Strange CCD / Vatican response vs. my recent confession attempt

My local npr station has been covering the recent accusations against the Pope.
Seems like Ratsy has a position that forgiveness of Bishops that hide pedophilia was more or less part of Church Doctrine; automatic (forgiveness) in a sense.

Cut to my recent attempt of being forgiven of my sins via Confession at The Shrine of Divine Mercy. The priest informed me that I could not be forgiven for any of my sins because I was currently involved in a sexual relationship outside of marriage. He refused to forgive any of my sins, even those that were not related to my current relationship (like not honoring my parents, wasting time, taking the Lord's name in vain).

Ain't that something? All this at http://thedivinemercy.org/shrine/ The Shrine of Divine Mercy. Oh, the irony..

If it isn't, then why confess it?

I pretty much agree that the relationship is sinful.
What I do not agree with is that politically supporting reproduction rights is sinful (I do believe that using contraception is essentially sinful - another sin I indulge in).

So although I feel my behaviors are sinful, I disagree that my political ideals are sinful.

I'm married outside the Church and am therefore in violation of the Church's marriage laws and living in sin.

About this time last year I dragged the kids to their annual confession (there were four priests there from different parishes) and my daughter insisted I go. So I did.

When I went in I told the priest I was not married in the Church so I didn't expect absolution since it was an ongoing situation.

To my surprise, he said he would leave the matter to God and gave absolution.

Unfortunately this priest was arrested a month later on computer pornography charges. Nevertheless, it showed me once again what a wide variety there is in how individual priests administer the sacraments for which they were ordained.

Good luck.

we have the "reproductive rights" discussion quite frequently. I support choice, he doesn't. I always told him that was why I didn't participate in the Eucharist..

take the Eucharist?

a state of sin.

I had not been to confession in over 25 years. So I, imho, need to go to confession and be absolved of my sins in order to receive communion (the Eucharist).

is Eucharist food for the journey, given to us freely and in and of itself also a sacrament of forgiveness,

or is it to be reserved as a reward for those who are sinless?

Is anyone worthy of the Eucharist? No. Is everyone invited to the table? Yes.

I submit to you that the measure of the sinfulness of any sexual relationship is not how well it accords to Church rules but whether the people involved show each other God's love and whether they are harming other people. I don't care if you are in a sexual relationship; my question is whether you are in a spousal relationship.

I would suggest to you to go to Mass and to take Eucharist and to pray over your situation. You may come to an understanding that God has no problem with your life or you may be able to make what changes you need to make.

very interesting.

I've always hated the dogma - and used the dogma to avoid communion as a sort of political protest (while I can agree with pre-marital sex as being sinful I NEVER thought that my support for reproductive rights to be sinful at all).
Perhaps I will take communion next week..

Thanks for the reply.. Peace and low stress..

The only time you would have to go to Confession first is if you are guilty of a mortal sin. I doubt that is the case here.

Communion is freely given to us all, we don't earn it because we can't earn it. It was never meant as a stick to enforce the rules.

Eucharist is viewed today as a sacrament of reconciliation as is penance(confession). It is not only a sacrament of reconciliation, of course. If you don't believe this is Church teaching, check out the 4th or 5th grade books in your parish's religious ed program.

With all due respect, it is up to mdmc to determine if in fact sin is involved in this relationship. Are the partners treating each other with respect and love? Is it a sign of God's love? Does this relationship cause harm to themselves or to others? Those are the questions that need to be asked by those involved. Depending upon the answers, I submit that mdmc may be more married than a lot of people who've had a church wedding!

I was referring to your opinion on sex - of any kind - outside sacramental marriage. It is indeed Church teaching that it is a grave sin requiring Confession. That's not my opinion. It's Paragraoh 2353 of the CCC.

things had to change. He summoned the bishops to Rome, bishops appointed by Pius XII and Pius XI, neither of whom was an advocate of modernity. Those bishops agreed that things had to change, but when they went home, all too many lost their nerve. I believe that the Spirit has been active throughout the world the last 50 years, opening our eyes to ancient injustices and bringing healing,everywhere but inside the Church! Does the Holy Spirit approve of discrimination against women? Does God hate the people who were created gay? How longer do you think Christ will allow His Church to be under the control of the men who wrote that rule book?

I'm not saying there shouldn't be any rules, just that God is still speaking.

yourself at odds with any of their tenets. Or would you?

On edit: if you eat cheeseburgers, shrimp cocktail, bacon or are uncircumcised, say a prayer of thanks to St. Paul for objecting to tenets imposed by the hierarchy!

How/why are you a Catholic? Because you were born one? If another reason, what is it about Anglicanism you find yourself out of sympathy with, but which the Catholic Church approves? This is not intended as a tendentious probing. I'm curious to know.

Thirty years ago, I was at a very low ebb, and lived in sin with my now wife for a while, but we lived together chastely for the next nine or ten years - until she could obtain an annulment and we could marry in the church. It wasn't easy. At least for me. But I wasn't of the opinion that I had an option. On the other hand, I know mainstream priests and maybe a bishop who believe an amnesty should be pronounced for divorced people, and you can understand why. Ideally, we should start off with the wisdom of old age, even if it means becoming more and more immature and foolish as we get older.

all Catholic doctrine proceeds from the Pope through the hierarchy, I am not a Catholic. I disagree.

asked us if we thought the rule on birth control was man made or mandated by God? We said, we beleived, it was man made. He said 'bless both of you and go in peace, you have your answer."
This was in the late sixties, too.

whatever happened to conscience supersedes all else?

Although I hesitate to compare myself to them, the greatest saints of our Church oftentimes found themselves in opposition to the hierarchy, even to the point of being excommunicated!

urged slaves to accept their position, but that was because the Church needed to evolve, not revolt against Caesar, when it would have had no chance to survive - failing radical, divine intervention, which would have thwarted the Providential norm of grace building upon nature.

Not that slaves were not generally treated much better in the ancient world than in hideously corrupted Christendom. They were. But, of course, slavery, itself, is the very antithesis of the most basic Christian precepts - stripping people of their freedom and all their most elementary rights and dignity as human beings, and as people created to be adopted members of God's own divine family of the Trinity. It was not for nothing that Jesus immediately likened the Commandment to love our neighbours as ourselves with the First Commandment, to love God, whole-heartedly, when he was only asked which was the greatest Commandment.

"Whatever happened to conscience supersedes all else?"

Some people, evidently, forgot the key qualification, "informed". The term is, "informed conscience". Still, some of the major heretics of yesteryear, such as Martin Luther and George Fox, were undoubtedly guided by the Holy Spirit, to correct the excesses and errancies of the Catholic Church, in terms of the traditions of men. Of course, the worst traditions of men, just like the best of them, are always promoted as divinely-inspired. Heretics, incidentally, are not excommunicated for merely disagreeing with aspects of the Church's teaching, but for persistently, aggressively attacking it. But excommunication, while it has its uses (much neglected these days) is often superfluous at the personal level, since the benefit of the sacraments depends on an attitude of (informed) good faith on the part of the recipient.

"Although I hesitate to compare myself to them, the greatest saints of our Church oftentimes found themselves in opposition to the hierarchy, even to the point of being excommunicated!"

I was wondering if you saw yourself as a Deutero-Athanasius. 'Athanasius contra mundum'. I'm not a stranger to criticism of the Church, but the major sin of presumption carries a very heavy penalty. I was right in my criticisms, but I extrapolated too much to my own credit and too little, to the Church, present and past. We don't come from a vacuum. If we have something worthwhile to tell the Church, it will be inspired by the Holy Spirit, as a result of what we have learned within it.

In fact, to say that I excoriated the most acclaimed theologian and the most distinguished scripture scholar of the day would be an understatement. I questioned whether they were even Christian. But that was where I was right, and there were some very strange signs to indicate that I was speaking with some authority. But in my immaturity, that was my undoing. It took me a long hard road to get back on track.

In fact, instead of being refuted, I was offered the opportunity to attend the Jesuit seminary, Heythrop College. (I had asked to be told where I was mistaken). I felt I had to decline that, and at least temporarily leave the seminary of the Italian missionary order, the Consolata Fathers I was with, since I could see the absurdity of a seminarian of several week's seniority lambasting the biggest and most widely published names in theology and scripture scholarship, while continuing studies for the priesthood/ministry. In fact Rahner, the theologian, had only been invited to Vatican II as an observer, I believe. So the Church was not without its wiser heads.

But we're none the wiser re your divergence from Catholicism and Anglicanism. Are the Catholic Church's ban on abortion and homosexuality your two sticking points? (Those are not the traditions of men, but immemorial, Judaeo-Christian precepts.) Or are there others? What do you have against the Anglican Church, which has a similar attitude towards the Catechism as you? Do you think the Catholic Church should ask if it could join the Anglican community. I believe at the moment, some wires seem to be crossed, and Anglican ministers are defecting to Rome. All we get from you is that you're Catholic and that's that. But you're divergencies from Catholic teaching are anything but insignificant.

your spouse and your children? It seems to me that breaking up a home would be a sin, not being married outside the Church.

As Catholics, we are called to answer to our consciences. Maybe 99.999% of the time, that means following Church teaching to the letter, but sometimes it doesn't.

Don't forget - the hierarchy that makes the rules regarding marriage is the same group that doesn't understand why people are so upset that some priests have been raping children. This is a group that at heart believes that celibacy is a higher calling than marriage. This is a group that until recently told women that it was a sin to leave an abusive husband.

Even worse, the issues surrounding sexuality have been clouded by a perceived need to maintain the power of the hierarchy rather than to seek the truth. Back in the 60's, a committee of priests, doctors, theologians and I believe a single married couple was assembled by the Vatican to study the issue of contraception. The committee found no sin, but the Vatican bureaucrats overrode the committee lest it seem that the bishops had ever been wrong about something.

So, Paul Vi condemned contraception for the wrong reasons. John Paul I would have permitted contraception had he not died so soon. Millions of Catholic couples use contraception. Are they all living in lustful sin, or are they taking responsibility for themselves and their families? As it happens, I am a mother of six, but I used contraception when it was appropriate and I did not sin.

Although the ecclesial response is to seek a declaration of nullity of any prior marriage and then marry inside the Church. In the meantime, no soup for you!

Isn't the Church the community of believers, the Body of Christ? Aren't we the Church?

The bishops allowed and enabled rapists to offer the Mass; how can they turn around and deny you Eucharist?

Don't forget, there was a time when the clergy was determined to deny Eucharist to men who refused to be circumcised. St. Paul set the elders straight on that issue. Maybe it's up to us to set them straight again!