[Question:]{.underline} Having no choice, I went to a Novus Ordo priest for Confession, who gave me absolution saying “I bless and forgive you all your sins, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”. Was it valid?
[Answer:]{.underline} Penance is one of those sacraments in which Christ instituted the form according to the signification of the words, rather than in the precise words themselves. It is for this reason that the different rites of the Church use different expressions, and historically the precise words of the form were somewhat different in the Latin rite of the first ten centuries than they are now. All these forms, however, indicate the direct remission of sins by the priest, as was the power entrusted by Our Lord to the Apostles: “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” (Jn 20:23).
Consequently, the only words of the sacramental form of Confession necessary for validity are “I absolve you from your sins”. The expression “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost”, although necessary for the validity of the sacrament of baptism is not necessary for the validity of the sacrament of penance. If the Church has included this in the formula of absolution, it is to express that it is only by the power of the Most Holy Trinity, of God Himself, that sins can be absolved. The word “absolve” is used rather than forgive, to indicate that the power to forgive is delegated by Our Lord, who being God properly has the power to forgive sins. However, the term “forgive” is still valid, for it indicates the personal remission of the fault by the minister, standing in Christ’s place. Consequently the absolution received was certainly valid.
However, the importance of this question remains. How can it be that a Catholic can be placed in front of a crisis of conscience as to whether a sacrament is invalid or not, because a priest changes the words of the form of absolution according to his own liking? This is unheard of in the Church, and is a sacrilegious and grave disrespect for the sacrament to which Christ gave a divine efficacy, even when it does not invalidate the sacrament. It is an immediate consequence of the novelties introduced since Vatican II, which modifying the rites of the Church, and the form of all the sacraments, has taken away the sacredness of what was once treated as the sacred, timeless prayer of the Church. The problem is in fact the Second Vatican Council, that stated: “The rite and formulae of Penance are to be revised…” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 72).
These doubts, created by the post-conciliar revolution, threaten not only the validity of the sacraments, but also, and much more frequently, their licitness. Once the council laid down the principle of changing the formulae, why would a priest not think that he could do likewise? Thus is comes about that highly licit personal improvisations, undermining the sacredness of the Church’s action through the sacraments, have beomce common place. The only solution to these doubts, that a regular layperson is generally unable to resolve, is to receive the sacraments only in the traditional rite. Nothing else will stop these abuses.
Answered by Father Peter Scott, SSPX.