Confession question...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Monica4316
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Monica4316

Guest
Let’s say a person had consented to any type of evil thought against their confessor… and let’s say they can’t see another confessor for whatever reason (there’s only one priest in their area, they can only confess to their regular confessor, WHATEVER the case may be). So should they say in Confession that it was against him, or should they just say “against a priest”? Would this change the validity of the Confession?

Assume for the same of the discussion that:
  • it was mortal, and
  • they can’t see another priest.
Is there anything on this that’s from the Church, rather than our own opinions?

??? thanks!
 
Why not just say “Against another”…Doesn’t seem to me that “against a priest” is necessary…

Peace
James
 
Monica4316 said:
Let’s say a person had consented to any type of evil thought against their confessor… and let’s say they can’t see another confessor for whatever reason (there’s only one priest in their area, they can only confess to their regular confessor, WHATEVER the case may be). So should they say in Confession that it was against him, or should they just say “against a priest”? Would this change the validity of the Confession?

Assume for the same of the discussion that:
  • it was mortal, and
  • they can’t see another priest.
Is there anything on this that’s from the Church, rather than our own opinions?

??? thanks!
Click to expand...
Baltimore Catechism No. 3
Q. 746. What faults are to be avoided in making our confession?
A. In making our confession we are to avoid:


  1. *]Telling useless details, the sins of others, or the name of any person;
    *]Confessing sins we are not sure of having committed; exaggerating our sins or their number; multiplying the number of times a day by the number of days to get the exact number of habitual sins;
    *]Giving a vague answer, such as “sometimes,” when asked how often; waiting after each sin to be asked for the next;
    *]Hesitating over sins through pretended modesty and thus delaying the priests and others; telling the exact words in each when we have committed several sins of the same kind, cursing, for example; and, lastly, leaving the confessional before the priest gives us a sign to go.

    Q. 790. What do you mean by the "kinds of sin?"
    A. By the “kinds of sin,” we mean the particular division or class to which the sins belong; that is, whether they be sins of blasphemy, disobedience, anger, impurity, dishonesty, etc. We can determine the kind of sin by discovering the commandment or precept of the Church we have broken or the virtue against which we have acted.

    Q. 791. What do we mean by "circumstances which change the nature of sins?"
    A. By “circumstances which change the nature of sins” we mean anything that makes it another kind of sin. Thus to steal is a sin, but to steal from the Church makes our theft sacrilegious. Again, impure actions are sins, but a person must say whether they were committed alone or with others, with relatives or strangers, with persons married or single, etc., because these circumstances change them from one kind of impurity to another.
 
Monica4316 said:
Is there anything on this that’s from the Church, rather than our own opinions?
Click to expand...
One is not going find “anything on this that’s from the Church” because it is too specific a scenario. That is why we ask our confessors these things, because there is no way that the Church can pronounce on every type of situation. There are too many variables. Even confessors would likely have different opinions on this.

To me, if the bad thoughts were a result of something that previously was said in the confessional, then I would indeed say that it was against my confessor. If the confessor then asked if the bad intentions were against him, I would certainly admit it (though I think it unlikely that he would ask that). If the thoughts were unrelated to the confessional, then I think that saying “against a priest” would be OK. Again, if he asked specific questions, I would respond honestly.
 
Monica4316 said:
Let’s say a person had consented to any type of evil thought against their confessor… and let’s say they can’t see another confessor for whatever reason (there’s only one priest in their area, they can only confess to their regular confessor, WHATEVER the case may be). So should they say in Confession that it was against him, or should they just say “against a priest”? Would this change the validity of the Confession?

Assume for the same of the discussion that:
  • it was mortal, and
  • they can’t see another priest.
Is there anything on this that’s from the Church, rather than our own opinions?

??? thanks!
Click to expand...

From the way you explained it, isn’t the confessor a priest? And isn’t every priest a confessor?
Then they are one and the same whichever way it was said.
Just a thought.​

“We have been told, we’ve seen his face and heard his voice alive in our hearts…” (hymn)
 
Thanks for the replies… maybe it’s best to just ask the priest then… ?

I think it’s a good idea to say if someone sinned against a priest (rather than in general)… just reading the Baltimore Catechism and how sometimes this might change the gravity (like if you do something against a parent, it changes the sin, or if it’s against the Church, so I thought, what about if against a priest).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top