Several Questions about Confession

[Bookcat]

Yes, which is why everyone keeps on having to correct you, so that the new people are not led astray into the fear and doubt of scrupulosity.

Actually there are only a few…not “everyone”…

Anyhow…

What I have said is theologically and canonically the case.

In addition to my study of Theology for my Theology degree from Steubenville …I continue to study theology (as my way of life)… I have even had the opportunity to speak with the author of a recently published book written precisely for Priests on how to hear confessions “Guide Book for Confessors” (2010). He is a Priest from Opus Dei (and is a fellow a Dr. Hahn’s Institute) (I heard at least one Bishop bought the book to give to all his Priests…the book has sold out already…it is now out of stock there on the Publishers website (the same Publisher who publishes the Navarre Bible)… Anyhow he agreed with what I have here in these forums regarding forgotten numbers and the obligation for them to be confessed in the next confession. That this is very important.

One does not avoid scrupulosity by avoiding correct theology and practice (I understand of course the confusion and the good intentions). Those with scruples need to see their confessor and seek his guidance in their particular case…as I have noted.

 

[jmcrae]

One does not avoid scrupulosity by avoiding correct theology and practice (I understand of course the confusion and the good intentions). Those with scruples need to see their confessor and seek his guidance in their particular case…as I have noted.

One avoids scrupulosity by avoiding scrupulous behaviour, such as going back and re-confessing previously confessed sins, because of missing details that the priest did not ask for.

Again, God is not an accountant - your best effort at the time is sufficient. Forget every sin that you have ever confessed (except to avoid committing them again) and move on with your life - grow, mature, and thrive - don’t spend sleepless nights worrying about your last Confession - if the Absolution was given, then those sins are gone from the earth, never to bother you again.

 

[Maureen1125]

One avoids scrupulosity by avoiding scrupulous behaviour, such as going back and re-confessing previously confessed sins, because of missing details that the priest did not ask for.

Again, God is not an accountant - your best effort at the time is sufficient. Forget every sin that you have ever confessed (except to avoid committing them again) and move on with your life - grow, mature, and thrive - don’t spend sleepless nights worrying about your last Confession - if the Absolution was given, then those sins are gone from the earth, never to bother you again.

:clapping:

Thank you JM!!! I find that we are much harder on ourselves. I know that I have been to confession and although repentint and forgiven, I have a hard time letting go. It is something I am conscience of and that I pray over and hope that in time I will learn to let go of the past. Obessing doesn’t help anyone and could keep me from hearing God in my life.

 

[Bookcat]

One avoids scrupulosity by avoiding scrupulous behaviour, such as going back and re-confessing previously confessed sins, because of missing details that the priest did not ask for.

Yes that too can be part of it (each person with scrupulosity of course can be different…(I know…both from my theological studies and from assisting various persons over time…some can have very different areas of scruples) and need different directives…they should speak with their regular confessor)…and yes a person with a difficulty with scruples can scruple about past sins etc…and can even be in a state where their confessor must simply things for them…give them directives…“exceptions” to what everyone else is obliged to do. Each who suffers from this difficulty is advised to have a regular confessor.

But just as one does not treat persons with a normal health with drugs and treatments for those with a particular disorder…neither does one prescribe remedies for particular kinds of scruples to the general population…and especially those without such a difficulty.

It remains the case that Catholics are obliged to “confess” that is “accuse themselves” of all mortal sins in number and in kind…it is their responsibility…and they should not of course wait for the Priest to ask for this sort of thing… This is not “unneeded scrupulous detail” but required aspects of the confession of mortal sin.

It is a simply requirement…a simple part of the confession easily done.

Again, God is not an accountant - your best effort at the time is sufficient. Forget every sin that you have ever confessed (except to avoid committing them again) and move on with your life - grow, mature, and thrive - don’t spend sleepless nights worrying about your last Confession - if the Absolution was given, then those sins are gone from the earth, never to bother you again.

Yes…one should not scruple over past confessions or “spend sleepless nights worrying over your last confession” (remembering that you forgot to say the number of a mortal sin or a particular mortal sin…should not cause any concern…one just mentions it next time)…one simply examines ones conscience…and confesses any mortal sins one find in number and kind…(and circumstance that actually changes the nature of the sin…like the person you murdered was your brother)…and is contrite…amended and wonderfully absolved…and then lives the Christian life with joy…following Christ and rejoicing in his love and mercy in the Sacrament…in the* true life* one has in him

Let us all live this wonderful life in Christ!

 

[Elizabeth502]

It is only if you forget to mention it at all, that you have to go back and confess it later - and only in the case of a mortal sin.

Indeed, because it is the sin(s), their content, that is essential to the matter of the sacrament, not the number of their occasion.

Hence, the penitent, who in confession willfully conceals a mortal sin, derives no benefit whatever; on the contrary, he makes void the sacrament and thereby incurs the guilt of sacrilege. If, however, the sin be omitted, not through any fault of the penitent, but through forgetfulness, it is forgiven indirectly; but it [the sin] *[not a correction of the number of occasions] *must be declared at the next confession and thus submitted to the power of the keys.

newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm

Yes, which is why everyone keeps on having to correct you, so that the new people are not led astray into the fear and doubt of scrupulosity.

Indeed.

Again, every sacrament requires essential matter and essential form to be valid.
Necessary matter of this sacrament = the mortal sins (their content, not their number)
**Necessary form of this sacrament **= the granting of absolution

The rubric of the sacrament can be found in a variety of Catholic sources, and begins with the Sign of the Cross, then the self-accusation formula (for example,“Bless me, Father, for I have sinned” is a standard way to begin) as well as length of time since last confession. Then the enumeration of serious sins, usually the most serious first. Normally, number or frequency is part of the rubric.

Jimmy Akin is not an ordained Roman Catholic priest. Usually he has to look up information, and is focused on technicalities. The priests in the confessionals know what the essential matter and form are. If the number of occasions are not mentioned, and the priest does not introduce a question about that, he is judging that it is not important (essential), as he knows what constitutes the validity of the sacrament. He cares about sorrow (contrition) because the Church herself, and Jesus Christ himself, consider that the most essential aspect of the penitent’s preparation – because sorrow signifies understanding of Truth, sorrow invites Mercy, sorrow is a catalyst for change (“firm purpose of amendment”) and sorrow prepares the soul for the sanctifying grace of the sacrament.

If a priest is concerned about the gravity of a particular sin, he is much more likely to inquire of the penitent, “Do you realize the seriousness (or danger) of this sin?” than he is likely to ask, “Well how many times did you do that?” As reported on more than one thread, by several CAF posters, and recently so (and we all have our confessions heard, probably, by different priests), our confessors never ask number of times, even for serious sins. Their understanding trumps anything Jimmy Akin could assert, or any interpretation of the technical “lists” that Jimmy Akin provides. I have two confessors, both of whom are the pinnacle of traditionalism and did not just graduate from seminary (let alone from a conversion process).

It is important to add that rubrics vary. Just as number of sin occasions is not essential to matter and form, neither is the particular confessional formula. Again, I prefer (and my most traditional confessor prefers) the very traditional format, including absolution in Latin. However, many experienced priests use, or accept, formulas and even Acts of Contrition that are variations of the standard or traditional formula. That also does not invalidate the confession, because that belongs to rubric, not to matter & form. Some confessors even prefer the pentitent to say their Act of Contrition privately afterward, outside the confessional.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I will add that it’s important to be accurate about the character, nature of the sin, and if a mistake has been made in the essential character of the sin, that should be revisited, because that would be as if the correctly serious sin itself had not been confessed.

Something that makes a sin more grievous in content is not repetition of it but the context of it. Thus, striking your neighbor with signficant injury – and doing so on two separate occasions – is not as grievous as doing the same thing to your wife, on one occasion. Because the nature of the latter relationship is far different. In that case, one should correct the recitation of the sin (of striking the spouse) if it was merely recited as “striking someone with great injury” the first time it was confessed.

 

[jmcrae]

:clapping:

Thank you JM!!! I find that we are much harder on ourselves. I know that I have been to confession and although repentint and forgiven, I have a hard time letting go. It is something I am conscience of and that I pray over and hope that in time I will learn to let go of the past. Obessing doesn’t help anyone and could keep me from hearing God in my life.

Exactly. The Devil wants you to worry, because it doesn’t want you to feel the joy of the graces that you have received in the Confessional. It hates that you have been forgiven of your sins, and it doesn’t want you to experience joy.

Only the Devil could ever possibly want you to suffer from sins that you have already been forgiven for. Let them go. Rejoice in the abundant love of Jesus Christ. Reject that jealous ogre, and enjoy the beautiful things that Jesus wants to give you, just as the Prodigal Son enjoyed the new clothes and beautiful supper given to him by his Father, without worrying about his jealous brother.

 

[Bookcat]

Indeed, because it is the sin(s), their content, that is essential to the matter of the sacrament, not the number of their occasion.

Yes if one as no mortal sins that need be confessed…

One may even confess just one kind of venial sin in a “general” way without ANY NUMBER…for which one is contrite for etc.

And the confession is VALID.

“I accuse myself of stealing some paper from work, and all the sins of my life”

or “I accuse myself impatience and lying”

However

If one has mortal sins to confess…one is required (obliged) to confess them in kind and in number.

If one intentionally conceals the number of the mortal sins…such can invalidate the confession. (forgetting …does not)

Number for mortal sins is required.

“I accuse myself of adultery 2x”

or

“I accuse myself of murder 3 x”

Or even "I accuse myself of such and such …many times over the last 20 years…I really do not know how many "

 

[Bookcat]

Exactly. The Devil wants you to worry, because it doesn’t want you to feel the joy of the graces that you have received in the Confessional. It hates that you have been forgiven of your sins, and it doesn’t want you to experience joy.

Only the Devil could ever possibly want you to suffer from sins that you have already been forgiven for. Let them go. Rejoice in the abundant love of Jesus Christ. Reject that jealous ogre, and enjoy the beautiful things that Jesus wants to give you, just as the Prodigal Son enjoyed the new clothes and beautiful supper given to him by his Father, without worrying about his jealous brother.

Exactly!

The Gospel is about joy.

In Jesus of Nazareth the Christ is …true life

(No one should scruple or needlessly worry about their confession. If they do they need to see their confessor and seek his direction…)

 

[Bookcat]

The committing of a mortal sin 10 times is worse than 1 time.

If I murder 10 persons it is worse that if I murder one person.

All “kill” oneself. Ones life in Christ. But the one is certainly worse than the other.

This is an increase in the number of the mortal sins. (Hence one reason why the Church requires us to confess mortal sins in number)

An increase in the seriousness of a single mortal sin (as I noted above) is for example the murder of my brother or even worse…the murder of my mother. That is the kind of circumstance that would need to be added.

But not “it was tuesday and it was raining” (those with scrupulosity/scruples can want to add all sorts of things that are not needed…)

Of course the mercy of God…particularly in absolution…can wash away ones sins…and make one again a son of God …a son of light! (Children of light).

So again let us rejoice!

 

[Bookcat]

PS

Of course if one wishes to confess a past mortal sin that has already been confessed in number and kind (not that you forgot…but just out of devotion and seeking grace and healing etc)…one can confess it in “general” too…but for those with scruples are to be cautioned about such…for it can open the door to scruples.

One good custom is to add at the end of all your confessions …one or two specific or general catagories from the past that one is particularly sorry for or seeking particular grace for…either venial or mortal…“and especially past sins of” …(for example) impatience, anger, lust, against chastity…

serial murder

 

[Bookcat]

This quote from above:

Hence, the penitent, who in confession willfully conceals a mortal sin, derives no benefit whatever; on the contrary, he makes void the sacrament and thereby incurs the guilt of sacrilege. If, however, the sin be omitted, not through any fault of the penitent, but through forgetfulness, it is forgiven indirectly; but it must be declared at the next confession and thus submitted to the power of the keys.

–

(In regards to the “forgotten mortal sin”)

It is a general quote…and it further substantiates what I have explained.

It is presumes that the number of the sin that was forgotten will be mentioned if it was more than one (it is giving a general illustration)

The obligation to confess all mortal sins in number and in kind is presumed …it is presumed that if it was committed more than one time such number will be said…it presumes the rest of the article. (this obligation has been around for a very very long time)

One older manual from 1961 to give as an example(the quote above is from the 1909 or so Encylopedia) …the manual by Jone (which was well known and used by confessors all over the place)

notes regarding the obligation to confess mortal sins in number:

“All mortal sins are properly confessed only when their number…”

“If in indicating the number of sins ones erroneously minimizes, the mistake must be corrected in the following confessions”

So if one thinks one committed 5 murders and confesses such in error…and later realizes “it was only 4!” he need not do anything…

But if one thinks one committed 3 murders and later realizes it was 5 then one needs to submit this to the key next confession…

But this does not mean that one should go about “worrying or stressing” and “examining again and again” ones confession after one made a good examine beforehand and made a good honest confession! But if he does realize it though…say he remembers out of the blue one day that he murdered steve too…well …he needs to mention that in the next confession (perhaps when the Priest visits the prison next …)

Of course if one forgets entirely the number for a mortal sin…then the that too must be submitted the next confession.

 

[Elizabeth502]

The committing of a mortal sin 10 times is worse than 1 time

Not in itself, no it is not. Not without a context.

If I murder 10 persons it is worse that if I murder one person.

The difference here is that it is 10 different lives that are snuffed out. But the people on CAF are normally not talking about murder. And if in some cases they’re talking about abortion – as already covered in other threads here way back when – they should and will confess that they did this twice (God forbid more than that), not once (for example).

You need to stop citing extremes that are out of the norm, in order to supposedly “prove” the norm. It doesn’t prove the norm. It shows that it’s an extreme, that’s all.

If one commits adultery 10 times, against the same spouse, it is not 10 times more serious than if you committed it once, just once. You broke covenant with your spouse You betrayed your spouse. You deceived your spouse. That’s a qualitative matter, not a quantitative matter. It’s generally either very short-term, or very long-term, and that distinction is what the priest cares about. If this was a long-term situation (now being confessed) that general abundance should be brought to confession. (“I’ve been having an affair for one year. It has strained my marriage, although my spouse does not yet know.”) The priest will then be alerted to advise the penitent on repairing the hurt to the marriage and the negligence to the marriage and the deceit to the marriage, which may require reparation on a practical level in addition to whatever spiritual reparation by the penitent will be advised.

A failure to understand these important distinctions shows a failure to understand the nature of sin and the purpose of the sacrament.

 

[Bookcat]

Not in itself, no it is not. Not without a context.

Yes it is.

The difference here is that it is 10 different lives that are snuffed out.

And 10 mortal sins!

But the people on CAF are normally not talking about murder. And if in some cases they’re talking about abortion – as already covered in other threads here way back when – they should and will confess that they did this twice (God forbid more than that), not once (for example).

Goes for all moral sins

You need to stop citing extremes that are out of the norm, in order to supposedly “prove” the norm. It doesn’t prove the norm. It shows that it’s an extreme, that’s all.

Works for all mortals sins. It is common practice to use extreme examples to make the point. I will not set aside this practice. And it being not what those at CA are normally committing …it serves as a good example for illustration

If one commits adultery 10 times, against the same spouse, it is not 10 times more serious than if you committed it once, just once.

Yes it is. It is 10 mortal sins of adultery.

You broke covenant with your spouse You betrayed your spouse. You deceived your spouse. That’s a qualitative matter, not a quantitative matter.It’s generally either very short-term, or very long-term, and that distinction is what the priest cares about. If this was a long-term situation (now being confessed) that general abundance should be brought to confession. (“I’ve been having an affair for one year. It has strained my marriage, although my spouse does not yet know.”) The priest will then be alerted to advise the penitent on repairing the hurt to the marriage and the negligence to the marriage and the deceit to the marriage, which may require reparation on a practical level in addition to whatever spiritual reparation by the penitent will be advised.

You are mistaken …the number MUST be confessed. It does matter …it is the penitents obligation to confess it…in number and in kind. The other things are of course important…in any case he needs to give number as well as kind

 

[Elizabeth502]

This quote from above:

Hence, the penitent, who in confession willfully conceals a mortal sin, derives no benefit whatever; on the contrary, he makes void the sacrament and thereby incurs the guilt of sacrilege. If, however, the sin be omitted, not through any fault of the penitent, but through forgetfulness, it is forgiven indirectly; but it must be declared at the next confession and thus submitted to the power of the keys.

(In regards to the “forgotten mortal sin”)

It is a general quote…and it further substantiates what I have explained.

It is presumes that the number of the sin that was forgotten will be mentioned if it was more than one (it is giving a general illustration)

No, it does NOT presume that. Not at all. Re-read the Catholic Encyclopedia, or better yet, talk to a priest. A Catholic priest, not a recent convert from evangelical Protestantism.

The obligation to confess all mortal sins in number and in kind is presumed …it is presumed that if it was committed more than one time such number will be said…it presumes the rest of the article. (this obligation has been around for a very very long time)

One older manual from 1961 to give as an example(the quote above is from the 1909 or so Encylopedia) …the manual by Jone (which was well known and used by confessors all over the place)

No modern priest uses such a manual today, bookcat. Not the most faitfhful, orthodox Roman Catholic priest will hold pentitents to such ridiculous standards. Not my super-traditionalist confessor who has practically memorized the entire Catholic tradition, nor my alternate Opus Dei confessor.

So if one thinks one committed 5 murders and confesses such in error…and later realizes “it was only 4!” he need not do anything…

But if one thinks one committed 3 murders and later realizes it was 5 then one needs to submit this to the key next confession…

Again with the absurd extremes. The question is not about murder. Substitute a sin such as pornography use, and ask any priest (not Jimmy Akin) whether the penitent should go back into the confessional and confess having used pornography 5 times instead of 3. Listen to yourself.

But this does not mean that one should go about “worrying or stressing” and “examining again and again” ones confession after one made a good examine beforehand and made a good honest confession! But if he does realize it though…say he remembers out of the blue one day that he murdered steve too…well …he needs to mention that in the next confession (perhaps when the Priest visits the prison next.

Yeah, the posters on CAF need to confess “murder” on a regular basis. That’s undoubtedly why they come to CAF – to seek counsel about whether they should mention that they murdered a 3rd or 4th person instead of “just” a 1st or 2nd person. Here’s the real problem with that: How is that Catholics on this discussion forum are getting away with murder more than once? Are all the law enforcement agencies in the United States of America this compromised? :bigyikes:

Of course if one forgets entirely the number for a mortal sin…then the that too must be submitted the next confession.

No. That is not in current Canon Law. Find it.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Also, please use the proper format for quoting posts, per CAF forum rules. It’s not fair to those trying to dialogue.

 

[Bookcat]

No, it does NOT presume that. Not at all. Re-read the Catholic Encyclopedia, or better yet, talk to a priest. A Catholic priest, not a recent convert from evangelical Protestantism.

One must read the entire article or works of Theology on the subject.
I know this from my own theological studies …and prior to any discussion with the senior apologist of Catholic Answers (what difference does it make that he is a convert? I too am a convert and I know Theology very well…my theology…being raised Catholic does not necessarily give anyone any “edge” in theology…it all depends on ones formation etc )

No modern priest uses such a manual today, bookcat. Not the most faitfhful, orthodox Roman Catholic priest will hold pentitents to such ridiculous standards. Not my super-traditionalist confessor who has practically memorized the entire Catholic tradition, nor my alternate Opus Dei confessor.

I quoted it only in response to your quoting the Cath. Encyclopedia from 1909…(and actually such does contain certain things still useful)

And as I mentioned above :

I have even had the opportunity to speak with the author of a recently published book written precisely for Priests on how to hear confessions “Guide Book for Confessors” (2010). He is a Priest from Opus Dei (and is a fellow a Dr. Hahn’s Institute) (I heard at least one Bishop bought the book to give to all his Priests…the book has sold out already…it is now out of stock there on the Publishers website (the same Publisher who publishes the Navarre Bible)… Anyhow he agreed that a person who forgot to give the numbers for mortal sins is to confess them in the next confession. That this is very important. And I can assure you that he is alive and well.

And as I noted before … if one does not know the numbers one can make an approximation (as one can) …even if one has to say “a few times” or “many times”. So if one say did not remember the number after his examination and honestly confessed it as “a few times” but then later remembers it was 3 times. I am not saying that person would need to go back and add anything. Or if say a person after his examination could not remember how many times but knew it was “many times over 10 years” and said that…and then later remembered it better…I am not saying they need to go back and do anything necessarily.

But if someone forgets to give the number of mortal sin …or says say it was 2x and later realize it was 5x…then they simply mention such in the next confession.

Again with the absurd extremes. The question is not about murder. Substitute a sin such as pornography use, and ask any priest (not Jimmy Akin) whether the penitent should go back into the confessional and confess having used pornography 5 times instead of 3. Listen to yourself.

Yes such would be the same. One would need to mention that it was 5 times (not 3).
(and by the way Jimmy Akin is quite qualified…but again such did not originate with him…this is the obligation we have of confessing our mortal sins (if we have any) in number and in kind)

And if one just forgot to say the number and just said “I used pornography” then one would say that it was 5 times in the next confession. No worries…for one is not concealing it…one just forgot (perhaps from nerves)

Yeah, the posters on CAF need to confess “murder” on a regular basis. That’s undoubtedly why they come to CAF – to seek counsel about whether they should mention that they murdered a 3rd or 4th person instead of “just” a 1st or 2nd person. Here’s the real problem with that: How is that Catholics on this discussion forum are getting away with murder more than once? Are all the law enforcement agencies in the United States of America this compromised? :bigyikes:

Already answered. Such is a common practice. Not murder… but in giving examples.

And while yes it would be important for the counsel for the priest to know that one has been on a murder spree lately…it is always important to note that the confession of number for mortal sins is part of the sacrament…and not just for the purpose of seeking counsel.

No. That is not in current Canon Law. Find it.

Yes is is as I have already explained at length.

 

[jmcrae]

… .but for those with scruples are to be cautioned about such…for it can open the door to scruples.

There was nobody ever born with scruples. Scrupulosity comes about by means of scrupulous behaviour. It is in the worrying over the details and redoing things until they are perfect that one becomes scrupulous - and loses one’s peace in Christ. This happens to every person who focuses, not on the fact that Christ loves them and wants to forgive them, but on whether or not they said the perfect words and did it “right.”

Perfection is required in many endeavors in this world, but in the Confessional, one’s best effort at the time is sufficient - there is nothing to “do over until you get it right” - this is not necessary. Jesus is running towards you and clasping you in His arms with love. He is not arching His brow and saying, Wait a minute, you used the wrong wording for that one. It’s not an exam to see how much you can remember - it’s a living encounter with the One who loves us best.

 

[Bookcat]

There was nobody ever born with scruples. Scrupulosity comes about by means of scrupulous behaviour. It is in the worrying over the details and redoing things until they are perfect that one becomes scrupulous - and loses one’s peace in Christ. This happens to every person who focuses, not on the fact that Christ loves them and wants to forgive them, but on whether or not they said the perfect words and did it “right.”

Perfection is required in many endeavors in this world, but in the Confessional, one’s best effort at the time is sufficient - there is nothing to “do over until you get it right” - this is not necessary. Jesus is running towards you and clasping you in His arms with love. He is not arching His brow and saying, Wait a minute, you used the wrong wording for that one. It’s not an exam to see how much you can remember - it’s a living encounter with the One who loves us best.

A person can be born with a predisposition to scruples (and some even have OCD). But yes upbringing, environment, hanging around scrupulous persons, and scrupulous habits are a key factor.

Those who suffer from such should seek a good regular confessor …and yes focus more on the love of Christ …etc So they may come to know more and more the “freedom of the sons of God” and joy.

The Christian life is yes…the narrow way…the way of the cross …etc…but it is indeed
to be a life of joy…to be true life.

 

[jmcrae]

A person can be born with a predisposition to scruples (and some even have OCD). But yes upbringing, environment, hanging around scrupulous persons, and scrupulous habits are a key factor.

Those who suffer from such should seek a good regular confessor …and yes focus more on the love of Christ …etc So they may come to know more and more the “freedom of the sons of God” and joy.

The Christian life is yes…the narrow way…the way of the cross …etc…but it is indeed
to be a life of joy…to be true life.

And do not take up habits that lead to scrupulosity - such as reconfessing sins already confessed, because the wording was “wrong.” Jesus knew what you meant to say, and forgave you, the first time.