Adult confession vs laundry list style

[MJE]

This evenings’ Journey Home guest was a Father Hollman (sp?) who is a convert from Espiscopal church (priest). He referred to the “laundry list” style of confessing so many adult catholics do rather then a more substantial discussion of the root causes of sins confessed. I sat straight up thinking he was talking about me. Excellent point that I wish he could go into greater detail. He said what I have not been able to articulate but have been frustrated w/ this in my own confessions.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Father Scanlan discusses this briefly in the last chapter of The Truth About Trouble. It’s easy reading, and has a lot of good information on the trials and tribulations of life.

 

[fix]

This evenings’ Journey Home guest was a Father Hollman (sp?) who is a convert from Espiscopal church (priest). He referred to the “laundry list” style of confessing so many adult catholics do rather then a more substantial discussion of the root causes of sins confessed. I sat straight up thinking he was talking about me. Excellent point that I wish he could go into greater detail. He said what I have not been able to articulate but have been frustrated w/ this in my own confessions.

Perhaps you can explain this more? Mortal sins must be confessed in kind and number. Do you mean explaining why one thinks they committed each sin?

 

[Brendan]

Sins should be confessed by kind and number. It then falls on the priest, as the one trained in Moral Theology, to recognize patterns then address ways the penitent can avoid these sins in the future.

 

[baltobetsy]

Perhaps you can explain this more? Mortal sins must be confessed in kind and number. Do you mean explaining why one thinks they committed each sin?

People who confess frequently often stop committing mortal sins. Sometimes they just list a whole lot of venial sins without much thought. I think the OP is talking about confessing fewer venial sins, but going more deeply into the causes so they can be rooted out.

It’s an orderly way of advancing in virtue. Rather than confess every tiny transgression you can think of from the last two weeks (or whatever time period), you can choose to concentrate on getting rid of one or two of the recurring sins at a time. This is called the particular examination of conscience. With the advice of your confessor, you choose your area of concentration. Every day you check on yourself to see how you’re doing. At your next confession, you confess your failures in this area (along with any mortal sins or venial sins that took you by surprise and horrified you). Your can discuss why and how you succeeded and why and how you failed and get good advice from the priest. When you have made substantial progress, or even conquered this sin, you move to the next one. Eventually, you work on the acquisition of virtues in your particular examination.

For example, if I regularly snap at or interrupt my spouse, I might choose to work on this as my particular examination of conscience. I will pray about why I snap at him and may discover impatience rooted in pride. I will make a resolution to give due consideration to his ideas, letting him finish speaking before I cut him off. Some days I will succeed, and some days I will fail. I will bring it to confession and discuss it with the priest. I may discover that my husband is right about certain things because I’ve given him a chance to express himself. I will grow in humility. When I no longer interrupt him regularly, I will choose another thing for my particular examination and start the process over again.

I believe it was St. Josemaria Escriva who said that the general examination of conscience (looking for all your sins) was a defensive weapon (your shield) and the particular was an offensive weapon (your sword) in the war against evil.

Betsy

 

[ChadS]

This evenings’ Journey Home guest was a Father Hollman (sp?) who is a convert from Espiscopal church (priest). He referred to the “laundry list” style of confessing so many adult catholics do rather then a more substantial discussion of the root causes of sins confessed. I sat straight up thinking he was talking about me. Excellent point that I wish he could go into greater detail. He said what I have not been able to articulate but have been frustrated w/ this in my own confessions.

The priest at my church when talking about confession to our RCIA group uses the exact same analogy. For example, the sin may be that you are jealous of somebody in your family. What causes that jealousy. He feels that if you only confess the jealousy you will keep confessing it but once what causes it – say a poor self-image – is found out it is easier to root out the sin and overcome it. Obviously it is still good to confess specific sins, but it shouldn’t stop at the “laundry list” and continue onto finding a deeper cause of the sin. Once the Christian has that figured out then they can move onto improving and developing their interior lives.

ChadS

 

[Palladio]

It all sounds as if some priests are on to psychology, not sacrament, so I would love to know the RCC teaching on these approaches.

Or as if there is a presumption of guilt even after absolution and penance, which would rather contradict the doctrine of the state of grace.

 

[DebChris]

It all sounds as if some priests are on to psychology, not sacrament, so I would love to know the RCC teaching on these approaches.

Or as if there is a presumption of guilt even after absolution and penance, which would rather contradict the doctrine of the state of grace.

You could look at confession in the same way you might look at going to a doctor. Remember the analogy that Jesus gave when asked why he spent all his time with sinners. We go to confession in search of spiritual healing.
I could go to a doctor for medication to help with my migraines. I take the medicine and my migraine returns so I go for more medicine. This could be likened to the grocery list confession. I confess my sins. I receive the penance but I never get to the root cause of the sins I commit. Read the post by Balbobetsy.
I can look at my migraines as something I never want to experience again. In that case, I will give the doctor as much information as possible to get to the reason I keep having these headaches. The doctor in turn can help me to get to the root cause and I will no longer have to keep coming to him for more medicine.
When I bring a life situation into the confessional, the priest can help me look at how that situation may be leading me into sin. As a result, I am better able to recognize that particular temptation when it comes up again and refrain from the sin.

 

[Scottgun]

I would need to see the context of the homily, but it seems like it is being interpreted into a false dilemma. Yes, we need to be mindful of the general nature of the origins our sinfulness, but we also need to be specific by confessing an actual, concrete sinful *act, *because acts are the fruits, and by the fruits we shall know them.

Josemaria Escriva put it this way: “The general examination is a weapon of defense. The particular, of attack. The first is a shield. The second, the sword.”

Scott

 

[Palladio]

I don’t disagree, at least not necessarily. Sacraments are myteries, yet ones which, like all sacraments, can be misundertood.

I certainly agree that the more we confess the better—assuming we do it properly, a huge assumption already provided for in learning the sacrament.

Confession entails that we forgive ourselves as God has already forgiven us, and my worry (rational or no) is that what seems intended for spiritual clarity actually encourages overscrupulousness and thus defeats the positive joy we are entitled, through Christ, to feel because of His saving Grace in the sacrament of confession. We may not always feel that joy, or it may take time, but it is still ours to feel, thanks to God. It is joy of the prospect of our salvation won for us by the blood of the cross.

“but I never get to the root cause of the sins I commit.”

I would suggest that is always so, or nearly so, and in part explains why we need absolution: God knows the root cause or causes, conditions, and so on. He absolves. He saves us. We cannot save ourselves but for the grace of God, although we must do good works to show our good faith.

God bless.

 

[tebesco]

This is really interesting. I’ve had numerous priests over the years say that confession is not therapy – you’re just supposed to tell kind and number.

I’ve also been told that discussing an inclination to a particular type of sin is also not what the sacrament is for. I always figured doing anything but discussing kind and number gave me room to rationalize what I’d done, whereas kind and number gives you no wiggle room for “yes, it was a sin, but…”

I’d love to hear more on this.

 

[Palladio]

This is really interesting. I’ve had numerous priests over the years say that confession is not therapy – you’re just supposed to tell kind and number.

I’ve also been told that discussing an inclination to a particular type of sin is also not what the sacrament is for. I always figured doing anything but discussing kind and number gave me room to rationalize what I’d done, whereas kind and number gives you no wiggle room for “yes, it was a sin, but…”

I’d love to hear more on this.

To me, what you say makes better sense than what I’ve read here so far because the ‘it’s a sacrament not therapy’ you’ve heard from priests assumes the existential change in the forgiven, whatever he may or may not realize or feel once forgiven, although it is without a doubt desirable to realize and feel much: that change entails salvation! It also presupposes the RCC’s anatomy of sin (mortal venial etc.) as clarifying the sin in question: again, there are no doubt intellectual and emotional benefits to such knowledge, which would be clear to the priest, but the purpose of it seems to be enjoyment of God’s infinite mercy and forgiveness.

 

[Brooklyn]

I saw The Journey Home last night as well, and was struck by the guest’s statement concerning “laundry list” confession. Just from my own experience, I would say it is important to mention, as much as you can, the number of times you commit a sin because it makes you much more aware of it. If you say “I lost my temper 10 times” and “I gossiped twice,” it helps you and the priest to see that you have a bigger problem with practicing the virtue of patience than you do with backbiting. When we see doctors, we need to give them specifics about our aches and pains in order for the doctor make an accurate diagnosis. I think we need to do the same in the confessional. I know that the more specific I am in my confession, the freer I feel when Ieave the confessional. My understanding is that the purpose of confession is to unload the burden of sin we are carrying and allow God’s grace into our lives through Christ’s sacrifice.

Mary

 

[ThuribleGuy45]

To me, what you say makes better sense than what I’ve read here so far because the ‘it’s a sacrament not therapy’ you’ve heard from priests assumes the existential change in the forgiven, whatever he may or may not realize or feel once forgiven, although it is without a doubt desirable to realize and feel much: that change entails salvation! It also presupposes the RCC’s anatomy of sin (mortal venial etc.) as clarifying the sin in question: again, there are no doubt intellectual and emotional benefits to such knowledge, which would be clear to the priest, but the purpose of it seems to be enjoyment of God’s infinite mercy and forgiveness.

Yes, but neither is a sacrament a spreadsheet, with neat talllies of sins organized by rows and categories. Were I a confessor, I would continually wonder at the ability of someone to say they did “X” 9 times or “Y” 11 times. If I actually thought they were recording their transgressions that way, I would think there was a deeper issue. Of course the dimensions of our failures, the pattern, needs to be known by the priest, but I expect and need more from Reconciliation than the “forgiveness machine” Protestants sometimes accuse us of having. It isn’t therapy, but it should assist an individual with insight into their failures.

 

[Brooklyn]

Yes, but neither is a sacrament a spreadsheet, with neat talllies of sins organized by rows and categories. Were I a confessor, I would continually wonder at the ability of someone to say they did “X” 9 times or “Y” 11 times. If I actually thought they were recording their transgressions that way, I would think there was a deeper issue. Of course the dimensions of our failures, the pattern, needs to be known by the priest, but I expect and need more from Reconciliation than the “forgiveness machine” Protestants sometimes accuse us of having. It isn’t therapy, but it should assist an individual with insight into their failures.

I’m curious as to what you mean by this. If you don’t confess your sins by telling your confessor how many times you have done something, how else would you confess? You say that reciting how many times you’ve done something reveals a deeper issue. What is that deeper issue? I ask this with all sincerity, not to be a smart aleck. If Reconciliation is more than a “forgiveness machine” as you say, then what is it? I definitely agree that it should help with insight into our failures, but I think looking at the specifics of what we do does give us this insight.

Looking forward to your response.

Mary

 

[Palladio]

I should think that one positive effect of confession weekly would be an acute conscience and sharp memory combined: don’t we cringe in the act of blasphemy? Couldn’t we count that accurately, and why not? Adultery? Stealing? If it is countless times, of any of these things, and the sinner has trouble remembering, so be it: he says and is forgiven.

The larger point, to my mind, is that while formalism threatens there seems to be no wrong way to confess kinds and particulars given the best of intentions in the act of contrition and penance.

 

[puzzleannie]

if the priest in confession makes a suggestion to the person on how they should be confessing, how they can improve their confession, how they can improve their examination of conscience, he is exercising his pastoral expertise, and his advice should be followed in anything of course that is not contrary to Church teacing. His advice may not be the same as another priest in the same situation, but it his best counsel, and should be followed without rehashing the advice with 3rd parties (except your regular confessor or spiritual director). Same way with the form of the sacrament. the priest is the one with the training and experience. Unless you know, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the priest did not “do it right” you assume that he has indeed got the rite right, and do not question, second guess or monday-morning quarterback the way he does it.

Like finding a good doctor or therapist, it takes time and care to find a good confessor, so spend the time and attention it deserves. I personally doubt very much if anyone will be helped by coming here to ask forum-ites to critique their confession or what their priest said or did, I just don’t think that will aid anyone’s spiritual progress. General questions on the sacraments, moral life, decisions etc, yes, but asking “was this confession OK?” is not going to help in the long run. If you genuinely think the priest is not following the rules to the extent that the sinner is being counselled in something against Church moral teaching, or the sacrament may not be valid, that is another matter.

 

[LilyM]

I think the whole PURPOSE of confessing the number of sins is that this in itself points the priest and penitent to those which are particularly problematic - if only because they are so frequent.

I’m not the sort to say ‘I did xyz 9 times’, rather I might say ‘once or twice’ as opposed to something that is daily, almost every day, weekly or what have you. This achieves the same result.

As for ‘getting to the root cause’, certainly a wise confessor can help greatly in this regard, but most priests are not thoroughly trained in counselling - or even, dare I say, moral theology.

To my mind it’s more a matter for spiritual direction and self-analysis by the sinner as well. There are many excellent tools, even on the internet alone, that can help with this - podcast talks or series about the nature of different types of sin and ways of dealing with it or what have you.

My view of it is that confession is usually like a consultation with a generalist physician - mostly you just want quick treatment of the most pressing of your symptoms. If they persist, then you consider consulting a specialist

 

[Palladio]

My view of it is that confession is usually like a consultation with a generalist physician - mostly you just want quick treatment of the most pressing of your symptoms. If they persist, then you consider consulting a specialist

I, for one, happen to agree with you, but the last claims you make seem to ignore the very basis and purpose of confession: forgiveness, grace, salvation, and all that that entails for our immortal souls: everything!

God bless.

 

[Brooklyn]

I, for one, happen to agree with you, but the last claims you make seem to ignore the very basis and purpose of confession: forgiveness, grace, salvation, and all that that entails for our immortal souls: everything!

God bless.

Oh how I do agree with that!. Although one effect of confession is to make us feel better, that is not the reason for it. It is to erase the barrier, which is our sins, that stands between us and our God. It is to restore us to the grace we had at baptism and to enable us to once again enter into the presence of God.

Mary