Scrupulosity

[Lux_et_veritas]

The same article on Scrupulosity in New Advent goes on to say…

Their chief remedy is, having reposed confidence in some confessor, to obey his decisions and commands entirely and absolutely.

They are counselled also to avoid idleness, and thus to close the avenue of approach to the wild conjectures and strange ponderings responsible for so many of their worries.

They should remove the cause of their scruples in so far as it may have been of their own choosing. Hence they are to guard against the reading of ascetical books of a rigorist trend and any intercourse with those afflicted in the same way as themselves.

If the source of their scruples be ignorance – for example, with regard to the obligation of some commandment – they are to be instructed, discretion being used in the imparting of the necessary information.

If it be a propensity to melancholy, certain harmless pleasures and rational enjoyments may be employed with advantage.

Confessors to whom falls the difficult task of receiving the confessions of these harassed souls are to carefully inquire into the origin of the anxieties laid before them.

They are to treat their unhappy penitents in general with great kindness. Occasionally, however, some degree of severity may be useful when the penitent shows an extreme tenacity in adhering to his own unreasonable view of the situation.

As a rule, the confessor’s answers to the innumerable troubles submitted should be clear, unaccompanied by reasons, and so unhesitating as to inspire courage. He should not permit the presentation indefinitely of the various doubts, much less, of course, the repetition of past confessions.

Finally, he may sometimes do what should hardly ever be done in any other instance, that is, forbid the penitent to have recourse to another confessor.

I think if someone reading this thread wonders if they are scrupulous it might be good to come right out and ask.

I think one of the key symptoms though, as listed in my previous post, is one who runs from confessor to confessor trying to convince him that they have sinned, or looking for their feelings to be validated as sinful, when they are not.

That too, sets it apart from one who is undergoing a spiritual conversion. In my case, I was confessing many venial matters that weighed heavily, but because I also recognized much ignorance at the time (from dumbed down '70’s catechism), I needed help from the confessor to understand the venial from mortal on a case by case basis. With his counsel, I began to relax more, yet had a desire to continue chipping away at the venial matters. They still make me feel bad, but I grasp that this is a grace given for the purpose of enabling me to make God-pleasing changes. It is in this regard that many in my parish seek weekly confession - to chip away at venial matters and to build virtue.

 

[Joysong]

Dear Diane,

There is only one way that calumny and detraction can be calumny and detraction, which would harm the reputation of others. There must be names. A reputation belongs to an identity and without an indenty revealed, there can be no detraction.

Not so. When a class of people are continuously disparaged, even though names are omitted, there is irreparable harm to the listeners. [Not only to them, but the person who spreads it must bear a grave responsibility before God for his action]

We have seen the harm done to blacks by the KKK, and the Jews by Nazis, and the priests by dissenting Catholics who find fault.

I saw a post just the other day from one of our members who no doubt has seen so much rhettoric about priests and their alleged or real abuses in liturgy, that she wondered whether the celebrant was a valid priest! That is the harm we do by casually detracting and spreading the gossip, even without naming names.

As for blacks, where do you think the Klan members received their reinforcement? Probably no black person was mentioned by name, but as a class, the hatred toward them was publicized by word of mouth to such an effect that one can become prejudiced through listening to it. Conclusion: All blacks are … (insert derrogatory characteristics)

I lived through my mother’s hatred of the Jews, and I’ll bet she heard it from her parents, neighbors, etc. Totally unfounded! And we all know about the Catholic bashing — yet no names are specified, as a rule. Anyone who states they are Catholic may find themselves automatically hated and suspected of heresy. Look at Ireland.

If you think there is further value in discussing this, feel free to begin the thread.

Carole

 

[aimee]

This is a very interesting thread indeed…thanks to all who posted…I’m still going over some of them.

BTW, does anyone have a link for explantion of examining your conscience? I read one somewhere but can’t find it now

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

Hi Karen10,

It is true that a scrupulous person can sin- but the following article from the book may answer the question you raise on this subject in your last post. Let me know what you think.
If anyone has scruples I suggest reading the whole book to get the big picture.

QUESTION : There is one thing that concerns me. You say," scrupulous people tend to multiply serious sins, to see serious sin in almost everything." If it is true that we human beings sin whenever we think we are sinning, then scrupulous people must be guilty of a multitude of offences against God, and there is no hope unless they are cured of their scrupulosity. There must be some error in this reasoning, but I cannot find it.

ANSWER : The error may be in your understanding of the very nature of sin. We should keep in mind that sin does not happen " by accident." You will recall that there are several basic elements to a sin. One of these is often called sufficient reflection. This implies that a person is clearly aware of the seriousness of the action he or she is contemplating and the choice he or she is making. This knowledge or advertence implies the ability to evaluate and appreciate moral values. A scrupulous person is often not able to have such reflection or advertence. This is because the scrupulous person tends to evaluate moral questions not as the Church wants us to evaluate them, but in an unnecesarily strict manner. Some scrupulous people ,in other words, do not have the kind of appreciation of moral values necessarey to distinguish between what is sinful and what is not.
A second point is that sin implies full consent of the will. It is essentially a free choice. Without freedom, there cannot be guilt or moral responsibility in the proper sense of the word. It is important to realise that the exercise of freedom can be limited by many influences, and scrupulosity is one of these. Theologians commonly accept that scrupulosity can either diminish or destroy the exercise of moral freedom. When this occurs, there cannot be sin. In other words , if one does not have sufficient reflection and full consent of the will, one cannot truly commit a sin. That is why the great spiritual directors of the ages have advised scrupulous people to trust in the judgment of their confessors. Since scrupulous peoples judgments are not accurate, they must rely on the judgment of another. In this way, they have a safe course for their consciences to follow.
End of quote.

That’s what I do if I have a doubt. I consult my spiritual director or confessors whom are holy, wise and orthodox- and I seek their guidance. If they get it wrong the guilt is theirs, not mine. This is the best remedy for the scrupulous person.
Hope this helps.

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

Hi, Check these links-

For adults - catholic-pages.com/penance/examine.asp
For children - domestic-church.com/CONTENT.DCC/19990101/SCRMNTL/kidsexam.htm%between%

aimee:

This is a very interesting thread indeed…thanks to all who posted…I’m still going over some of them.

BTW, does anyone have a link for explantion of examining your conscience? I read one somewhere but can’t find it now

 

[scared]

First off Happy New Year to everyone. I have been reading this thread and have been a bit concerned about how some judgements have been made and some references to "I am afraid to go to confession” a quick search would tell you that I started one of those threads, it was nothing to do with Scrupulosity, it had to do with a real fear, not so much of the sacrament, but because of priests. Asquared you have stated “What we all must do is refrain from stating our own opinions or experience or feelings as dogmatic truth, and from giving spiritual direction on line to people we don’t even know.” Now you know nothing of my background except what I have chosen to tell you. Sometimes getting an opinion from someone who only gets basic facts and doesn’t know you is your best way to gauge what you should perhaps do. I do have something called free will, we all have it, it is another thing what we do with it. I took the information I received, weighted it, digested it and took the course that was right, I went to confession. I accepted what I was told, I accepted that I was absolved and I accepted my penance and did it exactly as prescribed. Did I feel better no. Have I left those sins in the past yes.

Karen10 has talked about damaged spirits, I can speak for no one else except myself. God is not the one that has damaged my spirit, but the many people of the church including clergy have done years worth of damage. It is this damage that I fight, it may appear to be scrupulous, however, without going into great detail others chose to use their free will in such a way to hurt and that hurt is so deep. It is very difficult to go to a Priest and ask for help when you have been badly injured. Many people refuse to go back to a hospital because one doctor or nurse did a horrible job and caused emotional damage, what do we say to them? Damaged spirits are real, and I have fought that damage and I am losing the battle to keep my faith, call it scrupulosity if you want by Karen10 is right damaged spirits are just that damaged.

I don’t wish to offend anyone, just my two cents.

scared

 

[aimee]

scared,

I won’t tell you I understand…but I care. Its painful I’m sure. There are all types of people in all professions and ministries,churchs etc. they don’t represent everyone.

I will pray for you and if you can please say a prayer for me.

ps, you express yourself well with words…are you a writer

 

[scared]

Hello aimee:

I will send you a pm of a link for examination of consceince.

Yes, I am beginning to realize that just like all professions the church is far from perfect.

I have some unpublished writing. Thank you, but I do have the next best thing to it I work with books.

scared

 

[aimee]

scared:

Hello aimee:

I will send you a pm of a link for examination of consceince.

Yes, I am beginning to realize that just like all professions the church is far from perfect.

I have some unpublished writing. Thank you, but I do have the next best thing to it I work with books.

scared

Thanks for the link

 

[milimac]

Lux_et_veritas:

For one thing, the confessor should not confound a delicate with a scrupulous conscience, neither should he interpret the reasonable solicitude sometimes discernible in those who are trying to emerge from a life of sin as a sign of scrupulosity.
…
This last statement here gave rise to a thought…

Lets say that a scrupulous person is working with a single confessor, which is the recommendation. That confessor tells them not to confess anything that they are not absolutely sure is a fresh mortal sin. The scrupulous person thinks they may have confessed it but is not sure. This, along with the 10 commandments for the scrupulous listed further up the thread, suggests they, out of obedience, should not mention it because they are not sure (note that for non-scrupulous it is the opposite). If this person had committed a fresh mortal sin, but did not mention it because he thought he may have already confessed it, I hardly think God would condemn this soul if he dies with that mortal sin…because he was following the confessor’s advice in trying to rectify a sad and difficult situation. It is not malicious omission of a sin from confession, but an honest attempt to break from scrupulosity.

I’ll continue in the next thread with excerpts on the remedy.

Thanks for the great posts Lux_et_Veritas. I have made it a resolution for this year to increase the frequency of my confessions to at least once a month and to also increase the quality of my confessions. I recently bought a book by Benedict Baur entitled “Frequent Confession, Its Place in the Spiritual Life”. Interestingly I also bought a couple other books of his, one being “Igniting the Fire Within”. I believe these both have many references to St. John of the Cross and Therese of Lisieux.

Anyway, I was somewhat surprised to find this in Benedict Baur’s book which seems to conflict with the 1st and possibly 7th scrupulous commandments and advice I have heard more than once from our pastor: Ch.1.c.2:

"Can a person confess again sins – mortal sins or venial sins – that he has already duly confessed? We have already remarked that what is taken hold of by the sacramental power of Confession and elevated is not the sins that we confess but the interior acts of the will by which we turn away from these sins: our sentiments of contrition, of desire to make atonement, and so on. Now once a sin has been committed it remains a fact always that sin has been committed, even after it has been fully pardoned. And it is possible for a person again and again to turn away interiorly from such a sin, to condemn it, to be sorry for it, to resolve to avoid it for the future and to amend his life, to do acts of penance for it.

“There is no reason why such interior dispositions, as often as they are present, should not be elevated by the power of Christ in the sacrament of Penance and made fruitful of grace. For also in this case, where sins that have already been confessed and forgiven are confessed again, the sacrament produces its essential effects: it increases sanctifying grace, which, from its very nature as the fruit of the sacrament of Penance, blots out sin if such happens to be on the soul. The grace produced by the sacrament of Penance cannot be conceived without reference to sin: to the sin it would take away were the soul in a state of sin. Therefore the words of the priest, “I absolve thee,” have their full meaning even when they do nothing but increase grace and do not actually take away sin for the simple reason that there is no sin to take away. Hence the Church teaches that sins that have already been confessed are “sufficient matter” for Confession (Code of Canon Law, 1817, canon 902). And Pope Benedict XI in 1304 declared that it is “salutary” to confess again sins that have been confessed previously (Denzinger, Enchirid. Symb., no. 470).”

It seems then that there is a fine line or possibly even a fuzzy one that divides good and scrupulous confessions. I am just beginning the book, so perhaps there are more qualifications later or a certain method of doing this – I’m sure it’s not creating a laundry list of every sin one has ever committed. I’d be in there for months.

 

[Paris_Blues]

Yes and it’s a tool of the devil. As most of you know, I suffered with it and now I’m starting to recover from it, meaning that I’m starting to trust in God more and have learned what a mortal and venial sin is. Wow, I’ve had relief. I’m not so scrupulous anymore.

spiritblows:

Hey, I’ve been reading lots of threads that I haven’t posted on, and some that I have. I’m seeing a lot of scrupulosity evidenced here. It really seems very unhealthy. People arguing over the fine line bettween mortal and venial sin, how long they have to get to confession, extreme anxiety over God’s mercy, which they seem to pretty much doubt. By these people’s rules, nobody, I mean nobody, is going to Heaven.

I suggest to these folks that you are being a bad witness to our Catholic faith here on these boards. Protestants and other curious eavesdroppers are thinking we’re nuts. Did you know Martin Luther suffered from this and finally, after tormenting himself for years, came up with a whole new theology?

Now, first of all, this could be another of the devil’s work to keep people from coming to the Truth and/or cause non-Catholics to think that we’re crazy or something because Satan HATES the CC, not surprised.

That’s why the devil was part of the Reformation! He knew his plan would work and look, we have a billion denominations. I know this too because that was ONE reason WHY I left the CC temporarily due to be so scrupulous, so I’m not surprised why Luther would. I’m also not surprised that it was what the devil had in mind.

It pains me to see my Catholic brothers and sisters torturing themselves in this way. Also, it’s not healthy, it’s not spiritual, in fact it’s a sign of psychiatic problems, and has nothing to do with loving God. There’s help available, friends…

Are You Scrupulous?
Cardinal urges trust in God’s love to overcome a painful spiritual disorder

Scrupulous Anonymous

We need to pray for them. I MUST pray for them because I suffered it severely myself and got people mad at me and said to me stuff which was uncharitable(which I’m sure is what the devil had in mind as well) and I don’t want us on this forum getting upset at these people…that wont do any good; will make things worse for that person.

For those of us who have not suffered with it, we should try to be a little more nicer and loving to those who are suffering from scrupulousity.

Hmmm…my vocation should be a scrupulousologist! To help people.

Not to mention when I told Father at Confession what is going on, he kinda smiled and said, “you are scrupulous!” and I just humbly agreed with him as if saying “that’s what I thought!”

 

[amdannemiller]

1. A scrupulous person who has great difficulty in going to confession is automatically dispensed from this obligation. If you are absolutely certain you committed a mortal sin and have to go, restrict yourself to a generic confession and tell the priest what you are doing. A generic confession gives no details; it is only necessary to say that you have sinned seriously.

I’ve never heard this before…
That just doesn’t sound right to me. I think I’m going to ask my priest about this.

 

[rowsofvoices9]

Lets say that a scrupulous person is working with a single confessor, which is the recommendation. That confessor tells them not to confess anything that they are not absolutely sure is a fresh mortal sin. The scrupulous person thinks they may have confessed it but is not sure. This, along with the 10 commandments for the scrupulous listed further up the thread, suggests they, out of obedience, should not mention it because they are not sure (note that for non-scrupulous it is the opposite). If this person had committed a fresh mortal sin, but did not mention it because he thought he may have already confessed it, I hardly think God would condemn this soul if he dies with that mortal sin…because he was following the confessor’s advice in trying to rectify a sad and difficult situation. It is not malicious omission of a sin from confession, but an honest attempt to break from scrupulosity.

It appears that what you say is true. The consistent teaching of moral theologians states that even if the scrupulous penitent is convinced or highly suspects that they have committed a mortal sin, they are to be obedient to their confessor and refrain from confessing if he judges otherwise. God will not hold them accountable because he values obedience above all else.

ccel.org/ccel/baker/holy_wisdom.iv.vi.xi.html

1. Yea, they ought to consider that though indeed it were true that the confessor should happen to be mistaken, notwithstanding, the penitents practising bonâ fide according to his orders in a point of this nature about his confession (which is not a moral precept), should commit no sin, nor incur the least danger by it; yea, being an act of obedience for God’s sake and in opposition to natural passion it should be an occasion of merit to them; so that though the sins suspected by them were indeed mortal, yet, he judging otherwise, they would not be obliged to confess them.

 

[rowsofvoices9]

Its very important know how to identify true scrupulosity. Its not unusual for people emerging from a deeply sinful life to undergo a period of what appears to be scrupulosity but in actuality isn’t. It evidently is quite common in such cases that the person experiences serious doubts about their sincerity and fears over past sins.

religiousstudiesblog.blogspot.com/2011/12/traditional-catholic-pastoral-theology_8780.html

1. The confessor, in meeting a person who appears to be scrupulous, should first examine the case closely… Symptoms of real scrupulosity are a groundless fear of offending God at every moment and in almost every action, a fear not founded upon reason, but caused by a vague feeling; a frequent change of opinion; a constant agitation and distress, an excessive anxiety and doubt as to certain particulars, such as the intention in pious exercises, devotion in prayer, sorrow in contrition, a never-ending perplexity; a desire of again and again confessing sins, which have been already duly confessed; an obstinacy of opinion even against the advice and commands of a prudent confessor. As soon as you have come to the conclusion that the penitent is really scrupulous, you must investigate the cause and shape your remedies accordingly. Usually there is a combination of causes, and therefore it may be well to apply now one, now another remedy. The principal means to effect a cure is blind obedience to the confessor and Spiritual Director. All theologians agree on this point. The trouble, however, is that many scrupulous persons decline the yoke of holy obedience. They say that the confessor does not understand them correctly, or that he is too lax, etc. To these you may answer: No one can be a fair judge in his own case, much less if he is tormented by vain illusions; to trust ourselves rather than those whom God has placed over us is an unbearable pride, which deserves the severest censure. If this does not quiet the penitent, then either send him away and say that you cannot help him, or at least treat him with the utmost rigor…
2. The confessor, in giving instructions to a scrupulous penitent, must be decided in his commands and forcible and resolute in all what he says, because otherwise he would only confirm the penitent in his false alarms. Tell these afflicted souls that they ought not to cease praying, though they find no relish in it; command them to despise their scruples, and to act against a momentary doubt, even if their conscience be not quiet afterwards. Forbid them to reflect much upon their actions, to talk to others about the matter, to consult books for the purpose of solving difficulties. Assign to them the day and time when they may come to confession; never hear them at other times, even if they say they have committed a mortal sin; be firm and make no exception. In confession never allow them to mention their scruples; nor permit them to repeat past sins, except they can swear that the sin was never confessed before. On the whole, always foster hope in these unfortunate people. Make them regard God as a merciful Father and not as a stern Judge…