Did I fully consent to a mortal sin?

[SebMurphy]

Hi
I’m scrupulous and have a fear of blaspheming and am constantly thinking I have blasphemed under my breath when it’s very likely I haven’t. I saw that for the third condtion of mortal sin about full consent, it said the sinner reflects and wants to do it and wants to offend God. I have never wanted to deliberately offend God with blasphemy. I have been in a lot of anxiety over the last few weeks and I only seem to think I’ve said things when I worry about possible past blasphemies and when I have bad thoughts etc.
So if I have blasphemed, was it full consent? I want to go to Holy Communion tomorrow, but I don’t know if I can.

 

[joeybaggz]

A suggestion: I’d say you need to read up on or discuss with a priest/spiritual adviser, the problem of being overly scrupulous.

Only you know if you consented to a sin. However, if you have a doubt, then it is an indication that sufficient reflection (understanding) and full consent of your will - two of the three necessary conditions for mortal sin, may well have been lacking. I know several very good priests who have said that if you want to take communion and you have doubts about the nature of your sins, say an act of contrition first and go to communion.

One other observation. Unless a person deliberately, willingly, and consciously withholds confessing a mortal sin in confession, the absolution given by the priest forgives all sin. To be worried about the past and past sins may be an indication that you have a problem with the ability of God to forgive your sin. That somehow your action can impede the mercy and forgiveness that God offers us through the sacrament of Reconciliation. Being scrupulous to that degree is a serious impediment on your journey with Christ. Suggest you do some reading and talk this over with a priest you trust.

Blessings.

 

[Tietjen]

Hi
I’m scrupulous and have a fear of blaspheming and am constantly thinking I have blasphemed under my breath when it’s very likely I haven’t. I saw that for the third condtion of mortal sin about full consent, it said the sinner reflects and wants to do it and wants to offend God. I have never wanted to deliberately offend God with blasphemy. I have been in a lot of anxiety over the last few weeks and I only seem to think I’ve said things when I worry about possible past blasphemies and when I have bad thoughts etc.
So if I have blasphemed, was it full consent? I want to go to Holy Communion tomorrow, but I don’t know if I can.

Here’s my understanding of the situation…
There are 3 conditions that must be met (as you already know) in order for there to be mortal sin:

1. Grave Matter
2. Knowledge that the sin is grave
3. Knowing that it is a grave sin, one chooses to commit said sin

Now… what you fail to mention is your definition of blasphemy. If what you are doing is indeed blasphemy, then you have met the first requirement (Grave Matter). If, you recognized this grave matter as being a mortal sin then the second element has been met (full knowledge). If, having recognized the act as being mortal, you committed the act anyway, then the third element is also realized (choosing to commit an act while recognizing that the act is grave matter). Some however are confused as to what blasphemy is. For a definition click here.

The best course of action is to go to confession and ask the Priest. Given all the details, he will be better able to tell you whether or not you have committed a mortal sin. If you have, he can absolve you. If you haven’t, you still will have the peace of knowing that you have been absolved of all sins and are free to receive Holy Communion.

 

[LilyM]

Here’s my understanding of the situation…
There are 3 conditions that must be met (as you already know) in order for there to be mortal sin:

1. Grave Matter
2. Knowledge that the sin is grave
3. Knowing that it is a grave sin, one chooses to commit said sin

Now… what you fail to mention is your definition of blasphemy. If what you are doing is indeed blasphemy, then you have met the first requirement (Grave Matter). If, you recognized this grave matter as being a mortal sin then the second element has been met (full knowledge). If, having recognized the act as being mortal, you committed the act anyway, then the third element is also realized (choosing to commit an act while recognizing that the act is grave matter). Some however are confused as to what blasphemy is. For a definition click here.

The best course of action is to go to confession and ask the Priest. Given all the details, he will be better able to tell you whether or not you have committed a mortal sin. If you have, he can absolve you. If you haven’t, you still will have the peace of knowing that you have been absolved of all sins and are free to receive Holy Communion.

With all respect, the advice to go to confession if in doubt may just be the very worst thing to tell a scrupulous person. A scruplous person is ALWAYS in doubt about something or other that they’ve done or may have done, and could literally be in the confessional every day and still unsure of whether or not they’ve committed a fresh mortal sin in the time between confession and Mass, or even during Mass itself, or whether their confession was invalid because of something they might’ve forgotten to say or do …

What can I say, if I’ve never been scrupulous I’ve certainly at times come so close as makes almost no difference.

 

[Lazerlike42]

SebMurphy,

I would agree with what others said, but I would add one important point.

A mortal sin does not require that one desire to offend God. This idea is called the “Fundamental Option.” Some people have taught that for an act to be a mortal sin, a person must actually make a choice in it between God and the sin. In other words, they must consciously say to themselves, “I can either have God, or I can have X,” andd then choose X. This is not correct.

The reality is that a person must simply know that an act is gravely wrong and do it anyways. It doesn’t matter if they even so much as think of God in the process.

However, in your case, the issue of whether you want to offend God or not is actually very important, but for a different reason. I know what you are going through, because I was once extremely scrupulous. I thought constantly about my actions and about the fact that they would offend God all the time. The reason that matters is that when a person truly fears offending God so much that they think of it constantly like that, it is almost impossible for them to actually sin without really, truly knowing it. There will rarely be any doubt at all if the person has actually sinned.

A scrupulous person - or at least many, and from your posts you seem to fall into this category - thinks about how an act or a thought might offend God whenever such a thought comes across his mind or when he thinks of doing some action. Because of this, for the person to consent, he will actually end up having to say to himself, “this act offends God but I am going to do it anyways.”

I used to have terrible thoughts going through my mind constantly, literally about 4-6 every 60 seconds at times. It was terrible. I was in constant fear I had offended God by these thoughts, and I spent virtually all of my time constantly begging God for forgiveness. I could not get through an Our Father without apologizing to God about 15 times. The reality of the situation was, every time such a thought went through my mind, I hated it, because I knew it offended God. I never decided it was ok to have the thoughts in my mind. I wanted them gone because of their offense of God. In order for me to have actually consented to those thoughts, I would have either had to say that I didn’t care it offended God - I would think it anyways - or I would have had to have stopped thinking about how the thoughts offended Him, which I never did, as evidenced by the fact tthat I constantly begged Him for mercy.

I wonder if anything in my story is familiar to you. If so, great! Not really great, but you know what I mean… great - it may be of help to you.

Let me very concisely make the main point here again:

If you desire to not offend God in such a way that you think about how something might offend Him when you do it, and you choose against doing it on that basis, then even if some part of you still goes ahead and does it, you cannot possibly be offending God.

Now obviously this does not hold true for very… active actions. For instance, if you choose not to masturbate but “some part of you” ends up doing it anyways, you have sinned. Masturbation is a very direct, active thing to do that requires you to actually consent to it in a very explicit way. In other words, its not like a thought that crosses through your mind, or even like a word that might slip out of your mouth almost against your will.

For these, I highly recommend Father Groeschel’s advice, as it helped me a great deal:

Deliberate consent means you have the time to recognize that something is immoral, and you choose to do it anyways.

It sounds to me like you can receive the Lord in the Eucharist. Feel free to PM me if you would like to discuss this more privately or explicitly.

Peace and God bless

 

[Lazerlike42]

With all respect, the advice to go to confession if in doubt may just be the very worst thing to tell a scrupulous person. A scruplous person is ALWAYS in doubt about something or other that they’ve done or may have done, and could literally be in the confessional every day and still unsure of whether or not they’ve committed a fresh mortal sin in the time between confession and Mass, or even during Mass itself, or whether their confession was invalid because of something they might’ve forgotten to say or do …

What can I say, if I’ve never been scrupulous I’ve certainly at times come so close as makes almost no difference.

Well I think it is important to recognize two sorts of scrupulosity. In one variety, a person has doubts about a sin he has committed even after he has gone to confession - whether he thinks he didn’t confess it well enough, or he thinks he forgot it, or just thinks the confession didn’t “take” for some reason. In this case, certainly the advice is not to confess the sins. If a person is so worried about sinning so as to be scrupulous, then there is no question that he has more than sufficient contrition, qualitatively and quantitatively, such that anything he forgot will truly be forgiven in the Sacrament.

The other variety involves a person being unsure if they have sinned or not, or thinking that things are sins which are not, or thinking that every little sin is a mortal sin. From my own experience as a scrupulous person, and from my own theological opinions on top of that, I think that the advice to confess things one is uncertain of may be at times good advice. It does depend on the person and the severity and quality of his scrupulosity. It also depends on the sort of doubt.

In my dealings with myself and other scrupulous persons of this second variety, I have said that when one is in doubt over a particular sin, he ought to say an act of contrition and confess it at his next regular confession, but live the rest of his life as if it were not a mortal sin. For example, I know that I as well as someone I once talked to frequently had a very hard time praying to God while in mortal sin. Obviously we would not receive Communion. We would constantly worry that we had sinned mortally, and would spend our time in the self-imposed penance of avoiding our favorite recreations. Thus, when there was doubt about a sin, the advice I gave was to force oneself/myself to pray normally, to receive Communion, to enjoy one’s normal leisures, etc. It seemed to work pretty well, when it was followed.

As an addition to this advice, I had another very helpful habit. I used to confess my sins, and then when I had finished, mention very briefly to the priest those sins I was unsure of, pointing out that I was unsure. I didn’t confess them in great detail, in the way confession ought normally to be done. I would say something like, “I may have lusted after some images on the television, and allowed an angry thought or two towards God, and harbored hateful feelings toward some people, and if I did I am sorry I am always trying my hardest not to.”

It was a quick, 20 seconds extra at the end of my confession and it realllly helped set my mind at ease. I knew that God cares about my heart and my intent. I wasn’t sure about these sins, but I was mentioning them just in case, and that would more than please God. It would absolutely ensure I was not in sin, and yet it took all of 20 seconds once a week. It showed Him my real desire to please Him so that He would know I was trying throughout the week, and it would help keep that in my mind as well. I felt so secure doing this, and it really as a tremendous victory against my scruples.

If I had one piece of advice to give, it would be that.

Peace and God bless

 

[Tietjen]

With all respect, the advice to go to confession if in doubt may just be the very worst thing to tell a scrupulous person. A scruplous person is ALWAYS in doubt about something or other that they’ve done or may have done, and could literally be in the confessional every day and still unsure of whether or not they’ve committed a fresh mortal sin in the time between confession and Mass, or even during Mass itself, or whether their confession was invalid because of something they might’ve forgotten to say or do …

What can I say, if I’ve never been scrupulous I’ve certainly at times come so close as makes almost no difference.

Hi LilyM,

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. Are you suggesting that “when in doubt” don’t speak to a Priest? If so, then I must disagree. This is one of the functions of our clergy, to assist us in our confessions and understandings of God and His Church. When in doubt, ask. I see nothing wrong with doing this while in the confessional. I myself have done it, as have MANY other people. What’s the alternative? To ignore the act and then wonder constantly whether or not you are in mortal sin? Never receive Holy Communion again? No, if a person is unsure whether or not they have sinned (regardless whether they are a scrupulous person) they should speak to a Priest. If the Priest informs them that it is not a sin then they can know that they are still in union with God. If in fact the act is a sin, they can be absolved and thus be in union with God. It’s a win win situation.

Peace and God bless.

 

[KatyElizabeth]

If you want to be forgiven and are truly sorry for offending God then you are forgiven when you bring your sins to God and will NOT go to hell if you die before confession. This is canonical law I believe. You can search for it in AAA forum.

As i understand the burden of scrupulousity, i would suggest that when you go to confession tell the priest that you get these thoughts this way and it is a struggle for you.

If the priest says you are forgiven then you must believe it. if you can’t believe it then you may need to see a psychologist for over- scrupulousity.

It is okay. The priests are very familiar with this and should let you know if you need to see a doctor who is perhaps also a Catholic.

Don’t be afraid.

HTH

God bless.

 

[Lazerlike42]

If you want to be forgiven and are truly sorry for offending God then you are forgiven when you bring your sins to God and will NOT go to hell if you die before confession. This is canonical law I believe. You can search for it in AAA forum.

As i understand the burden of scrupulousity, i would suggest that when you go to confession tell the priest that you get these thoughts this way and it is a struggle for you.

If the priest says you are forgiven then you must believe it. if you can’t believe it then you may need to see a psychologist for over- scrupulousity.

It is okay. The priests are very familiar with this and should let you know if you need to see a doctor who is perhaps also a Catholic.

Don’t be afraid.

HTH

God bless.

One is forgiven before confession when he has perfect contrition - sorrow over having offending God, rather than mere contrition for fear of hell - though this may be present alongside sorrow over having offended God in perfect contrition.

One must never count on having perfect contrition. We can’t judge ourselves that well. However, the scrupulous may be, in my opinion at least, somewhat likely to have perfect contrition. They worry about sinning against God all the time, after all. The issue would be whether they are scrupulous only because they fear damnation over every little sin, or because they simply don’t want to offend God at all. When a person is scrupulous with this latter mindset, I think that perfect contrition may not be that far fetched.

It is part of why the general advice is to try to ignore those things about which a scrupulous person has doubts. If he loves God enough to be scrupulous, chances are he isn’t mortally sinning, and even if he in some case does, the wonderful love for God that he has had would simply leave him very open to the Grace of perfect contrition.

 

[KatyElizabeth]

One is forgiven before confession when he has perfect contrition - sorrow over having offending God, rather than mere contrition for fear of hell - though this may be present alongside sorrow over having offended God in perfect contrition.

One must never count on having perfect contrition. We can’t judge ourselves that well. However, the scrupulous may be, in my opinion at least, somewhat likely to have perfect contrition. They worry about sinning against God all the time, after all. The issue would be whether they are scrupulous only because they fear damnation over every little sin, or because they simply don’t want to offend God at all. When a person is scrupulous with this latter mindset, I think that perfect contrition may not be that far fetched.

It is part of why the general advice is to try to ignore those things about which a scrupulous person has doubts. If he loves God enough to be scrupulous, chances are he isn’t mortally sinning, and even if he in some case does, the wonderful love for God that he has had would simply leave him very open to the Grace of perfect contrition.

That is very helpful to me. Thank you.

 

[LilyM]

Hi LilyM,

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. Are you suggesting that “when in doubt” don’t speak to a Priest? If so, then I must disagree. This is one of the functions of our clergy, to assist us in our confessions and understandings of God and His Church. When in doubt, ask. I see nothing wrong with doing this while in the confessional. I myself have done it, as have MANY other people. What’s the alternative? To ignore the act and then wonder constantly whether or not you are in mortal sin? Never receive Holy Communion again? No, if a person is unsure whether or not they have sinned (regardless whether they are a scrupulous person) they should speak to a Priest. If the Priest informs them that it is not a sin then they can know that they are still in union with God. If in fact the act is a sin, they can be absolved and thus be in union with God. It’s a win win situation.

Peace and God bless.

While priests certainly are there for our guidance if needed, there also comes a point where every Catholic should be sensible, mature and well-informed enough to be able, at least in the vast majority of situations, to trust their own judgement on spiritual matters.

Especially on something as basic as issues of sin, which even with all the best possible advice ultimately is a matter between the individual and God anyways. Not even the best confessor or spiritual director will be able to perfectly read your soul, so you can’t totally abdicate your responsibility to educate yourself and examine yourself to your priest or SD.

If you run to your priest about every little thing then you never reach that point of spiritual development. Kinda like a teenager who never learns not to run to Mom and Dad with every minor problem, and never learns that part of being an adult is being mature enough to make some of your own decisions and judgement calls.

There are many sources other than your priest that you can go to to help resolve your difficulties and educate yourself about your faith. For myself, I only ask a priest for guidance if I’ve been through enough of the alternate sources to know that only a priest’s advice can help.

So my position, in the end, is ‘when in doubt educate yourself and reach an informed conclusion if you can, only go to a priest if you can’t.’

 

[Tietjen]

While priests certainly are there for our guidance if needed, there also comes a point where every Catholic should be sensible, mature and well-informed enough to be able, at least in the vast majority of situations, to trust their own judgement on spiritual matters.

Especially on something as basic as issues of sin, which even with all the best possible advice ultimately is a matter between the individual and God anyways. Not even the best confessor or spiritual director will be able to perfectly read your soul, so you can’t totally abdicate your responsibility to educate yourself and examine yourself to your priest or SD.

If you run to your priest about every little thing then you never reach that point of spiritual development. Kinda like a teenager who never learns not to run to Mom and Dad with every minor problem, and never learns that part of being an adult is being mature enough to make some of your own decisions and judgment calls.

I disagree in part here. Christ wants you to lean on Him and NOT be self-sufficient. While there is absolutely nothing wrong with educating yourself, we are to come to Christ as little children (Mat 19:14). Martin Luther relied on his own decisions and judgment calls as did/does countless others including a majority of American Catholics who have determined that artificial contraception is not sinful in their own personal lives.

There are many sources other than your priest that you can go to to help resolve your difficulties and educate yourself about your faith. For myself, I only ask a priest for guidance if I’ve been through enough of the alternate sources to know that only a priest’s advice can help.

So my position, in the end, is ‘when in doubt educate yourself and reach an informed conclusion if you can, only go to a priest if you can’t.’

That was very nicely put and I can see now where you are coming from. However, there are two points I’d like to make here:

1. The OP claims to suffer from scrupulosity and may not be able to educate himself/herself to the point where they are certain whether something is or is not a mortal sin. And it has been my experience that even when something is evident, the scrupulous person may very well see some mitigating circumstance in their respective situation that somehow may cause the act to be other than what it may be for another individual. So, I would definitely say to scrupulous people that if they are in doubt, speak to a Priest. This is precisely why Christ gave them to us. Besides, in most places that I have been, the Confession lines are not long at all. Perhaps, society by enlarge trusts “their own judgment on spiritual matters.”
2. The Church and her Priests should not be looked on as a last resort on the path to God. While I certainly agree with you that each of us should do our own studying, this can and should be done WITH the Church and not independently. Priests are certainly a resource that should be used.

I would also like to point out that sin is not always a “basic issue.” Mankind has been getting it wrong since Eden.

And I’ll close with this… I have heard that our beloved Pope John Paul II (The Great) went to Confession weekly. So, it’s evident that it certainly doesn’t hurt an individual to see their Priest frequently concerning real AND imagined sins which plague their respective life. God bless.

 

[porthos11]

What I would tell the scrupulous person as I did with another one sometime before is first, and foremost, get off these forums, and I don’t mean that in an unkind way.

Boards such as these here lead to a great diversity of opinions which will only lead the poor sufferer to more confusion and will even make the scrupulosity worse.

So the best thing for the OP to do is:

1. Sign of these boards. Don’t even lurk here.
2. Find one and only one father confessor.
3. Obey father confessor in ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING he says, no matter what, without question.

 

[Lazerlike42]

What I would tell the scrupulous person as I did with another one sometime before is first, and foremost, get off these forums, and I don’t mean that in an unkind way.

Boards such as these here lead to a great diversity of opinions which will only lead the poor sufferer to more confusion and will even make the scrupulosity worse.

So the best thing for the OP to do is:

1. Sign of these boards. Don’t even lurk here.
2. Find one and only one father confessor.
3. Obey father confessor in ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING he says, no matter what, without question.

I partly agree with this, but I partly do not.

The idea itself is fantastic in principle. However, for it to be good in practice, the scrupulous person must find a priest who is not only wholely submissive to the Magisterium, but who also is in fact good at the direction of souls. St. John of the Cross, perhaps the best spiritual director/confessor that ever lived, stated in no uncertain terms that a poor confessor or spiritual director can harm a soul far more than having none at all. He said that good ones were extremely rare - and this was in his day!

Today, it is in now way a guarantee that a priest is faithful to the Church, and it is even rarer that one is a good at directing souls. So I would second the advice, but with the caveat that the individual must needs find a way to ensure these two things are true, and the forums may be a tool to aid him in doing so.

 

[porthos11]

I partly agree with this, but I partly do not.

The idea itself is fantastic in principle. However, for it to be good in practice, the scrupulous person must find a priest who is not only wholely submissive to the Magisterium, but who also is in fact good at the direction of souls. St. John of the Cross, perhaps the best spiritual director/confessor that ever lived, stated in no uncertain terms that a poor confessor or spiritual director can harm a soul far more than having none at all. He said that good ones were extremely rare - and this was in his day!

Today, it is in now way a guarantee that a priest is faithful to the Church, and it is even rarer that one is a good at directing souls. So I would second the advice, but with the caveat that the individual must needs find a way to ensure these two things are true, and the forums may be a tool to aid him in doing so.

True, but nevertheless that would be the priest’s accountability, not the penitent’s.

Ideally, the OP should know whether or not a priest is orthodox. In that case, he must choose one and stick with that one only and then obey him in everything.

But if the OP’s conscience is not well-formed, he may be unable to discern properly. The best thing for him to do then, if he cannot know whether a priest is orthodox or not, is to approach his parish priest and stick with him.

The important thing to do is that he must obey the priest in absolutely everything, without question. Otherwise, he will never be healed of his scrupulosity.

But the forums give too many diverse opinions, and that would only confuse him more. Hence, the advice to get off the boards.

 

[Mystic_of_God]

Ehhhh…

No one, and i repeat NO ONE, commits mortal sin accidentally.

As you have described it, it would seem that this is accidental sin at worst (and that’s an worst-case-scenario for this act). The situation is benign.

In two words, you’re good.

 

[Lazerlike42]

True, but nevertheless that would be the priest’s accountability, not the penitent’s.

Ideally, the OP should know whether or not a priest is orthodox. In that case, he must choose one and stick with that one only and then obey him in everything.

But if the OP’s conscience is not well-formed, he may be unable to discern properly. The best thing for him to do then, if he cannot know whether a priest is orthodox or not, is to approach his parish priest and stick with him.

The important thing to do is that he must obey the priest in absolutely everything, without question. Otherwise, he will never be healed of his scrupulosity.

But the forums give too many diverse opinions, and that would only confuse him more. Hence, the advice to get off the boards.

There are some things wherein it would be the responsibility of the priest, rather than the penitent, but this is not always the case by any means. A poor spiritual director or confessor can give advice which may lead a person into mortal sin, in at least two ways.

First, it may simply be that the priest gives the penitent bad advice about what mortal sin is - both in regards to particular acts and in regards to the general category of mortal sin. The only thing that a priest could erroneously tell a penitent without the penitent being culpable for it would be that a certain act is not sinful. For example, if a priest tells a penitent that masturbation is not sinful, and the penitent truly is not aware that he is incorrect, then the penitent will not be mortally culpable for that act if he commits it under the priest’s advice. However, if the priest gives erroneous advice about just what deliberate consent of the will is or how to recognize it or some such thing as that, the penitent will still be sinning mortally if he does somethint which is gravely sinful, because the will’s movement is the will’s movement, regardless of what degree the individual understands it.

Second, remember that all sin - even if a person is not culpable for it - has extremely adverse effects on the soul. If a penitent is kept from sinning mortally by a priest’s poor advice, nevertheless he will be doing great harm to his soul as he goes about doing objectively sinful acts. He will be weakening and twisting his soul and will all about such that temptation may well call more frequently, and he will be less capable of resisting it.

In fact, there are other reasons that I think of now why a poor confessor may lead a person into mortal sin, such as inadvertently leading the penitent into occasions of sin more frequently.

There is a reason why St. John of the Cross made the statement that he did. Even Fr. Groeschel, whom I think most would say leans more toward the side of taking a less dark view of the fate of sinners, has said many times that if given the choice between having a holy priest and having a knowledgeable priest, he would choose the knowledgable one, because the knowledgable one will not lead him to hell. Actually, this may have been Fr. Corapi. Or it may have been both.

 

[porthos11]

There are some things wherein it would be the responsibility of the priest, rather than the penitent, but this is not always the case by any means. A poor spiritual director or confessor can give advice which may lead a person into mortal sin, in at least two ways.

First, it may simply be that the priest gives the penitent bad advice about what mortal sin is - both in regards to particular acts and in regards to the general category of mortal sin. The only thing that a priest could erroneously tell a penitent without the penitent being culpable for it would be that a certain act is not sinful. For example, if a priest tells a penitent that masturbation is not sinful, and the penitent truly is not aware that he is incorrect, then the penitent will not be mortally culpable for that act if he commits it under the priest’s advice. However, if the priest gives erroneous advice about just what deliberate consent of the will is or how to recognize it or some such thing as that, the penitent will still be sinning mortally if he does somethint which is gravely sinful, because the will’s movement is the will’s movement, regardless of what degree the individual understands it.

Second, remember that all sin - even if a person is not culpable for it - has extremely adverse effects on the soul. If a penitent is kept from sinning mortally by a priest’s poor advice, nevertheless he will be doing great harm to his soul as he goes about doing objectively sinful acts. He will be weakening and twisting his soul and will all about such that temptation may well call more frequently, and he will be less capable of resisting it.

In fact, there are other reasons that I think of now why a poor confessor may lead a person into mortal sin, such as inadvertently leading the penitent into occasions of sin more frequently.

There is a reason why St. John of the Cross made the statement that he did. Even Fr. Groeschel, whom I think most would say leans more toward the side of taking a less dark view of the fate of sinners, has said many times that if given the choice between having a holy priest and having a knowledgeable priest, he would choose the knowledgable one, because the knowledgable one will not lead him to hell. Actually, this may have been Fr. Corapi. Or it may have been both.

All that is true but we must never forget one thing.

The OP is scrupulous.

That changes the whole picture, and he needs special treatment. Unlike you or me, the OP is unable to properly discern the state of his conscience. He does not have the luxury of properly discerning poor advice. He may not even know what’s orthodox or not and therefore cannot discern a good spiritual advisor from a bad one.

That’s why he should go to his appointed pastor for help, and that would first be his parish priest. If his priest can direct him to a good spiritual advisor, well and good. But the first thing he should do is stop second-guessing, hence the need to obey unconditionally. It can’t be any other way, otherwise he will never find healing and peace.

 

[Lazerlike42]

All that is true but we must never forget one thing.

The OP is scrupulous.

That changes the whole picture, and he needs special treatment. Unlike you or me, the OP is unable to properly discern the state of his conscience. He does not have the luxury of properly discerning poor advice. He may not even know what’s orthodox or not and therefore cannot discern a good spiritual advisor from a bad one.

That’s why he should go to his appointed pastor for help, and that would first be his parish priest. If his priest can direct him to a good spiritual advisor, well and good. But the first thing he should do is stop second-guessing, hence the need to obey unconditionally. It can’t be any other way, otherwise he will never find healing and peace.

I agree other than on one point: he must have some means to determine whether the priest he goes to is an orthodox one, and is capable of giving good spiritual advice. Submitting to obey to an unorthodox or spiritually unwise priest unconditionally could easily lead him to hell. It would be better that he suffer through a life of scrupulosity than to risk submitting blindly to a poor priest, for thus can he be saved and finally have every tear wiped away, rather than risk damnation.

Please understand that I say this having been extremely scrupulous in the past, and knowing first-hand the terrible pain of scrupulosity.

The best situation would simply be that he find a good priest. It oughtn’t be too hard to do so. He just needs to make sure he has a way to make a wise judgment about this. That means asking the advice of a trusted Catholic friend, or perhaps getting some help on these forums, or something else. The forums do have a lot of divergent opinions, but in the end there is by far a wise and orthodox consensus. For example, I have seen virtually nothing but good replies in this thread.

So long as he has some means to make a good judgment about a confessor, that is all that I am advising.

 

[yinekka]

Seb, on 27 April you posted in the Ask an apologist forum - I am Scrupulous, Have I received Holy Communion in the state of Mortal Sin?

On 27 April you posted in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum - Was my Confirmation valid?

On 27 April you posted in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum - Holy Communion Mortal Sin

On 27 April you posted in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum - Will My Confirmation ever be valid?

On 29 April you posted in the Ask an apologist forum - ** I am worried about the unpardonable sin. Did I commit it? **

On 29 April you posted in the Apologetics forum - Worried about the unpardonable sin.

On 1 May you posted in Liturgy and Sacraments forum - When in doubt about mortal sin what do you do?

On 1 May in the apologetics forum you posted - Did I deny Jesus?

On 2 May in the apologetics forum you posted - Did I say a bad thing about the Holy Spirit?

On 2 May in the apologetics forum you posted - Why do Protestants Say that Catholicism leads to Hell?

On 3 May in the apologetics forum you posted - What is deliberate consent for mortal sin?

On 3 May you posted in Liturgy and the Sacraments - Did I fully consent to a mortal sin?

In most of your posts you mention your scrupulosity and ask for help. You have received great advice from many many people including Fr Vincent Serpa and yet you still post the same questions over and over. Have you followed any of the suggestions people have given you? If so, which ones and what happened? Perhaps it might be a good idea to volunteer to help someone else e.g. on a soup van to take your mind off your self. If you genuinely suffer from scrupulosity, an obsessive compulsive disorder, and aren’t pulling our legs you need to get some professional help. Fr Benedict Groschel may be able to help you (Google his name) or you may look up a good Catholic psychiatrist. I will keep you in my prayers, please keep me in yours.