Detail needed when confessing invalid confession?

[GodThenFootball]

I have an odd question to propose. I now understand that the position of the SSPX prior to 2015 was that their priests could not validly absolve sins. I went to confession before this time at their chapels, and I’m uncertain if doing so was sinful. I had mentioned during my last confession at my SSPX chapel that I had made invalid confessions for a long period of time, but when I was asked why the confessions were invalid I had replied that I had withheld sins (this is true too). I did not mention that I thought I received invalidly as the SSPX lacked faculty, mostly because I was a little nervous of the priest’s reaction to this or if he would even absolve me of this (he is an SSPX priest). For various reasons my family had always attended SSPX chapel since I was born, and it’s what I am accustomed to, I am unfamiliar with the diocesan confession practices and really feel more comfortable behind the screen without having to request it, or such. Thank God that the Pope has made it so SSPX priests can validly absolve until otherwise stated, but I’m still left with this small dilemma of the past, and I want to make sure I can receive on Easter.

In short, I’m pretty certain I had no idea that what I was doing before 2015 was invalid or a sin (except when I withheld sins), I was not too interested in my religious life, and never investigated the canonical situation. I have read that priests differ on whether or not this falls within common error, though a letter from the PED seems to say it would.

So I guess what I am asking is the following:

1. Was I receiving invalidly or even sinning out of ignorance, as a child and into early adulthood?

and the bigger concern

1. Was my last confession, too, also invalid because I confessed to invalid confessions because of withholding sins but not adding the detail of the canonical situation prior to 2015, or is the sin forgiven and the added detail was just something to aid the confessor in his counsel to me?

 

[Arkansan]

One is obliged to confess mortal sins in kind and number, as far as is morally possible. If one omits a mortal sin inculpably, then the obligation to confess it at one’s next confession remains, but the confession is still valid and one may receive the Eucharist in the meantime. OTOH, no sins are remitted by invalid confession, thus invalidly confessed mortal sins must be confessed again in full. If the confession was invalid due to one’s own fault, then that itself is a sin which must be confessed, but if one was not culpable then the fact of having made invalid confessions would not need to be confessed.

So you need to confess any mortal sins you have committed that have not been confessed post-2015. If you were not culpable for your situation, then the fact of having made invalid confessions does not itself need to be confessed (except when you were aware of their invalidity on account of withholding sins), though any mortal sins that were invalidly confessed need to be confessed on their own. Normally I would say that you should simply explain all of the details to your confessor, but that is inadvisable here since he likely has false beliefs about this subject and would argue with you about the matter, so simply confess such old mortal sins on their own (except when you withheld them intentionally, then it would be perfectly true to say that you invalidly confessed by withholding sins). If, in your last confession, you believed that what you were doing was seriously sinful, then it was invalid and you must abstain from the Eucharist. But if you believed that what you did was licit (or only venially sinful), then it was valid and you may receive the Eucharist in the meantime.

Really though, the best thing for you to do would be to find an FSSP or indult community and use one of their priests as a confessor. Then you can simply explain your situation in full without having to worry about an argument.

 

[GodThenFootball]

I wish. FSSP is 3 hours away.

From what I’m gathering:
I committed no sin in going to confession pre-2015, the priest may have in hearing it - and either A) it falls under common error for me and I’m absolved or B) the absolution was invalid but I did not sin.

However, regardless, I’ve since confessed all mortal sins from before then, I believe, validly. Well, at my second to last confession the priest instructed me to only confess sins preventing me from receiving communion due to time constraints (I only confessed sins that had been committed since last confession and I skipped my list and mentioned only any forgotten mortal sins that popped into my head). At my next confession I mentioned that I had intended to confess some forgotten sins in the past confession, but did not, and confessed them here and the priest replied that he understood, I’m guessing he remembered from the week previous, and I said to him just incase the past confession was invalid, I wanted to mention that here - he said he understood. He didn’t ask me to repeat any mortal sins from my last confession and told me to go receive in sanctifying grace, so I take that as affirmation that the confession was valid… I hope.

 

[mythbuster1]

Deliberately engaging in a sham sacrament is a sin, but an honest mistake is not. For example, if you confess to a man who says he is a priest but is not, the Confession is not valid, but you incur no sin thereby. He alone stands guilty of impersonating a priest.