Should I repeat my confession?

[Leegal]

(Again I will add for some readers those with scrupulosity can be in a very different boat then those without such difficulties…so for those out there with such struggles --make sure you have a regular confessor to direct you.)

I can’t quote the entire thing because of the format you used to reply, but this relates to your response to me. Usually, I find your posts to be most informative but this is very confusing to me, and contrary to what the confessor told me NOT to do. I can only think that we are speaking of two different things.

I cannot contribute anything more to this topic and will unsubscribe.

 

[Bookcat]

I can’t quote the entire thing because of the format you used to reply, but this relates to your response to me. Usually, I find your posts to be most informative but this is very confusing to me, and contrary to what the confessor told me NOT to do. I can only think that we are speaking of two different things.

I cannot contribute anything more to this topic and will unsubscribe.

A person with such struggles with scrupulosity may be in a “different boat”…and need to be guided by a regular confessor.

I would note that it needs to be remembered by persons with such scruples that what their confessor tells them in their particular case – often ought not be “universalized” when discussing the subject with others. (I understand of course your fine intentions here…for you thought such was universal…)

Have a Joyful Advent and Christmas!

 

[Bookcat]

I can’t quote the entire thing because of the format you used to reply

PS: in case you read this thread again. I may have misread your last post. Of course you may have quoted that line only cause I spoke of ones confessor in it (and cause you could not quote the whole)…not due to any difficulty of scruples. So it may have been that your confessor was advising you after your general devotional confession to not go back and think anymore on your past sins (since heck you just did an extensive examine!)…but rather face forward and follow Christ!..such would not mean though that one could not confess say a mortal sin that later pops into ones mind and one knows one did not confess it…such would be something one would actually confess.

 

[TrueLight]

A person with such struggles with scrupulosity may be in a “different boat”…and need to be guided by a regular confessor.

I would note that it needs to be remembered by persons with such scruples that what their confessor tells them in their particular case – often ought not be “universalized” when discussing the subject with others. (I understand of course your fine intentions here…for you thought such was universal…)

Have a Joyful Advent and Christmas!

With all due respect, Bookcat, I believe advice such as you have to go and confess all over again, encourages scrupulosity.

 

[Bookcat]

With all due respect, Bookcat, I believe advice such as you have to go and confess all over again, encourages scrupulosity.

It is not advice it is an obligation of the Church.

It is not about confessing all over again…but of confessing the mortal sins that where *honestly *forgotten. If I confessed one murder and I did 5 murders …I still need to confess those other 4 murders in the next confession…

Canon Law:

Can. 988 §1. A member of the Christian faithful is obliged to confess in kind and number all grave sins committed after baptism and not yet remitted directly through the keys of the Church nor acknowledged in individual confession, of which the person has knowledge after diligent examination of conscience.

(grave sin = mortal sin by the way)

and forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8705132&postcount=17

(again those who are scrupulous…it is important to have a regular confessor…and you may be in a different boat…discuss it with him).

Those with scrupulosity may discuss their particular difficulties with their regular confessor.

 

[TrueLight]

It is not advice it is an obligation of the Church.

It is not about confessing all over again…but of confessing the mortal sins that where *honestly *forgotten. If I confessed one murder and I did 5 murders …I still need to confess those other 4 murders in the next confession…

Canon Law:

Can. 988 §1. A member of the Christian faithful is obliged to confess in kind and number all grave sins committed after baptism and not yet remitted directly through the keys of the Church nor acknowledged in individual confession, of which the person has knowledge after diligent examination of conscience.

(grave sin = mortal sin by the way)

and forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8705132&postcount=17

(again those who are scrupulous…it is important to have a regular confessor…and you may be in a different boat…discuss it with him).

Those with scrupulosity may discuss their particular difficulties with their regular confessor.

Murder of course is obvious.

So one should go back and say, “I said I masturbated, but didn’t say how many times because I did not know that I was supposed to say how many times. I actually masturbated twice”?

 

[Bookcat]

Murder of course is obvious.

So one should go back and say, “I said I masturbated once, not knowing that I was supposed to say how many times. I actually masturbated twice”?

It goes for all mortal sins.

To confess “I committed murder” (or any other mortal sin) and not say a further number is to confess basically it as once.

If yes one did the mortal sin 2x one is to mention it in the next confession. “Last confession I confessed X…but I did not realize I had to give number for mortal sins…it was really 2x”…

 

[TrueLight]

It goes for all mortal sins.

To confess “I committed murder” (or any other mortal sin) and not say a further number is to confess basically it as once.

If yes one did the mortal sin 2x one is to mention it in the next confession. “Last confession I confessed X…but I did not realize I had to give number for mortal sins…it was really 2x”…

Okey-dokey.

 

[kdub432]

My understanding is that advising people to include the number of sins is to help the priest decide the pattern of that sin, or the effect it might be having in your soul. My understanding is that confessing the number of sins is not a requirement for a valid sacrament, although its common practice, and helpful to the priest if you can include the information.

 

[Bookcat]

My understanding is that advising people to include the number of sins is to help the priest decide the pattern of that sin, or the effect it might be having in your soul. My understanding is that confessing the number of sins is not a requirement for a valid sacrament, although its common practice, and helpful to the priest if you can include the information.

It is an* obligation *to confess all mortal sins in number and kind. See my posts above…such as Canon Law.

Yes venial sins need not be given in such a way (and need not be confessed but it is highly recommended to confess at least some)

 

[Edmundus1581]

It is an* obligation *to confess all mortal sins in number and kind. See my posts above…such as Canon Law.

There is no obligation to confess mortal sins in number and kind which have already been “acknowledged” in individual confession.

**Can. 988 §1. **A member of the Christian faithful is obliged to confess in kind and number all grave sins committed after baptism and not yet remitted directly through the keys of the Church nor acknowledged in individual confession, of which the person has knowledge after diligent examination of conscience.

“Acknowledged” is a very broad term here and, in the absence of further explanation, would include any sincere mention of the sins - with or without numbers - which has been accepted by the confessor.

The term seems to be deliberately broad, as it takes into account the many ways that sins can be confessed, and accepted by the confessor. For example, I may confess “I have been going to bars and getting drunk”, and then the priest asks “Have you driven home under the influence?”. I answer “Yes”. Thus I have “acknowledged” the mortal sin of driving while intoxicated. The priest may now ask the number of times, or he might not, but if he doesn’t then I am not obliged to mention the number (from that confession) in a subsequent confession, and, in general shouldn’t (although there may be exceptions to this).

This is my best guess at the **intended **scope of the word “acknowledged” in the canon. As you have invoked canon law, and given your interpretation, I am presenting my interpretation, which seems equally valid from looking at the text, and in the absence of commentary by a canon lawyer, or a priest.

My personal opinion on the OP’s question is that his confession was valid and that he should forget it, and move on. This is based on my many experiences in the confessional and advise I have received from confessors.

My purpose here is just to answer the “Canon Law” objection.

 

[Bookcat]

There is no obligation to confess mortal sins in number and kind which have already been “acknowledged” in individual confession.

“Acknowledged” is a very broad term here and, in the absence of further explanation, would include any sincere mention of the sins - with or without numbers - which has been accepted by the confessor.

The term seems to be deliberately broad, as it takes into account the many ways that sins can be confessed, and accepted by the confessor. For example, I may confess “I have been going to bars and getting drunk”, and then the priest asks “Have you driven home under the influence?”. I answer “Yes”. Thus I have “acknowledged” the mortal sin of driving while intoxicated. The priest may now ask the number of times, or he might not, but if he doesn’t then I am not obliged to mention the number (from that confession) in a subsequent confession, and, in general shouldn’t (although there may be exceptions to this).

This is my best guess at the **intended **scope of the word “acknowledged” in the canon. As you have invoked canon law, and given your interpretation, I am presenting my interpretation, which seems equally valid from looking at the text, and in the absence of commentary by a canon lawyer, or a priest.

Yes they need to be confessed. We are obliged to confess all our mortal sins in number and kind…

I murdered 5 times. I get nervous and forget to confess the number …

Later I realize my mistake. I still need to mention in the next confession …for the other 4 murders have not yet been submitted directly to the keys.

 

[twf]

Yes they need to be confessed. We are obliged to confess all our mortal sins in number and kind…

I murdered 5 times. I get nervous and forget to confess the number …

Later I realize my mistake. I still need to mention in the next confession …for the other 4 murders have not yet been submitted directly to the keys.

I hope that the “next confession” is from behind prison bars…no half-decent priest would grant absolution if you had no intention of turning yourself in for such horrendous grave crimes…crimes that call out to heaven for vengeance. I know I’m nit picking, but in these discussions people choose the most extreme unlikely examples of grave sins… you’re not very likely to forget the number of times you commit the sin of murder or adultery or fornication… a much more likely scenario is something like masturbation, which can be very addictive, and while grave matter, will not be as ‘memorable’ as these other examples…it is very likely that you won’t remember the exact number of times you’ve committed the sin, especially if struggle with it on a regular basis. If you forget the number of times you’ve committed murder or adultery, chances are you are either very mentally ill or you did not truly experience remorse…
If I am addicted to a sinful act like masturbation, and for whatever reason simply can’t get to the confessional for a significant length of time (say a month - perhaps you live in a remote area where priests only visit occasionally - as is true for many Catholics throughout teh world), it is likely that I will only know that I committed the sin multiple times… unless you’re suggesting the person is obligated to keep a chart in order to fulfill his obligation to confess in both kind and number…?

 

[Edmundus1581]

Yes they need to be confessed. We are obliged to confess all our mortal sins in number and kind…

I murdered 5 times. I get nervous and forget to confess the number …

Later I realize my mistake. I still need to mention in the next confession …for the other 4 murders have not yet been submitted directly to the keys.

This is just a general remark, and you did not address the point of my post, which was to answer your interpretation of canon law in the matter. We are talking about specific words here, particularly the words “not yet … acknowledged in individual confession”.

Can. 988 §1. A member of the Christian faithful is obliged to confess in kind and number all grave sins committed after baptism and **not yet **remitted directly through the keys of the Church nor acknowledged in individual confession, of which the person has knowledge after diligent examination of conscience.

(I have changed my bolding, just to make the sense a bit clearer).

I stand by my interpretation of those words, until you can show me that I am wrong.

 

[Edmundus1581]

…unless you’re suggesting the person is obligated to keep a chart in order to fulfill his obligation to confess in both kind and number…?

Agreed.

[Edit]

But I think that Bookcat has addressed this below, in general terms, about human limitations, so I’ve deleted the remainder of this post.

 

[Bookcat]

This is just a general remark, and you did not address the point of my post, which was to answer your interpretation of canon law in the matter. We are talking about specific words here, particularly the words “not yet … acknowledged in individual confession”.

Canon law…

Can. 988 §1. A member of the Christian faithful is obliged to confess in kind and number all grave sins committed after baptism and not yet remitted directly through the keys of the Church nor acknowledged in individual confession, of which the person has knowledge after diligent examination of conscience.

Every bit of the this canon is important…

here are a few notes:

1. We are Obliged to confess in number and kind all grave sins (mortal sin…same thing)
2. It is both number and kind.
3. That were not directly remitted…that means directly confessed and absolved…when a mortal sin is forgotten (not hidden) it is “indirectly absolved” thus it still needs to be confessed “directly” in number and kind in the next confession (even though it was indirectly absolved)
4. and again there is further emphasis that they need to be confessed in an individual confession…not only absolved in an emergency without confession…or indirectly…

When I confessed murder and in my nervousness I forgot to say it was 5 murders…that which was not directly confessed, given a penance for and absolved was “indirectly absolved” …it still remains for me to submit it directly to the keys in confession for they have not yet been submitted directly.

So if someone unknowingly omits a mortal sin …or the number…no problem it was indirectly absolved…but was contrite etc and seeking to confess all their mortal sins but they still have the obligation (within reason…our memories can not serve us…etc) to confess them…in number and kind…(again those with scruples talk with your confessors…for this can be a source of scruples…)

In addition to my knowledge from study etc I also had occasion to discuss this very thing with a Priest who wrote a book for Priests on how to hear confessions.

Remember too …there can be exceptions…and of course if one does not remember the actual number one can use various approximations according to ones knowledge. Which could range from something like “around 10 times” to “I do not know …but it was many many” etc

It is important to make an honest confession of all mortal sins in number and kind… but it is not a memory test.

 

[TrueLight]

I would love Fr. David’s opinion on this.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I would really like a reference for the book to which you are referring.
Everything you have posted here, while it may be “true” in strictest sense,
it is not what any priest I have ever discussed this with has said.
And more than one of them are Doctors of Canon Law.

I understand that you are trying to help,
but I think that you are doing more to “misguide” people than actually help them.

Canon law…
snipped for spaceIn addition to my knowledge from study etc I also had occasion to discuss this very thing with a Priest who wrote a book for Priests on how to hear confessions.

Remember too …there can be exceptions…and of course if one does not remember the actual number one can use various approximations according to ones knowledge. Which could range from something like “around 10 times” to “I do not know …but it was many many” etc

It is important to make an honest confession of all mortal sins in number and kind… but it is not a memory test.

 

[Bookcat]

To the original poster:

Yes you are correct that one is obliged to confess the number of the mortal sins --Lust, murder 2x, adultery 3X…etc. (venial sins do not “need” to be confessed and if they are they do not need to be by number…)

If one forgets mortal sins…one mentions it in the next confession.

Now since you mention you struggle with scrupulosity – discuss this with your regular confessor. He should be able to direct you.

It can depend on your particular difficulties and the nature of what you forgot…as to what your next step is… (at times those with scrupulosity can be in a very different boat then those without such difficulties… and I add this too for all out there in a like boat…your confessor can guide you)

Regarding our need to confess in number and kind and if one forgets such …the obligation to mention in next confession if one remembers.

Catechism of Trent:

"Sins Forgotten

But should the confession seem defective, either because the penitent forgot some grievous sins, or because, although intent on confessing all his sins, he did not examine the recesses of his conscience with sufficient accuracy, he is not bound to repeat his confession. It will be sufficient, when he recollects the sins which he had forgotten, to confess them to a priest on a future occasion."

Catechism of Pope St Pius X:

Q: If a mortal sin, forgotten in confession, is afterwards remembered, are we bound to confess it in another confession?

A: If a mortal sin forgotten in confession is afterwards remembered we are certainly bound to confess it the next time we go to confession.

Baltimore Catechism:

Q. Is our confession worthy if, without our fault, we forget to confess a mortal sin?

A. If without our fault we forget to confess a mortal sin, our confession is worthy, and the sin is forgiven; but it must be told in confession if it again comes to our mind.

Prummer OP

“An incomplete confession (note he means here in terms of mortal sins forgotten) should be completed by the accusation of the sin”

Fr. Herbert Jone "Moral Theology) (Tan)

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

(one can find various references in works of moral theology or works on confession)

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1456 Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of Penance: "All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted by them in confession…

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI

1. Which sins must be confessed?

1456

All grave sins not yet confessed, which a careful examination of conscience brings to mind, must be brought to the sacrament of Penance. The confession of serious sins is the only ordinary way to obtain forgiveness.

Cardinal Ratzinger:

“At this point the Council can say that it is necessary iure divino (by divine law) to confess each and every mortal sin.”

Cong. Discipline of the Sacraments:

“The divine constitution of the Sacrament of Penance requires each penitent to confess to a priest all mortal sins…”

Fr. John Hardon (Catholic Dictionary): catholicreference.net/index.cfm?id=33610

see also for Canon Law and summary: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8710098&postcount=36

A bit from Jimmy Akin (Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers):

A reader writes:

I am aware that if one goes to confession and supplies the requisite contrition, then all sins which the person committed are absolved--provided that the person does not intentionally conceal any mortal sins.

Correct.

Also, I have been told by several priests that this means that if one remembers a mortal sin after confession, they should know that they are forgiven for it so long as they mention it the next time they go to confession.

Correct, though this should be formulated a little differently. You are forgiven if you meant to confess all your mortal sins and just forgot one. Having been forgiven of the one you forgot, you are still obligated to confess it the next time you go to confession. It’s not that your forgiveness of it is conditional on you adopting the intention to confess it next time. That sin has already been forgiven. It’s that you incur a new sin if you refuse to adopt the intention of confessing it. (jimmyakin.org/2006/09/a_reader_writes_1.html)

and a couple others:

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=611641&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=number&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=28&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ID+DESC&start_at=

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=594654&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=confession&pgnu=4&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=171&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ID+DESC&start_at=

Remember it is not a “memory text” there can be times when one simply does not know after one examines how many of a particular mortal sin one committed --especially if one has been away from the Church for a while…one can “approximate” if need be and certainly one ought not scruple in these things. Our memory may not be like that of “Spock”…

 

[Bookcat]

To the original poster:

Yes you are correct that one is obliged to confess the number of the mortal sins --Lust, murder 2x, adultery 3X…etc. (venial sins do not “need” to be confessed and if they are they do not need to be by number…)

If one forgets mortal sins…one mentions it in the next confession.

Now since you mention you struggle with scrupulosity – discuss this with your regular confessor. He should be able to direct you.

It can depend on your particular difficulties and the nature of what you forgot…as to what your next step is… (at times those with scrupulosity can be in a very different boat then those without such difficulties… and I add this too for all out there in a like boat…your confessor can guide you)

I again want to underline…if a reader is scrupulous or struggles to with scruples…have a regular confessor. If the question of “past sins” come up discuss the matter with him…do not scruple here. Often those with this difficulty can worry and fear needlessly about such. Often they might be advised by their confessor regarding past sins…for example: only confess it if it is both certain that it was a mortal sin and certain that they have not confessed it…

Regarding the need to confess in number and kind and if one forgets such …the obligation to mention in next confession if one remembers.

Catechism of Trent:

"Sins Forgotten

But should the confession seem defective, either because the penitent forgot some grievous sins, or because, although intent on confessing all his sins, he did not examine the recesses of his conscience with sufficient accuracy, he is not bound to repeat his confession. It will be sufficient, when he recollects the sins which he had forgotten, to confess them to a priest on a future occasion."

Catechism of Pope St Pius X:

Q: If a mortal sin, forgotten in confession, is afterwards remembered, are we bound to confess it in another confession?

A: If a mortal sin forgotten in confession is afterwards remembered we are certainly bound to confess it the next time we go to confession.

Baltimore Catechism:

Q. Is our confession worthy if, without our fault, we forget to confess a mortal sin?

A. If without our fault we forget to confess a mortal sin, our confession is worthy, and the sin is forgiven; but it must be told in confession if it again comes to our mind.

Prummer OP

“An incomplete confession (note he means here in terms of mortal sins forgotten) should be completed by the accusation of the sin”

Fr. Herbert Jone "Moral Theology) (Tan)

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

(one can find various references in works of moral theology or works on confession)

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1456 Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of Penance: "All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted by them in confession…

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI

1. Which sins must be confessed?

1456

All grave sins not yet confessed, which a careful examination of conscience brings to mind, must be brought to the sacrament of Penance. The confession of serious sins is the only ordinary way to obtain forgiveness.

Cardinal Ratzinger:

“At this point the Council can say that it is necessary iure divino (by divine law) to confess each and every mortal sin.”

Cong. Discipline of the Sacraments:

“The divine constitution of the Sacrament of Penance requires each penitent to confess to a priest all mortal sins…”

Fr. John Hardon (Catholic Dictionary): catholicreference.net/index.cfm?id=33610

see also for Canon Law and summary: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8710098&postcount=36

A bit from Jimmy Akin (Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers):

A reader writes:

I am aware that if one goes to confession and supplies the requisite contrition, then all sins which the person committed are absolved--provided that the person does not intentionally conceal any mortal sins.

Correct.

Also, I have been told by several priests that this means that if one remembers a mortal sin after confession, they should know that they are forgiven for it so long as they mention it the next time they go to confession.

Correct, though this should be formulated a little differently. You are forgiven if you meant to confess all your mortal sins and just forgot one. Having been forgiven of the one you forgot, you are still obligated to confess it the next time you go to confession. It’s not that your forgiveness of it is conditional on you adopting the intention to confess it next time. That sin has already been forgiven. It’s that you incur a new sin if you refuse to adopt the intention of confessing it. (jimmyakin.org/2006/09/a_reader_writes_1.html)

and a couple others:

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=611641&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=number&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=28&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ID+DESC&start_at=

David M. Gregson, Ph.D. ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=594654&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2010&Author=&Keyword=confession&pgnu=4&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=171&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ID+DESC&start_at=

Remember it is not a “memory test” there can be times when one simply does not know after one examines how many of a particular mortal sin one committed --especially if one has been away from the Church for a while…one can “approximate” if need be and certainly one ought not scruple in these things. Our memory may not be like that of “Spock”…