Is my confession still valid?

[hopeforfaith]

I know that if I deliberately hold back confessing a sin in confession, the entire confession is non-valid. But I did went to confession once and held back a sin. I didn’t feel forgiven afterwards. Then I went to confession the second time (but not because I knew that my last confession was invalid, I didn’t know it at that time) and I confessed the thing that I held back at the last confession. However, I didn’t mention some other things I mentioned in the previous confession as I thought they were forgiven. But after the second confession, I felt a lot better and much more different than after I had my first one. So… is my confession valid?

 

[LilyM]

Feelings are not a reliable guide as to whether your sins have been forgiven - after all, most people feel good WHILE they’re committing some of their sins, no?

Secondly - a confession is invalid if one holds back a MORTAL sin. If one holds back a venial sin it doesn’t matter and the confession is still valid. Only confession of mortal sins is required. Now if you deliberately withhold a mortal sin, the entire confession is invalid. You weren’t absolved of any of the sins you confessed on that occasion.

It’s an all-or-nothing proposition, you can’t be absolved of only some of your sins.

So if you deliberately withheld ONE mortal sin in a confession, the next time you confessed what was required was that you re-confess ALL the mortal sins from that same confession, and add the one you withheld as well. Because none of them were absolved. Remember it’s only necessary to reconfess the mortal sins, not the venial ones.

 

[hopeforfaith]

Well, I don’t remember that any of my sins that I held back were mortal sins. In fact, I mentioned some of my sins in my second confession. I only remember one thing that I didn’t confess (which I mentioned in my first confession). Others… I can’t remember so well. And I remember that near the end of my second confession, I don’t remember anything else to confess. I am not sure if pretending to hate someone because your friend hates her count as a mortal sin. I can’t remember if I knew I shouldn’t do it or had the full knowledge of its seriousness. Chances are, I knew it was wrong but didn’t really know how serious it was. Argh, what should I do?

 

[LilyM]

Well,*** I don’t remember that any of my sins that I held back were mortal sins.*** In fact, I mentioned some of my sins in my second confession. I only remember one thing that I didn’t confess (which I mentioned in my first confession). Others… I can’t remember so well. And I remember that near the end of my second confession, I don’t remember anything else to confess. ***I am not sure ***if pretending to hate someone because your friend hates her count as a mortal sin. I can’t remember if I knew I shouldn’t do it or had the full knowledge of its seriousness. Chances are, I knew it was wrong but didn’t really know how serious it was. Argh, what should I do?

What you should do is take note of the parts I’ve bolded. You don’t remember holding back any mortal sins … AND you still, as you type, aren’t sure of the seriousness of the latter sin.

You can hardly reconfess mortal sins that you don’t remember. God doesn’t expect impossibilities of us, and confessing forgotten sins is an impossibility.

And you can hardly have full knowledge of the sinfulness of something AND at one and the same time be unsure of its seriousness. Sounds like the opposite of full knowledge to me

It sounds like you don’t need to reconfess. Just next time you DO go to confession, ask about the sin you’re unsure of, for future reference.

 

[Nita]

Well, I don’t remember that any of my sins that I held back were mortal sins. In fact, I mentioned some of my sins in my second confession. I only remember one thing that I didn’t confess (which I mentioned in my first confession). Others… I can’t remember so well. And I remember that near the end of my second confession, I don’t remember anything else to confess. I am not sure if pretending to hate someone because your friend hates her count as a mortal sin. I can’t remember if I knew I shouldn’t do it or had the full knowledge of its seriousness. Chances are, I knew it was wrong but didn’t really know how serious it was. Argh, what should I do?

I agree with Lily. But I would add, if it continues to bother you, why not just tell the priest (in your next confession) what you have told us here. You managed to state it quite clearly in just a few sentences. If you tend to get nervous and flustered, then just run off a copy of your 2 posts, consolidate them, and read it in the confessional!!! Believe me, priests have had that type of thing happen before. You can even tell him what you’re doing and why.

I’m speaking from experience as one who has gone thru the same type of quandary as you, and more than once. I’ve found the best solution for me is to quit stewing about it and just get to confession so I can relate it to the priest.

 

[hopeforfaith]

Well, yesterday I wrote all the facts out to see if a sin of mine is a mortal sin. I am unsure if I have the full knowledge of the sin. And I don’t want to do it 100% at that time. I was more like 99.9% wanting not to do it. And I doubt if it was even a sin. I concluded that if I did have the full knowledge, I would have known about it. But I still feel insecure.

 

[Bookcat]

I know that if I deliberately hold back confessing a sin in confession, the entire confession is non-valid. But I did went to confession once and held back a sin. I didn’t feel forgiven afterwards. Then I went to confession the second time (but not because I knew that my last confession was invalid, I didn’t know it at that time) and I confessed the thing that I held back at the last confession. However, I didn’t mention some other things I mentioned in the previous confession as I thought they were forgiven. But after the second confession, I felt a lot better and much more different than after I had my first one. So… is my confession valid?

I would go see a priest…and get this settled…he can ask questions etc…

…it normally goes like this…

ONLY mortal sins being withheld would invalidate …

If I have murder 3 times and grand theft auto one time…and I knowingly withhold the last one… it will be invalid and I know this there is an additional mortal sin for doing so…but I do it anyway …so Now I have to confess the one the murder 3 times again (saying perhaps I withheld other mortal sin hence need to say it again) and the grand theft…and the withholding mortal sin in confession…

(in your case it can be different for it seems you did not know about any of this?? so you would just mention all the mortal sins together then telling the priest what happened)

(Now a scrupulous person…may only fear he has invalidated …and he usually would be told to only confess again so if he was certain etc…but he can talk with his confessor…)

Now in your case it sounds like in particular that you did the second confession in “good faith” …for instance you found out that one should not withhold a mortal sin until afterwards…like reading it here…one thought one was doing all one needed…

I have seen it said in one of the older manuals that it would not be invalid for that reason…(but one still may need to confess it all together…) so I would think it would be valid…you were confessing thinking that is all you have to do…(so it is like you “forgot” the others)…but I think you would need to mention all the mortal sins together in the next confession…saying what happened…

 

[Nita]

Well, yesterday I wrote all the facts out to see if a sin of mine is a mortal sin. I am unsure if I have the full knowledge of the sin. And I don’t want to do it 100% at that time. I was more like 99.9% wanting not to do it. And I doubt if it was even a sin. I concluded that if I did have the full knowledge, I would have known about it. But I still feel insecure.

You’re right that it very probably is not a mortal sin – first, because “pretending” to hate may not be considered “grave matter”. But even if it is only a venial sin, once you confess it your insecure feeling will go away because you know you have confessed it. You will have that inner peace.
God bless you,

 

[Nita]

Well, yesterday I wrote all the facts out to see if a sin of mine is a mortal sin. I am unsure if I have the full knowledge of the sin. And I don’t want to do it 100% at that time. I was more like 99.9% wanting not to do it. And I doubt if it was even a sin. I concluded that if I did have the full knowledge, I would have known about it. But I still feel insecure.

I still think, if you want to lose that feeling of insecurity, you may need to just tell everything to a priest in confession. I’m not at all saying that you’ve committed a mortal sin. Again, personal experience. I know when I’ve sinned in a way that continues to bother me even after I’ve told Jesus I’m sorry - and even when I know it’s not a mortal sin - it seems it’s only after I finally confess it in confession that I receive that very real sense of feeling totally free of the matter. I think this interior peace is due to the special graces that come to us through the Sacrament of Confession.

I’m not sure how many hours/days/weeks you’ve been undergoing concern about this. But you can end it in just the *few minutes *it takes to go to Confession. I hope you’ll do yourself that favor.

 

[hopeforfaith]

Thanks. Any pointers on how I can bring myself to confession?

 

[choy]

deliberately holding back a sin does NOT invalidate a confession

in fact you can be absolved even without mentioning a single sin. this is licit only in emergency cases. but i brought that up to drive a point that holding back on since does not affect the validity of confession

but since you are required to disclose all your sins, you just commit another sin by deliberately withholding your sin

 

[dans0622]

deliberately holding back a sin does NOT invalidate a confession

in fact you can be absolved even without mentioning a single sin. this is licit only in emergency cases. but i brought that up to drive a point that holding back on since does not affect the validity of confession

Hi choy,

I can’t agree with this, unless you are only speaking of venial sins. The Rite of Penance states that one must confess all known mortal sins and this is based on the Council of Trent:

“But since all mortal sins, even those of thought, make men [29] and enemies of God, it is necessary to seek pardon of all of them from God by an open and humble confession. While therefore the faithful of Christ strive to confess all sins that come to their memory, they no doubt lay all of them before the divine mercy for forgiveness; while those who do otherwise and knowingly conceal certain ones, lay nothing before the divine goodness to be forgiven through the priest…” (Session XIV, On Penance, chapter V, “Confession”).

and

“If anyone says that in the sacrament of penance it is not required by divine law for the remission of sins to confess each and all mortal sins which are recalled after a due and diligent examination…let him be anathema” (canon VII, Session XIV, On Penance).

The occasions where no confession at all is required, and yet the “penitent” can be forgiven, is an entirely different matter, with its own requirements.

Thanks for your time.
Dan

 

[Nita]

Thanks. Any pointers on how I can bring myself to confession?

Is there a time when your parish/priest is regularly available for Confession? If so, just go at that time; tell him how long it’s been since you were last at Confession - and then just tell him all you’ve told us here.

If there is no regular schedule for Confession, then you may have to call and make an appointment. Are you close to any neighboring towns that have regularly scheduled Confessions?

I live in a small town, but go frequently to a larger city where a couple of downtown Churches have Confession on a regular basis before their Mass around the noon hour. I often go to Confession then.

 

[choy]

Hi choy,

I can’t agree with this, unless you are only speaking of venial sins. The Rite of Penance states that one must confess all known mortal sins and this is based on the Council of Trent:

“But since all mortal sins, even those of thought, make men [29] and enemies of God, it is necessary to seek pardon of all of them from God by an open and humble confession. While therefore the faithful of Christ strive to confess all sins that come to their memory, they no doubt lay all of them before the divine mercy for forgiveness; while those who do otherwise and knowingly conceal certain ones, lay nothing before the divine goodness to be forgiven through the priest…” (Session XIV, On Penance, chapter V, “Confession”).

and

“If anyone says that in the sacrament of penance it is not required by divine law for the remission of sins to confess each and all mortal sins which are recalled after a due and diligent examination…let him be anathema” (canon VII, Session XIV, On Penance).

The occasions where no confession at all is required, and yet the “penitent” can be forgiven, is an entirely different matter, with its own requirements.

Thanks for your time.
Dan

Dan, i’m not going to pretend i’m an expert on the subject. but from what i understand is that if the preist gives a valid absolution, then its valid. but if the penitent willfully holds back a sin, then he wilfully sins again and therefore he leaves the confessional still with a grave sin. its like receiving Communion while in a state of sin. you don’t invalidate the Sacrament, but you only sin more.

that is how i understand it

 

[hopeforfaith]

Wait a minute… when you mean he sins again does it mean the same sin someone holds back? Argh, this is really worrying…

 

[paperwight]

Wait a minute… when you mean he sins again does it mean the same sin someone holds back? Argh, this is really worrying…

Let’s go back to basics.

1. Jesus tells us that God is like the father in the Parable of the Prodigal Son. He comes running to welcome us back when we have strayed from Him. If you read the parable, the father does not even give the son a chance to go into what he has done wrong, he is so eager to get the celebration started.
2. We are only bound to confess mortal sins.
3. To be mortal, a sin must involve the serious matter, full knowledge and full consent.
4. It’s not possible to be guilty of committing a mortal sin by accident or withour knowing.
5. Feelings don’t matter. It’s not a sign that you have been forgiven if you feel wonderful after confession, it’s not a sign that you haven’t been firgiven if you don’t feel wonderful after confession. Forget feelings, and have trust in God’s mercy expressed through the words of absolution.

 

[LilyM]

Dan, i’m not going to pretend i’m an expert on the subject. but from what i understand is that if the preist gives a valid absolution, then its valid. but if the penitent willfully holds back a sin, then he wilfully sins again and therefore he leaves the confessional still with a grave sin. its like receiving Communion while in a state of sin. you don’t invalidate the Sacrament, but you only sin more.

that is how i understand it

Not true. A priest’s absolution is INvalid in certain circumstances even if they pray the prayer - one obvious example being if the penitent isn’t Catholic.

Doesn’t stop someone who is non-Catholic going into a confessional, omitting to mention to the priest that they’re not Catholic and having a prayer of absolution said over them. But the fact remains that the absolution is of no effect. This is the case because the priest can only validly minister the sacrament to Catholics, apart from certain very rare exceptions involving a non-Catholic who is in danger of death and meets other requirements.

Now the ‘matter’ required for the validity of the sacrament is the mortal sins of the penitent. If they’ve omitted a mortal sin, there is not valid matter even if SOME sins are mentioned. Just like a cup of wine mixed with fruit juice cannot be validly consecrated in the Eucharist, even though SOME wine is present. There either is or isn’t valid matter, there’s no partial valid matter.

That’s why we’re constantly told that someone who omits a mortal sin must not just confess the sins they omitted in that confession, but MUST reconfess ALL the mortal sins they mentioned in that confession. I’m surprised you’ve never been told this.

 

[baltobetsy]

Now the ‘matter’ required for the validity of the sacrament is the mortal sins of the penitent. If they’ve omitted a mortal sin, there is not valid matter even if SOME sins are mentioned. Just like a cup of wine mixed with fruit juice cannot be validly consecrated in the Eucharist, even though SOME wine is present. There either is or isn’t valid matter, there’s no partial valid matter.

Actually, the “matter” of the sacrament consists of the acts of the penitent - confession, contrition and satisfaction. See this from New Advent:

The Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, c. 3) declares: “the acts of the penitent, namely contrition, confession, and satisfaction, are the quasi materia of this sacrament”. The Roman Catechism used in 1913 (II, v, 13) says: “These actions are called by the Council quasi materia not because they have not the nature of true matter, but because they are not the sort of matter which is employed externally as water in baptism and chrism in confirmation”.

As unlikely as it may seem, there are people who have never committed a mortal sin. The first to come to mind is St. Therese of Lisieux, the Little Flower, who was told by her confessor that she had never committed one mortal sin. Next, I think of little children around the age of their first confession. Pretty hard for them to commit mortal sin, too, though not impossible. I have never even heard a hint of the idea that their confessions are not valid.

I’ve been taught (by priests of Opus Dei, who haven’t steered me wrong yet, although I can’t quote a source other than Fr. Ed!) that in order for absolution to work, there must be at least one real sin confessed, either mortal or venial. That’s why many who make frequent devotional confessions renew their sorrow for some real sin in the past, just in case the things they’ve confessed this time are only imperfections and not real sins. “I am sorry for all the sins of my past life, especially murdering my mother.” That way, there is a real absolution and the real conferring of sacramental grace.

Betsy

 

[Gerhard2]

You can hardly reconfess mortal sins that you don’t remember. God doesn’t expect impossibilities of us, and confessing forgotten sins is an impossibility.

To make a good confession one must confess his sins and repent.
What the Church recommends is to go often to confession in part so you don’t forget all the sins you committed. But if you don’t confess sins because you forgot them doesn’t go along with what Padre Pio did, telling others the sins they had forgotten. To make a good confession one must make a good examination of conscience, and one can’t make a good confession without the aid of the Holy Spirit. I recommend in the presence of the Eucharist exposed.

It is negligence to let pass too much time without caring about confession, without at least writing your sins, and negligence condemns people. It would be a lot easier for us to go to heaven if we don’t have to try to remember and undo our negligence, but is not that easy. olrl.org/snt_docs/fewness.shtml

Is true that God doesn’t expect impossibilities of us, but it is not an impossibility as being a saint is very hard but not impossible. God bless.

 

[Gerhard2]

The mortal sins must be declared at the next confession and thus submitted to the power of the keys. newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm

I did a mistake in the other post by not writting so clearly, sorry, couldn’t edit it. My emphasis is this:
If the sin be omitted, not through any fault of the penitent, but through forgetfulness, it is forgiven indirectly. But we need true repentance to be saved, and is not easy if we forget it and are negligent about the sin. * Not being repented condemns us, and to be repented, we must not do it again if we have another chance. Like I’m saying is hard to be saved if we don’t remember and strive to remember. This is what I’m saying that condemns people because many don’t remember and aren’t truly repented -or don’t know, are warm, or their fear from hell is not enough to look for forgiveness- many times.*