Doubtful Mortal Sins

[PoorWretch]

As far as I’m aware, a person needs to only confess certain mortal sins in order for the confession to be valid. Confession is the place where these sins are wiped (unless with perfect contrition with the desire to go to confession beforehand).

What about doubtful mortal sins, which are not certain as 2+2=4? Are they simply wiped away in perfect contrition since there is no obligation to confess? I know venial sins also get wiped away during the Mass and in Communion, would such sins also be included?

(I know people are encouraged to Confess such doubts, but scrupulous are often counseled to the contrary. I think you can already see why I’m asking this question):sad_yes:

 

[1ke]

(I know people are encouraged to Confess such doubts, but scrupulous are often counseled to the contrary. I think you can already see why I’m asking this question):sad_yes:

the scrupulous need to talk over their doubts and compulsions with their regular confessor, not people on the internet.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Yes, the scrupulous should have a regular confessor and trust in his advice. They should not seek out conflicting opinions.

 

[Bookcat]

One is not obliged to confess “doubtful mortal sins” - for example where one is doubtful one had the needed full knowledge or gave complete consent.

Those without scruples are encouraged to bring the matter to confession and note there is doubt.

(those who are lax ought really to think to confess them noting there is doubt…)

Those with scruples are often advised not to bring them directly. Ones regular confessor can guide one though -which means too that it can perhaps be good to bring the matter to him anyhow so he can advise one and help one form ones conscience. Discuss such with ones regular confessor.

When one though goes to confession such can be included in general in “and all my sins”…if one is not directly mentioning them…

…yes they can also be forgiven in other ways outside of confession.

 

[Bookcat]

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 a not too long ago 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