No. What may be no sin to one may be a venial sin to another or may be mortal to still another. Need to go to confession to remove the doubt.
This is a good point, but I would add one thing, and it pertains to the second sentence. Confession really isn’t about removing doubt about sin. That’s more appropriate to spiritual direction, per se. Confession isn’t about “feeling better.” Let me give you an example. Suppose a young couple has been chaste their entire life, and really lived out a true Christian courtship. The night of their wedding, they unite sexually for the first time. And, let’s say that both have a hard time getting over the negative feelings they have towards the sexual act. Now, I realize there would be more at play here, but just for the sake of example, let’s just say this couple has lived out the Church’s teachings, but perhaps out of a motivation of fear and/or legalism, and not necessarily genuine love of the Lord and respect for sex an sexuality. This legalism doesn’t magically disappear on the wedding night. So, it’s common for young couples in this situation to feel a certain amount of shame at being seen naked by their spouse and in engaging in marital intercourse. Have they objectively sinned? No. But do they subjectively feel as though they have? Yes.
If such a person came to confession, and assuming they confessed to no other sin, then there would be no sin to absolve. A certain amount of counseling and spiritual direction might need to take place, to be sure, but you can’t absolve what is objectively not there.
Put another way, could the Blessed Virgin Mary go to Confession? No. Why? Because she never sinned. There would be nothing to absolve.
As it pertains to your first point though, you are absolutely correct, and this is often times lost on us. This is why it is vital to have at least a basic grounding in moral theology. Different circumstances can change the gravity of a sin. For instance, if an alcoholic is truly struggling to overcome his addiction, and falls one day and gets drunk, can we really say that he has full consent of his will? Only God knows, but due to the individual’s addiction, this may very well be a venial sin for him. On the other hand, a person who has never struggled with alcohol abuse and has no family history of alcoholism may commit the same sin, objectively. But, due to the fact that he has the full capacity to choose to get drunk in a way that a recovering alcoholic may not, his sin is more grave.
An individual’s state in life may also mean an action is not a sin at all for one person, but a grave sin for another. For instance, two men walk into a hospital and proceed to celebrate the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick with two different sick people. One of the two men is a validly ordained priest; the other is in the habit of impersonating a priest. One of these two men has committed a serious sin called sacrilege, the other has celebrated a life-giving sacrament, even though they both have done objectively the same actions and said the same words.
But then again, when it comes to EMHC, who knows what is going on or what should go on.
)
