Scrupulosity Threads

[FonsBonitatis]

I’m sorry if this is the wrong subforum for this thread. I hope my choice is OK!

This is a little bit of a rant and a little bit of a suggestion. It has to do with the approach that so many individuals on CAF have towards scrupulosity threads: the famous “is this a mortal sin?” questions that often pop up.

Folks, I’ve seen any number of innocent and tormented people describe their actions in great detail while asking (name removed by moderator)ut as to the gravity and sin of such actions. And time and again the response is the same: the internet is no place to ask these questions, go find a priest for help with scrupulosity.

But never once have I ever seen someone point out the TRULY obvious.

These sorts of threads obviously and clearly describe DOUBTFUL mortal sins, and the Church has seemingly taught for 300 years now that doubtful mortal sins need not be brought to Confession, but only mortal sins that are certain (unless one is uninstructed or has a lax conscience).

Here is how one manual put it:

If, after an action, a person doubts about whether the matter was grievous, or about whether he had any realization of its being grave when he performed the action, **then he is not obliged to confess it. **However, if the doubt is about the gravity of the matter, he should find out before he does the action again. One way would be to ask his confessor, **but he is not obliged to solve the doubt in that precise way, if he can do it legitimately in some other way. **

Sometimes doubts arise about the fulness of advertence or consent after an action which is undoubtedly grievous matter, such as actions against the sixth commandment. Again,** there is no strict obligation to confess such doubts**, although it will usually be advisable to do so. If one deliberately omits such doubtful mortal sins from his confession, provided he is sorry for whatever fault there may have been in them, they are remitted by the absolution, even if they were in fact mortal sins. If there is real doubt about such sins, and not just scruples or feelings of guilt about them, then one must either make an act of perfect contrition3 before receiving Holy Communion, or go to confession. But confession is not necessary if the act of contrition is made; and if one does go to confession, he need not mention the doubtful mortal sins.

3 The ordinary act of contrition of the catechism is an act of perfect contrition. The fact that motives of imperfect contrition are also elicited does not exclude perfect contrition. The two can exist simultaneously.

I think it would be tremendously helpful to people if we told them such things when our famous “scrupulosity” threads come up.

 

[oldgraymare2]

Hi FonsBonitatis,

I understand what you are trying to convey in your post.

However, I do understand why members tell people with scrupulous tendencies, to go and talk to a priest, as a standard answer to the scrupulous person’s concerns.

I can only answer for myself here. When I try and answer someone’s post, I do it with the best of intentions.

I will answer it based on my own personal experiences, if that can help, or I will post a link/links to other Catholic websites with some helpful information for that person, in answer to their question, for example. I try and answer in ways that I hope will be helpful.

I would not do anything for anyone else, that I wouldn’t do myself. If I would refer someone to a priest for help and guidance, it is because I have done the same myself.

If someone has an issue with Scrupulosity and sin, I think that this is a situation that goes beyond more than what most of us here are equipped to discern/determine. That’s my personal opinion. I am not an Apologist, Theologian, or a member of a Religious Order.

I am just a well-meaning lay person. The last thing that I would want to do, is to misinform someone with the information that I post.

There have been times that even for myself, I have needed help discerning what type of sin I was committing, where I needed the priest’s help. I really think that that is up to the person and their confessor to determine. They can discuss the context of the sin/situation, and other situations that it involves. I also don’t think that this is something that we can determine for someone else on a forum, and that this would be something that is best left to a priest and the concerned person.

God bless you, and welcome to the forum!

 

[RPRPsych]

Help me! Now that I can’t unread this thread, is relying on it the next time I have an “Is this a sin?” query a sin? And is it a sin for me to ask this here?

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Search here on CAF for “scrupulosity”

There is also Scrupulosity Anonymous at the Liguori Web site.

 

[PraiseChrist]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=943551

^^I missed those days…

 

[robertmidwest]

True scrupulosity is a medical/psychological issue that needs treatment. That is why they are referred to get counselling from real flesh and blood people.

Many threads here are also just trolls. People who are getting some sick pleasure from posting absurd things and getting people to respond. Some are politically or ideologically motivated too.

 

[RPRPsych]

True scrupulosity is a medical/psychological issue that needs treatment. That is why they are referred to get counselling from real flesh and blood people.

Many threads here are also just trolls. People who are getting some sick pleasure from posting absurd things and getting people to respond. Some are politically or ideologically motivated too.

*But try telling that to Them. They of little faith.

So I think I’ll just stay here and enjoy the view.

It’s so beautiful.*

(Umberto Eco, Foucault’s Pendulum)

 

[robertmidwest]

*But try telling that to Them. They of little faith.

So I think I’ll just stay here and enjoy the view.

It’s so beautiful.*

(Umberto Eco, Foucault’s Pendulum)

It’s not a matter of faith…and I don’t want to get into a position of questioning someones faith.

It’s is truly a medical/psychological issue.

I do agree with you that nothing they are told here matters. I suspect many have already been told that something they question is not a sin, so they turn elsewhere for support of their idea they have sinned. Another reason not to feed it.

 

[RPRPsych]

It’s not a matter of faith…and I don’t want to get into a position of questioning someones faith.

It’s is truly a medical/psychological issue.

I do agree with you that nothing they are told here matters. I suspect many have already been told that something they question is not a sin, so they turn elsewhere for support of their idea they have sinned. Another reason not to feed it.

It’s just a literary quote used slightly out of context. My apologies.

My point was that “telling them so” doesn’t work, because they don’t believe the person who is trying to reassure them, even if s/he is telling the truth. I wasn’t questioning the faith of those so afflicted.

And yes, it is a medical/psychological issue with close ties to OCD. Both the Catholic and Islamic traditions have recognized this for centuries.