+AMDG+
WEDNESDAY OF THE THIRD WEEK IN LENT (2014 A.D.)

Catechism of St. Pius X states

Q.   What is Sacramental grace?
A.   Sacramental grace consists in the right acquired in the reception of a Sacrament, to have at the proper time the actual graces necessary to fulfill the obligations arising from the Sacrament received.  Thus when we were Baptized, we receive the right to have the grace to live a Christian life.[/b]


To receive the grace to live a Christian life we are given sacramental grace by God through his ministers through administering the Sacraments.  
It is their duty and responsibility to ensure we receive them so we have the grace to live a Christian life.
 
They are not favors we ask/beg of them and hopefully if we played our cards right and did not offend them we receive them.

The Catholic Church is not a country club whose membership is bought with membership dues.

The clergy aren't the Board of Director's of that country club deciding who gets to be a member and who gets more or less privileges based on contributions to the club.

Next time a priest is evasive or avoids or even withholds a Sacrament ~ speak up and remind them of your Baptismal right!  

Have charity - not fear - in your heart and remind them, so they have a chance to redeem themselves before God.

Absolutely!

 :confused1:
Why would the priest not want it known he was hearing Confessions?  Why might others be close enough to see or hear your confession?  Was it necessary to keep the fact of a Sacrament taking place a secret?

Catechism of St. Pius X states

Q.   What is Sacramental grace?
A.   Sacramental grace consists in the right acquired in the reception of a Sacrament, to have at the proper time the actual graces necessary to fulfill the obligations arising from the Sacrament received.  Thus when we were Baptized, we receive the right to have the grace to live a Christian life.[/b]


To receive the grace to live a Christian life we are given sacramental grace by God through his ministers through administering the Sacraments.  
It is their duty and responsibility to ensure we receive them so we have the grace to live a Christian life.
 
They are not favors we ask/beg of them and hopefully if we played our cards right and did not offend them we receive them.

The Catholic Church is not a country club whose membership is bought with membership dues.

The clergy aren't the Board of Director's of that country club deciding who gets to be a member and who gets more or less privileges based on contributions to the club.

Next time a priest is evasive or avoids or even withholds a Sacrament ~ speak up and remind them of your Baptismal right!  

Have charity - not fear - in your heart and remind them, so they have a chance to redeem themselves before God.

Actually that isn't what this question is telling you by the answer. The Italian original:

271. Che cos'è la grazia sacramentale?
La grazia sacramentale é il diritto alle grazie speciali necessarie per conseguire il fine proprio di ciascun sacramento.

Sacramental grace is the right to the special graces necessary to achieve the proper end of each Sacrament.

Take marriage: the end of marriage = fostering eternal salvation of spouses /  raising and spiritual education of children / fostering mutual union etc.

The Sacramental Grace is the grace that enables all of those ends to be achieved

Persons in sin at time of marriage get the Sacrament but not the graces (strengths to live and achieve those end) until a subsequent "Good Confession"

Objection:

Catechism of St. Pius X states

Thus when we were Baptized, we receive the right to have the grace to live a Christian life.

The word "right" here would be better expressed in Latin as "Titulum" or "Title"
Baptism enables us to have access to the other sources of Grace = God's Help = other Sacraments, but not where we manifestly put roadblocks to the action of that grace in our lives. The priest is the one ordered (by ordination) to make decisions as to moral probity and worth of those receiving the Sacraments in exceptional cases by virtue of his various ordinations. That doesn't mean he can ride rough-shod over people because they don't toe the SSPX line etc. A delicate distinction needs to be made.

Quote from: soulguard

I made a confession today, the priest said I absolve you, but did not say in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost. He said Go in peace. He spoke french to me. Was this absolution valid. I presume that he intended to absolve me and perhaps said the rest of the words silently so people would not know he was doing a confession.

So he just said "ego te absolvo" and that was it?

Fr. O'Kane on the Rubrics of the Ritual from the late 1800s treats of precisely this question and states that "I absolve you" would be sufficient for validity. I had the same thing happen to me so I looked it up years ago.

Fr. O'Kanes books are now linked in the CathInfo library.  

This is from a 2011 letter written by a person to Rome concerning SSPX-India/Asia:


1.   Dissidence is common and is legitimate when it has to do with a matter of conscience. However, the SSPX – for legitimate dissidence – have no compunction in dismissing their priests and excommunicating their lay adherents without canonical process which is a traversity of justice and Christian charity. This has been taking place right round the world, and right here in Mumbai where at least five SSPX lay adherents, including the undersigned, have been denied the sacraments without canonical process. It seems the SSPX are a law unto themselves, and in acting in such ruthless manner, a cult which is now seeking legal stature in the Church of Rome.

They (SSPX priests at our priory) deny and provide as to their hearts desire, not out of obligation or duty.  

I was hospitalized during my pregnancy, with serious risk of stroke and kidney failure.
The line of questioning is such that it took three phone calls trying to determine if I was really going to die and if:
a) I wasn't really dying, the trip was not necessary, as it was only for the "truly" dying, not seriously ill
b) I was practically dead, they may not make it on time as they were 3 hours away, and they could only administer the sacrament if I was still technically alive

They had at least 4 priests at the nearest Priory.
Finally a fourth phone call came (after almost half the day had passed) from a different priest in that Priory, and he offered to come down, even if it would take him 3 hours.
Maybe that was the sign that God was waiting for and miraculously while my husband was giving driving directions, all the machines I was hooked on to calmed down and showed my situation to have stabled and I was officially out of the "danger" zone.
So he ended up not bothering with the trip.

My point is for half a day, there was so much "calculating" going on, mind you I was pregnant and baby would have come in at about 6-8 weeks early.  
Which makes you wonder, by their actions, do they truly believe in God?
Instead of spending half the day "calculating" whether I was really dying or not, shouldn't they have made the effort to come and administer the sacrament?  
If I was a wealthy patron, would they have been rushing to my bedside?  
If they knew I was leaving a substantial portion of my estate upon death, would that have made a difference?

And I haven't told you yet about my experiences with the other sacraments with NO priests and FSSP priests ...

Quote from: AJNC

This is from a 2011 letter written by a person to Rome concerning SSPX-India/Asia:


1.   Dissidence is common and is legitimate when it has to do with a matter of conscience. However, the SSPX – for legitimate dissidence – have no compunction in dismissing their priests and excommunicating their lay adherents without canonical process which is a traversity of justice and Christian charity. This has been taking place right round the world, and right here in Mumbai where at least five SSPX lay adherents, including the undersigned, have been denied the sacraments without canonical process. It seems the SSPX are a law unto themselves, and in acting in such ruthless manner, a cult which is now seeking legal stature in the Church of Rome.

They (SSPX priests at our priory) deny and provide as to their hearts desire, not out of obligation or duty.  

I was hospitalized during my pregnancy, with serious risk of stroke and kidney failure.
The line of questioning is such that it took three phone calls trying to determine if I was really going to die and if:
a) I wasn't really dying, the trip was not necessary, as it was only for the "truly" dying, not seriously ill
b) I was practically dead, they may not make it on time as they were 3 hours away, and they could only administer the sacrament if I was still technically alive

They had at least 4 priests at the nearest Priory.
Finally a fourth phone call came (after almost half the day had passed) from a different priest in that Priory, and he offered to come down, even if it would take him 3 hours.
Maybe that was the sign that God was waiting for and miraculously while my husband was giving driving directions, all the machines I was hooked on to calmed down and showed my situation to have stabled and I was officially out of the "danger" zone.
So he ended up not bothering with the trip.

My point is for half a day, there was so much "calculating" going on, mind you I was pregnant and baby would have come in at about 6-8 weeks early.  
Which makes you wonder, by their actions, do they truly believe in God?
Instead of spending half the day "calculating" whether I was really dying or not, shouldn't they have made the effort to come and administer the sacrament?  
If I was a wealthy patron, would they have been rushing to my bedside?  
If they knew I was leaving a substantial portion of my estate upon death, would that have made a difference?

And I haven't told you yet about my experiences with the other sacraments with NO priests and FSSP priests ...

I've heard of two cases out here in India. In the first, the priest did go to the hospital but deemed that Extreme Unction was not necessary. Maybe he heard the patient's Confession and gave him Communion - I dont know. The patient died later that day. On the other occasion a man who was hospitalized made a request  for a priest. The priest concerned did not go. And the man died. "Oh, I didn't know he was that serious!".

For other reasons,I couldn't get on at all with the priest involved in the first example. My so-called good friends, or their family members, shared with him my opinions which I had confided to them in private. He accosted me and said that I would be held liable on the Day of the General Judgement. You see, only lay folk are liable. What about the other priest? Did anyone notice any signs of regret or scruples? What do you think? No prizes for guessing!