Bad Confession?

  • Thread starter Thread starter augustinefellow
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

augustinefellow

Guest
I posted this in a different category earlier, but am hoping to get more of a response.

I’ve been really bothered since I went to Confession this morning. Here’s what happened:

I’m a guy who struggles with SSA. I went to confession and confessed lust among other things, and was stumbling through my list of sins, and as the priest was briefly offering me encouragement, I realized that I hadn’t been specific in the fact that my lust involved SSA, which is something I normally mention in the confessional. But I didn’t say anything when I realized I hadn’t. I made my act of contrition and then received absolution, and then said my penance. But I felt guilty still.

I was told by a priest when I first became Catholic, that lusting after the same-sex added another dimension to the sin and was basically a different sin than lust since it is part of a separate disorder of the soul, and needed to be confessed as such.

So during the entire Mass I felt like I had withheld a major mortal sin in confession and just could not experience God’s mercy and peace. I did end up going up for Communion and now I wonder if I made a bad confession and desecrated the Eucharist. Am I just being scrupulous?
 
I would tend to agree with the Priest you spoke to before. Yes I would say that such is a something that “changes the species” changes the kind and would need to be confessed. For normally “lust” would be presumed directed at the opposite gender.

One is obliged to confess all mortal sins in number and kind --and that which changes the kind (like it was a chalice from the Church that you stole and thus also sacrilege etc)

And of course one cannot say things too generally --one must get to the species --one cannot for example say “I sinned against the 6th commandment” one needs to say (though there are various ways to put it) I accuse myself of fornication 2x or Adultery 3x etc

jimmyakin.com/2007/03/specific_confes.html
 
It is rather difficult to advise one here --for we were not there in your experience.

One can bring the matter to the confessional (not just as if it was “forgotten”- but what happened and what happened later --he can advise you)

That being said- I note this from Jimmy Akin --what he thinks regarding when one suddenly remembers a mortal sin in confession:

jimmyakin.com/2009/12/what-if-you-suddenly-remember-in-confession.html

Know that Jesus the* Good Shepherd* knows you and loves you
 
Bookcat said:
It is rather difficult to advise one here --for we were not there in your experience.

One can bring the matter to the confessional (not just as if it was “forgotten”- but what happened and what happened later --he can advise you)
Know that Jesus the* Good Shepherd* knows you and loves you
Click to expand...
This is sage advice.
 
Like I said in the earlier post in my mind it comes down to this: is saying “I lusted” instead of “I lusted after men” two different sins that are so different that to confess the former instead of the latter is to withhold a mortal sin? I have one who says it is and one who says it is not.

In my mind when I think of “kind” of sin I think of lust vs. sodomy vs. fornication vs. adultery vs. polygamy vs. incest, etc. Sodomy is its own thing, fornication is its own thing and lust is its own thing. How much detail do you need to go into?

Anyway I just want to get more people’s thoughts on how many degrees of specificity do we have to go in our sins in order to be confident in that we haven’t withheld anything grave?
 
augustinefellow said:
Like I said in the earlier post in my mind it comes down to this: is saying “I lusted” instead of “I lusted after men” two different sins that are so different that to confess the former instead of the latter is to withhold a mortal sin? I have one who says it is and one who says it is not.

In my mind when I think of “kind” of sin I think of lust vs. sodomy vs. fornication vs. adultery vs. polygamy vs. incest, etc. Sodomy is its own thing, fornication is its own thing and lust is its own thing. How much detail do you need to go into?

Anyway I just want to get more people’s thoughts on how many degrees of specificity do we have to go in our sins in order to be confident in that we haven’t withheld anything grave?
Click to expand...
Yes I would go with what the original Priest (and me…:)) said.
 
It is not just “kind” but also circumstances which changes the kind (that which changes the species). So as I noted I would tend to think the original Priest was correct in his noting this to you.

If I murder my Wife …

the fact that she is my Wife changes the kind. Tis not sufficient for me to say “I accuse myself of murder”

If I steal a chalice from the Church --such is not just theft of a chalice but also sacrilege.
 
Since you seem to know a lot about Confession can you point me in the direction of the official canons regarding the confession of laypeople?
 
augustinefellow said:
I posted this in a different category earlier, but am hoping to get more of a response.

I’ve been really bothered since I went to Confession this morning. Here’s what happened:

I’m a guy who struggles with SSA. I went to confession and confessed lust among other things, and was stumbling through my list of sins, and as the priest was briefly offering me encouragement, I realized that I hadn’t been specific in the fact that my lust involved SSA, which is something I normally mention in the confessional. But I didn’t say anything when I realized I hadn’t. I made my act of contrition and then received absolution, and then said my penance. But I felt guilty still.

I was told by a priest when I first became Catholic, that lusting after the same-sex added another dimension to the sin and was basically a different sin than lust since it is part of a separate disorder of the soul, and needed to be confessed as such.

So during the entire Mass I felt like I had withheld a major mortal sin in confession and just could not experience God’s mercy and peace. I did end up going up for Communion and now I wonder if I made a bad confession and desecrated the Eucharist. Am I just being scrupulous?
Click to expand...
If you had any sort of homosexual relations with another individual, it is necessary to tell the priest that is was homosexuality. If it was only homosexual porn, I don’t think that it is absolutely necessary for a proper confession to mention the SSA. However, to get the most out of your confession, I’d recommend that you disclose your SSA. A physician can’t treat someone who won’t disclose their sickness.

In Christ,
Zekariya 🙂
 
Seek out perhaps the first Priest who advised you. He may be able to help one determine if such is a “change in species (kind)” in what happened in your case. Some things “change the kind” others do not and sometimes one needs to ask.
 
augustinefellow said:
I posted this in a different category earlier, but am hoping to get more of a response.

I’ve been really bothered since I went to Confession this morning. Here’s what happened:

I’m a guy who struggles with SSA. I went to confession and confessed lust among other things, and was stumbling through my list of sins, and as the priest was briefly offering me encouragement, I realized that I hadn’t been specific in the fact that my lust involved SSA, which is something I normally mention in the confessional. But I didn’t say anything when I realized I hadn’t. I made my act of contrition and then received absolution, and then said my penance. But I felt guilty still.

I was told by a priest when I first became Catholic, that lusting after the same-sex added another dimension to the sin and was basically a different sin than lust since it is part of a separate disorder of the soul, and needed to be confessed as such.

So during the entire Mass I felt like I had withheld a major mortal sin in confession and just could not experience God’s mercy and peace. I did end up going up for Communion and now I wonder if I made a bad confession and desecrated the Eucharist. Am I just being scrupulous?
Click to expand...
This may be helpful, from the Baltimore Catechism No. 3 and the latest Catechism. Your description seems to fit the ninth commandment the best as “carnal concupiscence” regardless of the

Q. 1284. What is forbidden by the sixth Commandment?

A. The sixth Commandment forbids all unchaste freedom with another’s wife or husband; also all immodesty with ourselves or others in looks, dress, words, and actions.

Q. 1317. What is forbidden by the ninth Commandment?

A. The ninth Commandment forbids unchaste thoughts, desires of another’s wife or husband, and all other unlawful impure thoughts and desires.

Q. 1324. In what does the sixth commandment differ from the ninth, and the seventh differ from the tenth?

A. The sixth commandment differs from the ninth in this, that the sixth refers chiefly to external acts of impurity, while the ninth refers more to sins of thought against purity. The seventh commandment refers chiefly to external acts of dishonesty, while the tenth refers more to thoughts against honesty.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church, on the ninth Commandment:

2514 St. John distinguishes three kinds of covetousness or concupiscence: lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life.301 In the Catholic catechetical tradition, the ninth commandment forbids carnal concupiscence; the tenth forbids coveting another’s goods.

2515 Etymologically, “concupiscence” can refer to any intense form of human desire. Christian theology has given it a particular meaning: the movement of the sensitive appetite contrary to the operation of the human reason. The apostle St. Paul identifies it with the rebellion of the “flesh” against the "spirit."302 Concupiscence stems from the disobedience of the first sin. It unsettles man’s moral faculties and, without being in itself an offense, inclines man to commit sins.303
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top