Confession incident/advice

  • Thread starter Thread starter ssa_trad_cath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

ssa_trad_cath

Guest
Something unusual happened when I went to confession this morning, it’s never happened to me before. I was wondering what readers thought. I try to go to confession regularly, and to make a reasonable examination of conscience before. If I have anything I think may be serious I try to confess that first; and, if needed, I try to indicate approximately how many times I have committed the sin.

This morning, I confessed to a different priest, i.e. not my usual confessor. Part-way through my confession he stopped me, saying he didn’t want to hear any more. He said “you’re torturing yourself”, and indicated said that I was being too strict with myself. He said that it wasn’t necessary to confess the number of sins. When I asked “Doesn’t the church say we should if it may be serious,” he replied “Only if it’s the difference between 1 and 100, not when you’re talking about 5 or 10 times.” He said something like “it’s not as if you’ve murdered somebody”. He then started asking if I was performing spiritual reading, for example on mental prayer, and made some other comments I can’t remember at the moment. But he didn’t let me finish my confession - he just gave me a penance, asked me for the Act of Contrition, then gave me absolution. When I made the Act of Contition, I mentally offered it for everything, including the sins I had wanted to confess but wasn’t allowed to. Although there were three or four people behind me, it’s not as though there was a long queue, where the priest could say there were too many people to waste time with somebody confessing too many sins. And this was at the start of an hour of confessions, so it’s not as though the priest was e.g. just about to say Mass and didn’t have much time. (In fact, he spent far more time talking than it would have taken me to say the rest of what I wanted to say!)

I suppose the thoughts on my mind are - firstly, from a personal point of view, am I absolved? It’s not like I deliberately held something back - I wanted to confess but the priest didn’t want to hear it. Also, has something like this happened to somebody else, and what do readers think of the priest’s comments?

(By the way, I feel bad enough about this as it is, so I hope I’m not going to get another bashing from readers! :D)
 
Perhaps he observed that what you were confessing were not mortal sins, and that you had already covered your areas of sinfulness. He is hearing your Confession in Person of Christ, so perhaps the Lord is trying to tell you something.
Please trust that as a priest who was acting in the Person of Jesus, your absolution is valid.
That he asked about your spiritual life and practice does indicate that he takes the direction of souls seriously.

You are of good heart. Trust that the Lord thinks less harshly of you than you do.
May our dear Lord guide you gently and wisely.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1458 Without being strictly necessary, confession of everyday faults (venial sins), however, is highly recommended because Church.59 regular confession of our venial sins helps us form our conscience, fight against evil tendencies, allow ourselves to be healed by Christ and progress in the life of the Spirit. Upon receiving more frequently through this sacrament the gift of the mercy of the Father, prompted us to be merciful as merciful: 60

May I suggest, for your peace of mind and soul, that before you go into Confession, ask the Holy Spirit to guide both you and the priest in all that occurs in Confession, and trust that the Holy Spirit will grant your honest prayer. Trust Him and He will.

God bless you, sincere soul.
 
Something else I’ve just remembered: I referred to praying when I’m tempted. The priest advised me not to pray when I’m tempted, but to find some other way of distracting myself. I thought that was a bit strange, because praying when tempted is something I’ve picked up from several sources over the years, including priests and spiritual writers.
 
I think what he is trying to do is to prevent you from focusing on the temptation. He may worry that you pray against the temptation with distress or urgency or some strong emotion that makes it harder to forget the temptation. I think he is trying to get you to protect yourself against getting upset or continuing to be upset by the focus in prayer. Sometimes if you’re fighting hard against something it’s harder not to fall.

He suggests that you distract yourself which is possibly something that works well in his life.
I agree up to a point. Pray a prayer, but of trust in God’s help, and then get your mind and focus on something else. Pray, but pray calmly and with trust. I suspect that he observed that you are very intense, and that is a good thing but has its pitfalls, which he wants to protect you from.
 
I think that many here–certainly those who frequently avail themselves of the sacrament of confession–have had a similar experience, in one form or another. It can be partly due to a pentinent’s tendency toward scrupulosity, but it can also be attributed to a priest’s shift away from what the Church has always taught and encouraged, regarding the sacrament. The modern mindset tends to see a pyschological framework, rather than an examination of conscience, as the basis for moral reflection.
 
ssa_trad_cath said:
Something else I’ve just remembered: I referred to praying when I’m tempted. The priest advised me not to pray when I’m tempted, but to find some other way of distracting myself. I thought that was a bit strange, because praying when tempted is something I’ve picked up from several sources over the years, including priests and spiritual writers.
Click to expand...
This is not really a fair posting, considering that the priest has no ability or right to defend his position or clarify your statements here due to the seal of confession…
 
promethius said:
This is not really a fair posting, considering that the priest has no ability or right to defend his position or clarify your statements here due to the seal of confession…
Click to expand...
Confessional stories are like that. Let’s take folks’ word for it.

I think it’s clearly an absolution.
 
ssa_trad_cath said:
Something unusual happened when I went to confession this morning, it’s never happened to me before. I was wondering what readers thought. I try to go to confession regularly, and to make a reasonable examination of conscience before. If I have anything I think may be serious I try to confess that first; and, if needed, I try to indicate approximately how many times I have committed the sin.

This morning, I confessed to a different priest, i.e. not my usual confessor. Part-way through my confession he stopped me, saying he didn’t want to hear any more. He said “you’re torturing yourself”, and indicated said that I was being too strict with myself. He said that it wasn’t necessary to confess the number of sins. When I asked “Doesn’t the church say we should if it may be serious,” he replied “Only if it’s the difference between 1 and 100, not when you’re talking about 5 or 10 times.” He said something like “it’s not as if you’ve murdered somebody”. He then started asking if I was performing spiritual reading, for example on mental prayer, and made some other comments I can’t remember at the moment. But he didn’t let me finish my confession - he just gave me a penance, asked me for the Act of Contrition, then gave me absolution. When I made the Act of Contition, I mentally offered it for everything, including the sins I had wanted to confess but wasn’t allowed to. Although there were three or four people behind me, it’s not as though there was a long queue, where the priest could say there were too many people to waste time with somebody confessing too many sins. And this was at the start of an hour of confessions, so it’s not as though the priest was e.g. just about to say Mass and didn’t have much time. (In fact, he spent far more time talking than it would have taken me to say the rest of what I wanted to say!)

I suppose the thoughts on my mind are - firstly, from a personal point of view, am I absolved? It’s not like I deliberately held something back - I wanted to confess but the priest didn’t want to hear it. Also, has something like this happened to somebody else, and what do readers think of the priest’s comments?

(By the way, I feel bad enough about this as it is, so I hope I’m not going to get another bashing from readers! :D)
Click to expand...
Sometimes it’s because it’s inherent in the nature of the sin. For example, it should be mortal. If you miss Mass you must give the priest a number of weeks for example - or times.

However, there are some sins for which you may not or cannot provide a number over a period of time. I had the same experience in that it was a mortal sin left out of a previous confession, but I was not near my home. I told the new priest that though I had made a previous good confession, and admitting to a bit of scrupulosity, I was afraid that though I had confessed that nature of sin – this one (many times repeated) was not specifically addressed, except I could not reconfess sins (the first priest who heard the confession recognized my scrupulosity and specifically told me not to reconfess), which I had no intention of doing and told the second priest. He finally asked me the sin that I thought had not been addressed and I told him. By that he knew and no number was needed.

He explained that I was absolved and should not be fearful that absolution does not take place. Of course, I was in a position of having confessed in general but the specificity of some of the sins were not broken down – this one.

Think of it this way, you know if you miss Mass. However, if you have a habit of blasheming – taking the Lord’s name in vain, it’s hard to put a number to it (and the intent might not be present). So, if you say to the priest, “I have not been to confession for two months and I have repeatedly taken the Lord’s name in vain” - the priest pretty much has an idea that it’s habit, likely some venial and some mortal (it just slips out) and pretty much has a rough idea that it was not 1 time in 8 weeks, but many times in 8 weeks. Whether it can be exact is probably impossible to determine. Whether it was 40 times or 41 at that point – the priest has an idea of the repetive nature of the sin over a 2 month span. My confessions usually are not specific as to number unless I can give one, because I know that some are habit and some are my scrupulosity speaking.

I’m not a priest; maybe one of the religious will comment but from my experience the nature of certain sins indicate a ball park number and whether or not it was habit – some intentional, some without intent to sin.

The priest assured me I had been absolved, even the first time, but absolved me of my newest sins for which I had a specific number. He said that this happens all the time and that I should not fear not having been previously absolved.
 
I think most Priest can reconize scrupulosity (OP I’m not saying you are)

I know when young I numbered the sins but not as an adult. Take the Priest at this word, he has absolved you, all the sins you walked in with have been absolved and need not be confessed again or worried over.🙂
 
promethius said:
This is not really a fair posting, considering that the priest has no ability or right to defend his position or clarify your statements here due to the seal of confession…
Click to expand...
I don’t think that this is something where defense of statements is at issue - it’s more about the poster’s sense of being stopped before completion and worry about not confessing all of the sins, and his/her concerns about the validity of the absolution as a result.
I also think Trishie’s responses were right on target (as usual :D).
 
ssa_trad_cath said:
Something else I’ve just remembered: I referred to praying when I’m tempted. The priest advised me not to pray when I’m tempted, but to find some other way of distracting myself. I thought that was a bit strange, because praying when tempted is something I’ve picked up from several sources over the years, including priests and spiritual writers.
Click to expand...
It’s hard to judge here. But I can think that sometimes distraction might be tried – such as leaving the home if the temptation is there.
 
I think he is probably detecting what may be - with all Christian love and respect, I say this - a bit of scrupulosity on your part. It is not necessary to state the number of venial sins - only mortal ones - for a valid confession, so give yourself a bit of a break. If you think your confession is going to take more than 5 minutes or so, I would try to see the priest outside of the normal confession hours, since he is probably concerned to be able to fit in everybody who may be in line.

I am sure your confession is completely valid and you are completely absolved.

Priests gain a lot of wisdom sometimes from hearing hundreds and thousands of confessions over time…
 
Today, in our RCIA session, the topic was the Sacrament of Reconciliation. As far as numbering your sins, Father said, sometimes you need to, sometimes not. An example he gave was a person committing adultery. A mortal sin to be sure, but if it was a one time thing and the person was totally repentant, that is different from someone who is repeatedly committing the sin. He would want to know the frequency in a case of adultery, and of course, if he was not convinced of the repentance of the person, that would make a difference.

Do we need to number our venial sins? According to him–no, unless they are becoming so habitual that they are steering us into a path that might lead us to mortal sin. Then we need to recognize that a pattern is developing and take the necessary action to break the pattern, and that would include the frequency with which we commit the sin.
 
We are obliged to confess all mortal sins in number and kind (and circumstance that changes it such as it was your brother you murdered). If one does not know the number…one approximates according to what one knows.

Venial sins need not be confessed (though recommended to confess…) and need not be confessed in number and kind.

A particular person with scrupulosity etc (since some mentioned this) may be in a different boat…for they can start wanting to confess all sorts of things which are not mortal etc etc…their confessor can direct them.​

As to absolution …I do not see that you were not absolved …(so it seems to me)…he stopped you…as you note…you were trying to confess any mortal sins…it was not that you where hiding something. If you have any mortal sins though that were not thus confessed…bring them to the next confession (with your regular confessor…and he can guide you further). This may be of interest from Jimmy Akin of CA. jimmyakin.com/2009/12/what-if-you-suddenly-remember-in-confession.html
 
I’ve struggled with the same sort of thing, and the struggle didn’t stop until I got (at the recommendation of a priest who heard my confession once) a spiritual director. I recall at the time that Father told me very sternly, “The Lord forgives you. You must learn to forgive yourself.” Under spiritual direction I learned that I do have a tendency to scrupulosity, and it is not of God. It is one of the tools of the enemy to try to draw me away from Christ, specifically because it destroys the delight and joy that I should be experiencing as one of His precious children.

I am currently reading the diary of St. Faustina, “Divine Mercy in my Soul,” and am beginning to learn that I need to show myself the same mercy that I would show a person in dire straits. That is the mercy that God shows us, and for me anyways, it is presumptuous to mull over whether the absolution I received was valid.

This doesn’t excuse repetitive bad behavior. It merely reminds me that in all humility I need to accept Jesus’ great sacrifice, and His sacraments, without questioning myself needlessly.
 
Bookcat said:
We are obliged to confess all mortal sins in number and kind (and circumstance that changes it such as it was your brother you murdered). If one does not know the number…one approximates according to what one knows.

Venial sins need not be confessed (though recommended to confess…) and need not be confessed in number and kind.

A particular person with scrupulosity etc (since some mentioned this) may be in a different boat…for they can start wanting to confess all sorts of things which are not mortal etc etc…their confessor can direct them.​

As to absolution …I do not see that you were not absolved …(so it seems to me)…he stopped you…as you note…you were trying to confess any mortal sins…it was not that you where hiding something. If you have any mortal sins though that were not thus confessed…bring them to the next confession (with your regular confessor…and he can guide you further). This may be of interest from Jimmy Akin of CA. jimmyakin.com/2009/12/what-if-you-suddenly-remember-in-confession.html
Click to expand...
PS so you are very correct that one is to confess ones mortal sins in number and kind…this goes for all mortal sins (the difference between 1-100 thing is simply not correct…if one knows the mortal sin was 5x one says 5x…if one knows it is 3x one says 3x…if one does not know one can then approximate accordingly).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top