Confession question - invalid past confession/scrupulosity?

[buc_fan33]

As you noted one is obliged to confess all mortal sins in number and kind. So I think it should be clarified that yes normally the Priest needs to know the actual number of all mortal sins - for the penitent is obliged to confess them. But as you note that is not absolutely necessary - for one may not know them.

Now can there be times when one does not know that number?

Yes sure. And then one may approximate according to what one knows from ones examination of conscience. That may be something like “around 5” or 8-10x or more than 20 or it may be it may need to be “many times” or “alot” or “a few times”…

And because it is the nature of the Sacrament and the Divine Law.

Now can there be exceptions to such? Yes such as the person does not know the number (so can approximate)…or the person does not have the time before the plane crashes …certain cases of scruples etc etc.

Jimmy Akin senior Apologist at Catholic Answers (for reader further reading):

jimmyakin.com/2012/03/confessing-by-kind-and-number.html

jimmyakin.com/2006/09/a_reader_writes_1.html

ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/when-you-dont-have-to-say-something-in-confession

I get all this, but, with all due respect, I don’t think it’s helpful to the OP. He or she was specifically asking about one sin, committed many times, not something where he/she knows the specific number. My fear is that extra points of emphasis like this, while true, only serve to muddy the water and cause more strife and consternation for the person asking the question.

 

[Bookcat]

I get all this, but, with all due respect, I don’t think it’s helpful to the OP. He or she was specifically asking about one sin, committed many times, not something where he/she knows the specific number. My fear is that extra points of emphasis like this, while true, only serve to muddy the water and cause more strife and consternation for the person asking the question.

I see you have posted only around 300 or so posts so are not as familiar with how this forum is used and seen by the world…it is not just one person one is responding too when one writes.

Many many persons read these posts (even thousands)…and for years to come. So clarifications are important. One finds these answers in a general google search…and will like find them in 2054…

So when I respond - I usually try to write with that in mind.

If a person confessed that the mortal sin was 10 times - and later realized it was 20 they are obliged to bring that to the next confession. If they think was around 10 times and confess so - and later realize it was really around 20 times (mortal sin) - then they mention that in the next confession.

As I noted and provided further information about - there can be exceptions. But that is the obligation.

The OP - I have counseled to go bring the matter to their confessor - who can personally and in the Sacrament assist them.

 

[buc_fan33]

Many many persons read these posts (even thousands)…and for years to come. So clarifications are important. One finds these answers in a general google search…and will like find them in 2054…

If a person confessed that the mortal sin was 10 times - and later realized it was 20 they are obliged to bring that to the next confession. If they think was around 10 times and confess so - and later realize it was really around 20 times (mortal sin) - then they mention that in the next confession.

As I noted and provided further information about - there can be exceptions. But that is the obligation.

The OP - I have counseled to go bring the matter to their confessor - who can personally and in the Sacrament assist them.

Fair enough, and I probably should not have said “never.”

 

[Bookcat]

Fair enough, and I probably should not have said “never.”

As you noted we are to confess in number and kind…but

If one does not know the number of the mortal sins …no worries.

One examines and estimates according to what one knows…

…as l like to say …we are not expected to be Mr. Spock

That was 23.235 times…

 

[Bookcat]

Also given the fact that the term scrupulosity is mentioned:

I will re-post another older post of mine (general information regarding scrupulosity) for readers who come to read this thread because that term was used.

A person struggles with scruples - what ought they do?

A person with scrupulosity --ought to have a* “regular confessor” who can direct them --and even give them some general principles* to follow -to apply (principles for them due to their particular scruples -they are usually not for those with a normal conscience).

Thus with their direction they can “dismiss scruples” (in the older language despise them) - “act against them” (agere contra).

Scruples are to be dismissed ~ not argued with.

To borrow and image from a Carthusian from centuries ago: Scruples *are like a barking dog or a hissing goose -one does not stop to argue with a barking dog or a hissing goose does one? * No one keeps walking.

Such ‘obedience’ to a regular confessor who knows of ones scruples (except in what is manifest sin - such as if he told them it was ok to murder someone or something certain like that) is key. Such is the age old practice.

Also counseling -(especially if one also has OCD) could be helpful depending on the case -but one would want to look for a counselor who can assist one in following the Churches Teachings - not go contrary to them (I have heard CA staff mention catholictherapists.com/)

Here was post from Jimmy Akin of CA that I saw in the Register and saved for those who struggle with such.

ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/6-tools-for-the-scrupulous