What is the effect of a confession if there is no intention to cease the sin?

[SimmieKay]

Hello, I had a question about confession. (I’m presenting it as a hypothetical, but it is based on a situation in my family, although I’ve changed some of the non-pertinent details for the sake of privacy.) Suppose a man A is validly married in the Catholic Church to a woman B, and then man A commits adultery with woman C. A divorces B, and then marries C in a non-Catholic ceremony; A and B’s marriage has never been annulled, so in the Church’s eyes it is still valid, while in the Church’s eyes the marriage of A and C is invalid.

Now suppose A starts to feel a bit guilty about this situation, so he goes to a priest and confesses his sin of adultery. However, in his mind, the sin of adultery was purely in the past - while A and B were married. Even though A is Catholic, he doesn’t accept the Church’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage, so he believes his marriage with B is over, and hence he is no longer committing adultery with C. In the Church’s view, A and B are still married, thus so as long as A continues to carry on his relationship with C he is still committing adultery with C. A has no intention whatsoever of ceasing his adulterous relationship with C; so, while he claims to be repentant for some of the older past sin (prior to the civil divorce), he claims no repentance for his more recent past sin (since the civil divorce), and he actively plans to sin more in the same way in the future.

So my question is: what spiritual effect, if any, has A’s confession of the sin of adultery had? Is it valid or invalid? Effective or ineffective?

You might think that this is no one but A’s business, but A is now telling others that his sin of adultery has been forgiven by God and the Church through the sacrament of confession, and that therefore others he hurt ought to forgive him too. I think that, while we ought to forgive the repentant, there is no requirement to forgive the unrepentant, and A is not genuinely repentant of his sin of adultery, thus he should not be forgiven at this time; if, in the future, he makes a genuine change in the direction of his life away from the sin of adultery, then he ought be forgiven. Am I right in thinking this?

Thank you
Simmie

 

[InNomineDomini]

Well, there’s a massive question here about Mr. A’s **knowledge **of the sin involved in continuing to engage in the sexual act with C, and therefore, there may be a mitigating factor regarding his culpability.

On the other hand, he may be deliberately disagreeing with the Church regarding her teachings on marriage, simply because he doesn’t want to deal with certain consequences.

Here we’re entering into “I-can-read-your-heart” territory, and that’s a no-no.

Moreover, there is a question regarding the validity of his marriage to B. Maybe Mr. A wasn’t faithful because he didn’t intend to be faithful … like, ever.

Some might say, and I think they can be faithful to the Church and say it, that we should only forgive those who repent, since otherwise, we’re confirming them in their sin. (God has mercy on the repentant, and on those who genuinely would do what God wants them to, but who, without culpability, are ignorant.)

But if it were me, I would assume that this man did try to repent, and that he just doesn’t know what he’s doing, and that, perhaps, he’s being blinded by emotions. I would also definitely pray for him; and yes, if I had been hurt by him, I would try my best to forgive him, even if he isn’t fully repentant.

Moreover, I would really try to steer him, if possible, in the direction of pursuing an annulment. Again, maybe his marriage to B wasn’t valid; and maybe fear that it was is the only that’s preventing him from a deeper conversion.

But as I say, I would pray for him, because clearly, he’s going to need an incredible amount of grace to get out of this situation, and to put God first, and to take up his cross and carry it.

 

[RitasKid]

It looks like you’re getting into a discussion where the terms are being redefined.
“Therefore others he hurt ought to forgive him too…”
Wow! This kind of thinking is incredibly selfish. Consider this. Even if the confession had been valid…So I burn down a house. Repent. Confess and am forgiven… I really am not able to make reparation,rebuild the house or pay for it. God’s forgiven me.
So I have the right to expect the owner of the house to be my bestie? In what universe?

 

[Gorgias]

Even though A is Catholic, he doesn’t accept the Church’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage, so he believes his marriage with B is over, and hence he is no longer committing adultery with C.

So, in other words, he knows what the Church’s teaching is, but he just doesn’t believe it’s true? You said that he doesn’t accept the teaching, not that he doesn’t know it, right?

So my question is: what spiritual effect, if any, has A’s confession of the sin of adultery had? Is it valid or invalid? Effective or ineffective?

On one hand, we might hope that the confessor he went to, when he heard the confession of the sin of adultery, would have asked, “have you stopped having relations with that woman?” (Then, the followup answer would have ferreted out the situation.) But, even if the confessor didn’t understand the situation, there’s one thing that’s true: you can certainly fool a priest, but you can’t fool God. :nope:

A is now telling others that his sin of adultery has been forgiven by God and the Church through the sacrament of confession

Perhaps these others might consider whether they could ask him: “if you went back to the priest, and told him that you’re still having sex with this woman, would the priest tell you that you’re committing adultery?” In other words, when put on the spot to answer the question (and not squirm out of giving an answer), would he admit that the Church sees it as adultery? If so, then it’s not honest for him to say “the Church forgave me.”

 

[Vico]

Hello, I had a question about confession. (I’m presenting it as a hypothetical, but it is based on a situation in my family, although I’ve changed some of the non-pertinent details for the sake of privacy.) Suppose a man A is validly married in the Catholic Church to a woman B, and then man A commits adultery with woman C. A divorces B, and then marries C in a non-Catholic ceremony; A and B’s marriage has never been annulled, so in the Church’s eyes it is still valid, while in the Church’s eyes the marriage of A and C is invalid.

Now suppose A starts to feel a bit guilty about this situation, so he goes to a priest and confesses his sin of adultery. However, in his mind, the sin of adultery was purely in the past - while A and B were married. Even though A is Catholic, he doesn’t accept the Church’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage, so he believes his marriage with B is over, and hence he is no longer committing adultery with C. In the Church’s view, A and B are still married, thus so as long as A continues to carry on his relationship with C he is still committing adultery with C. A has no intention whatsoever of ceasing his adulterous relationship with C; so, while he claims to be repentant for some of the older past sin (prior to the civil divorce), he claims no repentance for his more recent past sin (since the civil divorce), and he actively plans to sin more in the same way in the future.

So my question is: what spiritual effect, if any, has A’s confession of the sin of adultery had? Is it valid or invalid? Effective or ineffective?

You might think that this is no one but A’s business, but A is now telling others that his sin of adultery has been forgiven by God and the Church through the sacrament of confession, and that therefore others he hurt ought to forgive him too. I think that, while we ought to forgive the repentant, there is no requirement to forgive the unrepentant, and A is not genuinely repentant of his sin of adultery, thus he should not be forgiven at this time; if, in the future, he makes a genuine change in the direction of his life away from the sin of adultery, then he ought be forgiven. Am I right in thinking this?

Thank you
Simmie

So he married once with approval of the Catholic Church so he know about marriage and what makes it valid then from pre-cana. Therefore he could not be considered ignorant of what constitutes marriage when he invalidly attempted the second marriage. No repentence for a mortal sin means no absolution, and no sanctifying grace. We can know that it is objective sin, but can we know that it is mortal?

 

[porthos11]

Hello, I had a question about confession. (I’m presenting it as a hypothetical, but it is based on a situation in my family, although I’ve changed some of the non-pertinent details for the sake of privacy.) Suppose a man A is validly married in the Catholic Church to a woman B, and then man A commits adultery with woman C. A divorces B, and then marries C in a non-Catholic ceremony; A and B’s marriage has never been annulled, so in the Church’s eyes it is still valid, while in the Church’s eyes the marriage of A and C is invalid.

Now suppose A starts to feel a bit guilty about this situation, so he goes to a priest and confesses his sin of adultery. However, in his mind, the sin of adultery was purely in the past - while A and B were married. Even though A is Catholic, he doesn’t accept the Church’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage, so he believes his marriage with B is over, and hence he is no longer committing adultery with C. In the Church’s view, A and B are still married, thus so as long as A continues to carry on his relationship with C he is still committing adultery with C. A has no intention whatsoever of ceasing his adulterous relationship with C; so, while he claims to be repentant for some of the older past sin (prior to the civil divorce), he claims no repentance for his more recent past sin (since the civil divorce), and he actively plans to sin more in the same way in the future.

So my question is: what spiritual effect, if any, has A’s confession of the sin of adultery had? Is it valid or invalid? Effective or ineffective?

You might think that this is no one but A’s business, but A is now telling others that his sin of adultery has been forgiven by God and the Church through the sacrament of confession, and that therefore others he hurt ought to forgive him too. I think that, while we ought to forgive the repentant, there is no requirement to forgive the unrepentant, and A is not genuinely repentant of his sin of adultery, thus he should not be forgiven at this time; if, in the future, he makes a genuine change in the direction of his life away from the sin of adultery, then he ought be forgiven. Am I right in thinking this?

Thank you
Simmie

If the confessor, through proper questioning, determines the story as you stated it and knows all these as fact, he would be obligated to withhold absolution if he is unable to elicit a sincere intention on the part of the penitent.

If he doesn’t know all the facts and the penitent somehow manages to fool him into believing he is repentant even though he isn’t and Father absolves him, the lack of firm resolve to not sin again renders the absolution invalid, and he incurs the additional sin of sacrilege.

 

[SimmieKay]

Thank you to those who responded, your thoughts were helpful.

I would like to apologise for leaving things for so long without thanking you. This is an emotional matter for me, it makes me angry and upset, and so after making that post I tried to forget about the issue I was asking about, hence I did not reply further.