), then you may receive communion. The Confiteor at the beginning of Mass (like any Act of Contrition) forgives all venial sins, as does receiving the Eucharist Itself. 

If you have committed a mortal sin, then you must not receive Holy Communion until after receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation and Penance. (Receiving the Eucharist while in a state of mortal sin is in itself a mortal sin. It is a grave offence against the Blessed Sacrament.)

1 Corinthians 11:27-29: “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgmenton himself.” 

Hi Anon!

I have two links for you. I hope they can answer your question!

In Christ,

-Olivier

Code of Canon Law 844 §4 says:

If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

If you’re a baptised Christian (baptised with water and in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), you may licitly receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation provided it is a grave circumstance (it’s usually the case that death is imminent) and you truly believe in the Sacrament (i.e. you must believe that the priest who is hearing your confession has the authority to forgive sins in persona Christi, and that forgiveness only comes with true guilt and a resolve to sin no more). 

God bless.

-Olivier

Yes, we do. As long as they are cognizant (have an eternal soul) and want to be baptised, then we baptise, catechise, and minister sacraments to them!

Brother Guy Consolmagno, from the Vatican’s astronomical observatory, says more in these articles. 

(Ignore the part where it says “The discovery of aliens would raise huge theological problems for the Roman Catholic church that would make the debate over women priests, clerical abstinence and contraception pale into insignificance.” I don’t see what “theological problems” there are, and it’s funny that they didn’t point any of them out…)

Pax vobiscum!

-Olivier

Anon, you’re not alone! Lots of people, including myself, have doubts or have had doubts about what we believe to be the pinnacle of our Catholic faith.

The Eucharist is the ultimate source of life for the soul, because in both species, it’s Jesus’ body and blood, soul and divinity. We know this because in the Gospel, Jesus referred to himself as the Bread of Life, He told us that if we don’t eat the flesh of the Son of Man, we will die, and He commanded us to “do this in memory of me:”

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” (John 6: 35)

Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” (John 6: 53-58)

While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many.” (Mark 14: 22-24)

Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you.” (Luke 22: 19-20)

As Catholics, we take all of these statements literally. We don’t believe the bread and wine are symbols of Jesus, we believe they actually are Jesus. And this is a tough bullet to bite! Why would the God of the Universe tell people to eat bread and drink wine (which was supposedly His body and blood) in Give us this day our daily bread” section of the Our Father. Says the Catechism #2387:

2837“Daily” (epiousios) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Taken in a temporal sense, this word is a pedagogical repetition of “this day,”¹²⁸to confirm us in trust “without reservation.” Taken in the qualitative sense, it signifies what is necessary for life, and more broadly every good thing sufficient for subsistence.¹²⁹Taken literally (epi-ousios: “super-essential”), it refers directly to the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ, the “medicine of immortality,” without which we have no life within us.¹³⁰Finally in this connection, its heavenly meaning is evident: “this day” is the Day of the Lord, the day of the feast of the kingdom, anticipated in the Eucharist that is already the foretaste of the kingdom to come. For this reason it is fitting for the Eucharistic liturgy to be celebrated each day.

The Eucharist is our daily bread. The power belonging to this divine food makes it a bond of union. Its effect is then understood as unity, so that, gathered into his Body and made members of him, we may become what we receive. . . . This also is our daily bread: the readings you hear each day in church and the hymns you hear and sing. All these are necessities for our pilgrimage.¹³¹

The Father in heaven urges us, as children of heaven, to ask for the bread of heaven. [Christ] himself is the bread who, sown in the Virgin, raised up in the flesh, kneaded in the Passion, baked in the oven of the tomb, reserved in churches, brought to altars, furnishes the faithful each day with food from heaven.¹³²

Taken literally, the Eucharist is our daily bread. But why bread? I think that Jesus chose bread because it’s something that’s accessible to everyone: everyone understands we need food to live, and every believer understands we need God to live, so why not combine the two? In the Eucharist, God takes a mere symbol of life (bread for a mortal body) and turns it into actual life (His body, given up for the immortal soul). Isn’t that neat?

All this information aside, it’s still tough to believe, especially when you’re at Mass and the incense is choking your lungs, there are screaming children at the back of the church, someone’s cell phone goes off, your nose itches, your knees hurt from kneeling because you got the pew that didn’t have the padding, ad infinitum. There are a ton of reasons as to why our “experience” of God (especially during the Eucharistic prayer and most especially during the Consecration—the highest part of the Mass) doesn’t always feel the same. I find that I “experience” the Eucharist better at youth rallies, retreats and other gatherings. Sure, we can have warm fuzzy feelings about the Eucharist when packed into a crowded gymnasium full of other young crazy people who are also on fire for Christ, but does the actual Eucharist itself change from a retreat setting to a boring, home parish setting? Of course not! Jesus makes Himself present at every valid Mass, regardless of who believes and what emotional circumstances they find themselves in. And that’s the beauty of the Catholic faith: God is present in the transubstantiated bread and wine even if we don’t believe it. It still happens no matter what! 

There’s one miracle in particular that I want to focus on: The Miracle at Lanciano.

During Holy Mass, after the two-fold consecration, the host was changed into live Flesh and the wine was changed into live Blood, which coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size.

… 

[A]nalyses were conducted with absolute and unquestionable scientific precision and they were documented with a series of microscopic photographs.
These analyses sustained the following conclusions:

• The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.
• The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.
• The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.

So basically, a priest was doubting the presence of Jesus in the Eucharist (just like you!) and the accidents of the bread and wine actually turned into flesh and blood! It always gets me. I mean, I don’t think it would have happened unless God wanted to tell us that the transubstantiated bread actually is His body and the wine actually is His blood. It’s amazing, really. 

Last question: “How can I believe?” 

That’s a hard one to answer. I don’t think there’s anything you can do about it on your own. However, ask the Holy Spirit to give you a spirit of knowledge and understanding the next time you’re in Eucharistic Adoration! Sometimes, things just ‘click,’ and you say to yourself, “yeah. That’s the Body of Christ.” It’s happened to me a bunch of times. 

I’ll be praying for you!!

-Olivier

PS: Here’s a list of Eucharistic Miracles

Lots of questions here haha, I’ll try my best to explain:

The Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, so in a sense they are “today’s apostles”. The same way that the early Church devoted themselves to the teachings of the Apostles (Acts 2:42), we devote ourselves to the teachings of the Bishops. Hence we started the “Stand with the Bishops” campaign.

Apostolic Succession is important because it passes down the gifts granted by Christ through the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Jesus gave authority to Peter to bind and loose things (Matthew 16:19) and that authority was passed down to each successor of Peter at the beginning of his Pontificate. Also, Jesus gave the Apostles the ability to consecrate bread and wine into His Body and Blood (Luke 22:19) and He gave them the ability to forgive sins (John 20:23). The Apostles handed down these abilities through Holy Orders.

The first example of Apostolic Succession is in Acts 1:23-26 when Matthias became the successor of Judas. There are a lot of Bible Verses and evidence from Sacred Tradition here.

We all aren’t necessarily Apostles, there were only 12 of those. However we are disciples of Christ. So I guess you could say anyone can be a disciple without being an Apostle. The ones who are closest to the Apostles would be the Bishops. 

I hope this answered your questions, thank you so much for asking :) God Bless!

-Javi

Short answer is no it’s not wrong/weird. However the decision to enter into a relationship has to be done after much prayer and thinking. You have to discern whether or not you are called into that relationship. 

I read a book called “To Save A Thousand Souls” which is a book about Priestly Discernment. In it Father Brett Brannen gives some tips when it comes to dating and discerning:

1. You have to communicate that you are in fact discerning priesthood. To deny that piece of information is unfair to the woman you wish to date.
2. It must be chaste. Healthy Christian dating can be beneficial; if the both of you are praying and discerning whether or not you are called to marriage with each other, it could help clear the fog in your own discernment. 
3. Speak with a Spiritual Director about it. Sometimes it’s good to get an outside perspective.
4. Diligently discern the relationship. Make sure that you properly pray on whether or not to enter the relationship. There is a great difference between giving up women in general and giving up a specific woman, whom you happen to love. It’s much harder to do the latter. 

Something to keep in mind is that our lives aren’t straight lines. It’s not a perfect path towards our vocation. God will have us take stops, change direction, or move slower depending on what He needs for the big picture.

A friend of mine is discerning priesthood and entered a relationship, then discerned out of it later on. Why God called him to the relationship is still a mystery but I’m sure it was supposed to happen for him. I myself am discerning priesthood and I’m also in a relationship. But these kinds of decisions need to be discerned carefully.

I can’t stress enough that you have to be completely transparent about your discernment and there has to be an open line of communication for this. It’s a pretty big deal. 

I’ll pray for you and your discernment, God Bless!

-Javi