Confession obligatory once a year?

[TheLittleLady]

There are those who reach that place in their spiritual life where they do not commit grave sins. We can all get there, in fact, that is our goal!!

 

[TheLittleLady]

I think people got away from speaking of mortal sin (using the euphemisms “grave” and “serious”) because they don’t want to speak clearly of going to hell for committing particular acts — especially acts that some people would prefer weren’t spoken of as being worthy of eternal punishment. How this trend got started, I could only speculate.

Grave and serious are the words used by Holy Mother Church.

Not all grave sins are mortal, not all serious sins are mortal however all mortal sins are grave or serious.

 

[TheLittleLady]

I took a look at Jone’s Moral Theology this afternoon, and Jone routinely refers to certain sins in and of themselves as “mortal sins” (adultery, fornication, and so on).

Because it is rare form someone, especially during the time when Jone was writing, to not have knowledge that adultery and fornication were grave sins. It is also not common for someone to lack consent of will when committing adultery or fornication, if they were forced it is rape and not fornication.

Jone is a valuable resource, we must still consider the audience.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

“Margaret” is from the Greek for “pearl”, and if you know how pearls are made, then I’m still a work in progress.

 

[strita]

there are 66 replies and I presume you have a clear idea of the obligation. What I would like to say has to do with the Jewish practice and observance of Yom Kippur - the day of atonement. It’s a day of complete fast. As I understand it, if a Jew has not reconciled with someone who has been injured by the Jew, then it is at least one day of the year that one atones to God for sin. There is this obligation to do this on this day. The book of Jonah is read in the synagogue on this day.

You can get a better explanation of the spirit of confession and Yom Kippur with a quick search.

 

[poche]

Where I live, the lines of confession are long.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Where I live, the lines of confession are long.

And where is that, if I may ask? General ballpark location is fine, not necessarily the city, state, or diocese (e.g., the upper Midwest, the deep South, etc.). Is it in the United States?

 

[Vico]

poche:

Where I live, the lines of confession are long.

And where is that, if I may ask? General ballpark location is fine, not necessarily the city, state, or diocese (e.g., the upper Midwest, the deep South, etc.). Is it in the United States?

We have long lines too, on Saturday morning, United States.

 

[Gorgias]

The three conditions that are needed for mortal sin are just a “given”.

A “given”? As in “if there’s a sin, then it must be mortal”? (Or at least, “it’s a given that it should be considered mortal, all other things being equal”?) That doesn’t sound quite right.

And I do have to note that, traditionally, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will were just assumed to have existed, unless proven to the contrary.

Yep. That’s what you mean, alright! Wow…

The presumptions there are:

• folks know what sin is. (That’s not a good assumption, these days. We’ve kinda lost the sense for personal sin.)
• folks act with full consent of the will. (One is never coerced? Burdened by pre-existing habits that condition the will?)

To answer the questions “did you know it was a mortal [grave] sin, did you know what you were doing, and did you want to do it?” was not rocket science then, and it’s not rocket science now.

It’s not that answering them is difficult… it’s that the answers might be different these days, due to catechetical deficiencies and cultural influences.

For instance, I read one examination of conscience that said “am I faithful to the moral law in my married life?”. To the average reader, what in the world is that supposed to mean? Oh, I see now, they’re talking about contraception. Well, then, why not just say it?

I would say that it could mean a lot of things, not just contraception!

 

[babochka]

Where I live, the lines of confession are long.

Generally speaking, the same is true here.

 

[babochka]

traditionally, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will were just assumed to have existed, unless proven to the contrary.

Proven to the satisfaction of whom? God is the one who matters. Besides, how does one prove lack of sufficient reflection and lack of full consent? What is the standard of proof? And who is the judge? God. And in the confessional, the priest, standing in the person of Christ. Just like it is today. Which brings us back to: Go to Confession! Go regularly. Go whenever your conscience is bothering you about something, even if you’re not sure something is mortal. Don’t assume anything and don’t just confess what you think are “the big ones”. Lay it all before the merciful God.

Traditionally, a Catholic funeral was denied to those who died by their own hand; today, we have a much better understanding of the psychological factors that can compromise the full consent of the will. I greatly appreciate today’s approach. I would rather risk scandal than deprive the deceased of the prayers of the Church.

For instance, I read one examination of conscience that said “am I faithful to the moral law in my married life?”

So that particular examination of conscience was unclear. It should have included contraception, adultery, etc. separately. It is a bit much to write off all “modern” examinations of conscience because of this. I once saw an examination of conscience that asked if I recycle my batteries, among other weirdness. I found a better one.

On the other hand, I’ve mentioned the one my dad had from the 1950s: Steal $100 dollars and it is a mortal sin. Steal less than $100 and it is venial. Is that sort of black and white thinking clearer? Does it better reflect the reality of sin?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The three conditions that are needed for mortal sin are just a “given”.

No, the “given” was that mortal sin requires all three conditions. People don’t know that anymore.

For instance, I read one examination of conscience that said “am I faithful to the moral law in my married life?”. To the average reader, what in the world is that supposed to mean? Oh, I see now, they’re talking about contraception. Well, then, why not just say it?

The “vibe” I got from this is that it was a contemporary examination of conscience, and they wanted to soft-pedal this sin, not be explicit about it, because many people have made up their minds that contraception isn’t a sin.

traditionally, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will were just assumed to have existed, unless proven to the contrary.

Of course.

On the other hand, I’ve mentioned the one my dad had from the 1950s: Steal $100 dollars and it is a mortal sin. Steal less than $100 and it is venial. Is that sort of black and white thinking clearer? Does it better reflect the reality of sin?

No, but stealing does admit of parvity of matter. I would set the bar lower than $100. Stealing $17 from Bill Gates is not as serious a matter as stealing $17 from a little old lady whose sole source of income is Social Security. Some forms of stealing have additional things that make them more serious than just the sin itself, such as shoplifters who may steal small items. Our society and its legal system impose far worse ramifications than simply paying for the item stolen, such as shame upon one’s family, a lifetime mark on one’s criminal record, one’s children being harassed in school because their dad stole a pack of fishing lures from the sporting goods section of Walmart, his name came out in the paper, and the family can’t go back to Walmart anymore. That sort of thing.

I do not advocate any form of stealing. I will confess that I once went to a party at one of the poshest country clubs on the East Coast, and in a moment of mischief, I felt like I needed one of their whiskey glasses, emblazoned with the club crest, more than they needed it. Once I became convicted of the venial sinfulness of this, I repented of it and deposited $5 into the parish poor box as restitution. I do not recall if I ever mentioned this in confession, in that it was only a venial sin.

Do as I say, not as I do. Miserere mei Domine.

 

[Vico]

…
No, the “given” was that mortal sin requires all three conditions. People don’t know that anymore.
…

Each should study or be taught the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Especially if they did not receive Catholic training elsewhere, for example, from the Baltimore Catechism or another Catholic catechism. Even so, conscience must be cultivated.

Catechism

1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. …

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1859 … Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

And I do have to note that, traditionally, sufficient reflection and full consent of the will were just assumed to have existed, unless proven to the contrary.

As much of a theological hard-butt as I am, I fervently hope that Our Lord looks at today’s society, realizes that many, many people are largely clueless about what constitutes a sin, what constitutes a mortal sin, and judges them as they perceive themselves in good faith. I don’t want anyone to go to hell forever, nor even to be punished in purgatory any more than they need to be, to become perfect in the Eyes of God and to enter heaven without the stain of sin. Perhaps all of the good people in the past, who trembled and worried themselves to death thinking they were in mortal sin, back when sins were more or less evaluated objectively, some of whom just gave up and said “it’s no use anymore, I’m going to hell”, have been received into the Beatific Vision by a God Who understands all and forgives all. I hope so.

Even Father Stedman’s old Latin-English missal makes allowance for Our Lord having “compassion on the crowd”.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[po18guy]

1. I dare not assume that I have not sinned mortally. If the great Saints confessed regularly, and if I strive to emulate them, then I must also receive reconciliation regularly.
2. If you do not have one, get a good examination of conscience. It is illuminating and convicting at the same time. Here is the best that I have found:

https://www.leafletonline.com/examination-of-conscience

 

[poche]

The state of Georgia

 

[TomH1]

It should first be noted that Can 989 is an absolute mandatory, minimum. It is not a recommendation. It actually corrects and more clearly defines earlier laws in that it refers only to ‘grave’ (a.k.a. ‘mortal’) sins, and not to venial ones. The obligation in Can. 989 does not apply to venial sins.

Source: Beal, J. P., Coriden, J. A. and Green, T. J. (eds) (2000) New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law. New York, USA: Paulist Press (ISBN-13: 978-080914066).