“On the hundredth time a person comes to her to confess the same sin, he never thinks that maybe there is “sucking” a little?». Over the centuries, sacramental confession has undergone radical changes that many are unaware of, specie i “great doctors theologians” of Facebook and Twitter
Latest posts by father ariel (see all)
- And now I'll explain why journalists' onanist narcissism is causing more victims than the war in Ukraine to the point of generating greater destruction - 7 May 2022
- The Russian-Ukrainian conflict. A people can be deluded by an influencer and ask Europe to participate in a suicide? - 21 April 2022
- Aristophanes, this great unknown. The Russian-Ukrainian war and the cartoonist Vauro accused of anti-Semitism between politically correct and limitations on the right to satire - 14 April 2022
I know that sacramental confession is valid even if the priest lives in sin or leads an immoral life, but everyone is looking for holy priests filled with the Holy Spirit. What's the reason ?
more or less the same reason why all men want Monica Bellucci as a wife and all women Sean Connery as a husband, But, in concrete real life, often they had to settle for Tina Pica and Bombolo
This article, like the others, brings the faithful down from the pedestal and brings him down to earth (me per primo).
Speaking of confessions I would like to tell you this, one day a priest when a faithful in the confessional told him: father you always tell me the same things the father dear son changes sins and I change speeches(told by the priest)
Father Ariel Levi Di Gualdo have a nice day and bless me.
I bless you from my heart and you pray for the health of my soul
Reverend Father Ariel
I would like to ask you when there is sacrilegious confession?when you fail to tell the priest a mortal sin?then at the moment of communion the priest can recall the Pauline warning 1 corinzi 27 Therefore everyone who unworthily, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord, It will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Each, therefore, examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup; 29 because whoever eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord, he eats and drinks his own condemnation. or it is not expected ?Thank you
dear fabio,
when the penitent approaches the priest to celebrate the sacrament of Reconciliation – after having been received in the confessional according to the rite – the moment in which one's spiritual condition is manifested to the confessor begins. By spiritual condition we do not mean only the accusation of all and individual sins but also the manifestation of what the Lord is doing good in that soul. Questa si chiama Confessio Laudis, which usually no penitent does before the priest, because we are often led to see the Sacrament of Reconciliation as a court in which a priest worse than us minds his own business and judges us. This unfortunately denotes a lack of faith in the Lord and a lack of knowledge of the Church's doctrine in sacramental matters.
In front of the priest confessor, divine mercy is administered to us not only to forgive us the sins committed but also to experience that divine grace that makes us live well and allows us to prevent falls into sin.. We are there on our knees to ask for forgiveness it is true, but if there is a recognition of guilt there must be a recognition of grace and praise that opens our hearts to hope and trust. After Confessio Laudis you get to He life that is, becoming aware of what is wrong in my life in relation to the person of God, of my brothers and myself. Having made this necessary premise, according to the teaching of the Church, the penitent in He life recognizes and confesses all mortal sins by defining them in number, species and circumstances, after having carried out a diligent examination of conscience which has the task of identifying even the most secret or hidden sins. The phase of the examination of conscience is fundamental and very delicate and must take up a lot of time for the penitent if you want to make a good confession, that is, a non-sacrilegious confession that mortifies and demeans what is being done. E’ it is necessary to say how many times we have fallen into sin: different is falling once or twice, than falling twenty times into the same kind of sin. Say the kind of sin: that is to know if it is a sin that has interested God, myself or my neighbor? To know if it is a sin that has affected the Christian life, la sessualità, public or private relations, created things, the heritage, the feelings…etc. In the end, say the circumstance that caused the sin or the context in which it occurred: it is different to confess to having stolen out of hunger than to have stolen out of envy or gluttony.
If the penitent confesses in this way, to the best of his ability and remaining in an attitude of openness to the Holy Spirit in prayer and humility he undoubtedly makes a good confession. But if the penitent is hasty, pressapochista, he fails to voluntarily confess the sins that are more shameful to him or he does not confess those that – although they are mortal sins – they are not considered by him as such, runs the risk of falling into sacrilege. I'll explain, if the penitent does not consider it a grave sin not to go to Mass on Sunday and despite having sometimes failed to go there, he deliberately omits these shortcomings in his confession because they are sporadic, he's hurting his confession. The priest relies on the accusation of sins to exhort and help the penitent but can easily be deceived by him with malice or cunning by omitting sins, circumstances or important details. The responsibility of a good confession lies with the penitent who should know the Pauline warning you recalled and should get help from the priest to make a good confession. As for the priest at the moment of communion he cannot give any warning because that is not the moment. There are more opportune moments to exhort the faithful to this effect, such as catechesis or preaching. Indeed, the priest cannot even refuse to give communion to a sinner in public, unless this is a public sinner who blatantly and brazenly approaches communion as a gesture of defiance or derision. Or in the event that the state of one who approaches communion is incompatible with the reception of the sacrament, such as alcohol or drug alteration. However, the priest can do one thing, he can call the person aside and invite him, if he is aware of sufficiently serious and reasonable reasons, to avoid approaching communion.
dear father Ivano,
thank you for the answer you gave me, but I must tell you that the things that many priests have written, at least those of my acquaintance, have never told me, I knew some things because I read Father Bellon, she confesses with the confessional, he knows that in modern churches it is no longer used? And I don't see anyone going to confession, but they do communion all the same, then today, with the imposition of communion in hand, it is desacralized and one does not realize that the Blessed Sacrament is desecrated because fragments fall and this does not seem to interest priests much. Better once at the Latin Mass that I got to know with the summorum pontificum, once a priest refused me communion because he wanted to impose communion on my hand but before the pandemic, abuse today (pardon) it has become the rule because the CEI has imposed it and instead you could give it to the tongue with the pliers and the saucer and on your knees, but communion to the politicians who approved abortion and divorce because the church gives it to them?
dear fabio,
my answer is not my own flour but of the teaching of the Catholic Church which has been teaching these things since the Council of Trent. Da ultimo, just read the Praenotanda to the ritual of the Sacrament of Reconciliation and the Catechism of the Catholic Church – in the specific section dealing with the Sacraments – to find the things I said.
As for the confessional, can. 964 of the Code of Canon Law establishes the proper seats and places for receiving the sacramental confessions of the faithful. §3 of the aforementioned can. 964 recommends that “confessions are not received outside the confessional, except for just cause”, this clarification can be easily understood in a particular context such as the pandemic one we are experiencing. For further information on the place dedicated to hearing confessions, the apostolic letter in the form of Motu Proprio of John Paul II Mercy of the Gods al n.9.
These things priests should know very well and – if not – the fault is to be found in two reasons: the crass ignorance in the sacred sciences and the liturgical imagination that rests on the priest's narcissism.
About the way the S. Communion, I don't see any abuse, in the Catholic Church the possibility of receiving it in the mouth is currently prescribed – both standing and kneeling – but also on the palm of the hand according to the letter of John Paul II Dominicæ n. 11 the 24.02.1980.
Clearly, regardless of how you receive the S. Communion, all the necessary precautions are necessary to make a devout communion, decorous, respectful and fervent. There is no need to bother the The old order to have the epidermal sensation of receiving + Communion or + Mass as if to mimic those people who want, want and vote + Europe.
In the case of those politicians who are publicly and openly for abortion, for divorce and profess other realities decidedly in contrast with the Holy Gospel and with the Catholic Church – if you don't repent and confess – they cannot approach receiving the S.. Communion. Indeed, if they appear before the priest, the indications and answers I gave for the previous question are valid.
Reverend Father Ivano thank you for your reply
I report some news https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2021/06/26/news/stati_uniti_vescovi_americani_retromarcia_comunione_politici_aborto_biden-307750430/
In the case of those politicians who are publicly and openly for abortion, for divorce and profess other realities decidedly in contrast with the Holy Gospel and with the Catholic Church - if not repentant and confessed - they cannot approach receiving the S. Communion. Indeed, if they appear before the priest, the indications and answers I gave for the previous question are valid.( Father Ivano )
——-
Perfettamente d accordo.
And what about the American bishops who rightly want to deny communion to politicians like Catholic Joe Biden (???!!!!) pro aborto ( if I'm not mistaken pro abortion until 9 month… that is practically the possible killing of the child practically formed also physically) and of the Roman “Holy See” ( less and less Holy ... in these sad times ...) which sends in countertrend another type of signal not to deny the sacraments anyway ....
And we poor faithful more or less ignorant of this what we have to think?
Ditto for the German priests who bless gay couples by the hundreds ( a sin not only serious ... but that even somewhere it is written that he cries out for vengeance in the sight of God) and Holy Roman Church bypasses… with even a Holy Father who encourages Jesuit James Martin pro LGBT through a letter
We poor ignorant faithful ( the 90% of Catholics ... ) what should we think ?
1- that at the top of the Holy Roman church there is currently an antichristic imposture ( and then I understand ... including Pachamamma )
2- or that the summit is legitimate .. and it is betraying Christ .... otherwise I don't understand ...
the ( excellent and very precious) explanations on the confession given by Father Ivano I HAVE NEVER HEARD FROM ANY PRIEST IN MY LIFE .
The confession is now much, much clearer to me .... I suspect that always the 90% of Catholics are in the same condition as me . Such an explanation should be posted in every confessional ....
Riguardo alle “commutations”, they also took hold in the court of the inquisition.
Galileo is an example of this, sentenced to “formal prison”, discounted in the villa of Arcetri, e “for three years to come, say the seven penitential psalms once a week”, he had them recited in his place by his eldest daughter Sister Maria Celeste, to the century Virginia.
And, it is true.
How much your insights fill, dad!
If only he had a very small part of it in Sunday homilies… .that (it is with great shame that I confess it) I undertake to listen without being satisfied with it.
I repeat, I am ashamed to say it because I understand for myself that we cannot expect to always have Cardinal Comastri before us, Mons. Cantalamessa (I respect them both very much) the Law p. Ariel, and because I'm sure every priest, even if too young, possesses some preciousness to donate. So I try to investigate inside myself to understand that I'm not really the one who is incapable “reader” of those messages, apparently simple, “off topic”, ovvi.
Cara Anna,
you shouldn't be ashamed at all, it is we priests who should seriously question ourselves. During the homilies I heard everything, from heresies to telling jokes.
In 2013 I published a collection of homilies which in a while’ for months we will print in second edition. In the back of the book – to reiterate precisely how much he should not be ashamed at all – I reported the sentences of two cardinals, one of which, Joseph Ratzinger, at that time prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the other, Cardinal Tomas Spidlik.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger says:
In «Feet, a confirmation of the faith gods, comes from the fact that every Sunday he survives a few million homilies "
Says Cardinal Tomas Spidlik:
"The Church has placed the Profession of Faith after the homily to urge us to believe despite what we have just heard".
Thank you… of comfort and encouragement
Interessantissimo, thank you. What would you say, dad, to collect in a book a series of articles on the sacraments like this one, understandable even to those like me who do not know anything?
On going “a hundred times” for the same sin to confess that another reader wrote about, I believe that one cannot enter people's conscience as an accountant. A confessor explained it to me many years ago, the important thing is sincere repentance and the desire not to relapse, then everyone has their own frailties linked to their human condition.
I confirm from experience all the nonsense imparted by the Neocatechumenal catechists, illustrated with lots of doodles. For them from Constantine to Vatican II it was only scorched earth, with all due respect to saints and doctors of the Church.
And what about Carmen's contempt for confessionals, who called “casette”?
O di Kiko, who believed that presence in the community was sufficient for the forgiveness of sins, eventually “Sealed, if you want it” tomorrow with a confession?
What has always made me angry though, it is the silence of priests, bishops and cardinals. No one has ever opened their mouth to correct it.
I remember a movie in which he boasts of exorcising entire cities and casting out demons in front of dozens of priests., and nobody says a half word. On the contrary, all there happy to clap their hands. Because?
About Latin antidiavolo, at school I hated Latin, it means that I am demon-possessed?
I almost almost go from’Kiko exorcises to get me free…
Thank you, to her and to all the fathers for the good you do to us.
The historical reconstruction of the changes that occurred to the sacrament of reconciliation is absolutely flawless, it took me back to the years when I was studying at the institute of religious sciences. And despite the hot father Ariel still continues thanks to his proverbial rhetorical inventions to cut flesh and bone!