When to go to Confession

  • Thread starter Thread starter expectthebest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

expectthebest

Guest
I’ve always been taught that if one commits a mortal sin, they should go to confession as soon as possible. But, what does this mean? Does this mean the next Saturday when confession is regularly scheduled? Does it mean we should make a special appointment? Does it mean we should wake the Priest up in the middle of the night? Does it mean basically when we get around to it? What exactly does it mean?
 
Probably the next time confession is offered. If you can not make it, then probably make an appointment.
 
JMJ

My protocol is instant act of contrition, and as soon as the office is open i call the priest and confess. I live very close to the Shrine of Divine Mercy so they have confessions twice per day.

Trick is though, NOT to commit a mortal sin.
 
The rule of thumb is ‘as soon as practicable’. If you’re in a place where confession is only scheduled on a weekly basis, I’d probably see if I could get an appointment sooner.

Praise be to God I live in the city where daily confession times are available - makes it easier to fall into the sin of presumption though!
 
I’ve always been taught that if one commits a mortal sin, they should go to confession as soon as possible. But, what does this mean? Does this mean the next Saturday when confession is regularly scheduled? Does it mean we should make a special appointment? Does it mean we should wake the Priest up in the middle of the night? Does it mean basically when we get around to it? What exactly does it mean?
I guess it depends upon whether you plan to roll the dice to see if you get hit by a bus or suffer some other unforeseen fatal even before then. 🤷

Most priests are available for confession PDQ if you call and ask for it and you can almost always catch them after a daily Mass, so I think I’d get busy dealing with that ASAP.

I mean think about it. Would anyone want to risk finding themselves in hell just because they were lackadaisical about getting to confession with a mortal sin? http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/jump4.gif http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/emo-epicfail.png
 
I guess it depends upon whether you plan to roll the dice to see if you get hit by a bus or suffer some other unforeseen fatal even before then. 🤷

Most priests are available for confession PDQ if you call and ask for it and you can almost always catch them after a daily Mass, so I think I’d get busy dealing with that ASAP.

I mean think about it. Would anyone want to risk finding themselves in hell just because they were lackadaisical about getting to confession with a mortal sin? http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/jump4.gif http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/emo-epicfail.png
Is it your opinion that God would not take into account the intention of going to Confession?
 
Catechism:
1452 When it arises from a love by which God is loved above all else, contrition is called “perfect” (contrition of charity). Such contrition remits venial sins; it also obtains forgiveness of mortal sins if it includes the firm resolution to have recourse to sacramental confession as soon as possible.51
 
It seems odd to me that God, in all his love, would not at least give someone the chance to Sacremental Confession before death if he new the person had the intention of going. I also wonder why, if things are this strict, why the Church wouln’t make Confession available in some way 24 hours a day.

Can someone point me to the Scripture supporting that God will only forgive a mortal sin in the absence of Sacremental Confession if there is perfect contrition?
 
I am no expert, but have been a Catholic for a long time. Here are my thoughts anyway.

1 Make a good Act of Contrition

2 Resolve and stay out of Mortal Sin.

3 Go to Confession ASAP. In my case, many available churches here, but with time constraints (work and daily duties), usually means the next Saturday afternoon.

I agree that if that can’t happen, make an appointment and get er done…
 
It seems odd to me that God, in all his love, would not at least give someone the chance to Sacremental Confession before death if he new the person had the intention of going. I also wonder why, if things are this strict, why the Church wouln’t make Confession available in some way 24 hours a day.

Can someone point me to the Scripture supporting that God will only forgive a mortal sin in the absence of Sacremental Confession if there is perfect contrition?
And for all we know, maybe He does. Maybe He keeps some of us alive a few hours or days longer than we’re meant to have so as we can receive our last rites or what have you. And anyone who really needs confession can probably, by calling their local priest, obtain it PDQ. Whether it’s 2am or not.

As for forgiveness absent perfect contrition - that would be the same thing as a parent forgiving their child knowing that the child is sorry only about the punishment and doesn’t really accept that what they did was itself wrong. Most parents wouldn’t accept that as sufficient basis for forgiveness, would they? We should be greatful that God, in His mercy, accepts imperfect contrition in the confessional, rather than expecting that he would grant this enormous concession at other times.

The scriptural basis of the procedure lies in two things a) the Church’s power to bind and loose, and b) Christ’s promise that the Holy Spirit would guide His church in all its teaching. This includes its teaching on sin and forgiveness.
 
And for all we know, maybe He does. Maybe He keeps some of us alive a few hours or days longer than we’re meant to have so as we can receive our last rites or what have you. And anyone who really needs confession can probably, by calling their local priest, obtain it PDQ. Whether it’s 2am or not.

As for forgiveness absent perfect contrition - that would be the same thing as a parent forgiving their child knowing that the child is sorry only about the punishment and doesn’t really accept that what they did was itself wrong. Most parents wouldn’t accept that as sufficient basis for forgiveness, would they? We should be greatful that God, in His mercy, accepts imperfect contrition in the confessional, rather than expecting that he would grant this enormous concession at other times.

The scriptural basis of the procedure lies in two things a) the Church’s power to bind and loose, and b) Christ’s promise that the Holy Spirit would guide His church in all its teaching. This includes its teaching on sin and forgiveness.
Just because contrition is not 100% perfect does not by a long shot mean that person isn’t sorry for what they have done. One can be both sorry for hurting God and sorry for fear of punishment. It’s my understanding that perfect contrition is only valid when all contrition is from hurting God without any though of one’s own fate. But, contrition certainly does not have to be totally one or the other for a person to be legitimally contrite. I’m sure there are many times that my children are sorry because they got in trouble and that they hurt their parents. They don’t have to have perfect contrition to gain my forgiveness. I don’t know of any parent that feels that way in a strict sense.

As far as the Scripture is concerned, are you saying that rules surrounding perfect contrition, Sacremental Confession and the forgiveness of mortal sin come soley from the power to bind and loose and is not directly Scriptural? If this is the case, it would be the Church that made these rules and these rules are not specifcally found in Scripture. Is this correct?
 
Just because contrition is not 100% perfect does not by a long shot mean that person isn’t sorry for what they have done. One can be both sorry for hurting God and sorry for fear of punishment. It’s my understanding that perfect contrition is only valid when all contrition is from hurting God without any though of one’s own fate. But, contrition certainly does not have to be totally one or the other for a person to be legitimally contrite. I’m sure there are many times that my children are sorry because they got in trouble and that they hurt their parents. They don’t have to have perfect contrition to gain my forgiveness. I don’t know of any parent that feels that way in a strict sense.

As far as the Scripture is concerned, are you saying that rules surrounding perfect contrition, Sacremental Confession and the forgiveness of mortal sin come soley from the power to bind and loose and is not directly Scriptural? If this is the case, it would be the Church that made these rules and these rules are not specifcally found in Scripture. Is this correct?
I don’t think it’s that strict - even the traditional Act of Perfect Contrition is phrased including other reasons for contrition - it just states that above all other reasons you are sorry because you have offended God. It’s discouraged from relying on Perfect Contrition because it’s so uncertain - there’s no reliable way of knowing whether your contrition is perfect or not.

And the rule (that the Church can bind and loose, at least on matters of faith and morals which includes the forgiveness of sins, and that when they do so their acts are infallible - protected and guided by the Holy Spirit and expressive of Truth) IS scriptural.
 
I don’t think it’s that strict - even the traditional Act of Perfect Contrition is phrased including other reasons for contrition - it just states that above all other reasons you are sorry because you have offended God. It’s discouraged from relying on Perfect Contrition because it’s so uncertain - there’s no reliable way of knowing whether your contrition is perfect or not.

And the rule (that the Church can bind and loose, at least on matters of faith and morals which includes the forgiveness of sins, and that when they do so their acts are infallible - protected and guided by the Holy Spirit and expressive of Truth) IS scriptural.
I understand about the binding and loosing in Scripture. I guess what I’m asking is about the decisions made to put these rules in place. Are the rules themselves based in Scripture or are they simply the decision of the Church? If it’s the rules are the decision of the Church, then the Church could change the rules. Correct?
 
Is it your opinion that God would not take into account the intention of going to Confession?
I can’t speak for God. I can say that I would not trust myself to wait to get to confession and risk getting killed somehow when I had the chance to go to confession.

It’s not that hard at all, so I don’t see the problem.

I’m human. If I gravely sin…I get to confession. It’s simply that important to me. 🤷
 
I understand about the binding and loosing in Scripture. I guess what I’m asking is about the decisions made to put these rules in place. Are the rules themselves based in Scripture or are they simply the decision of the Church? If it’s the rules are the decision of the Church, then the Church could change the rules. Correct?
The Church’s teaching on sin and contrition and their effects is NOT a changeable ‘rule’ - it’s a dogmatic teaching, binding and infallible, beause it’s a matter of faith and morals. It goes to our beliefs about the very nature of sin and forgiveness, and is not just a procedural matter.

Their stipulation that Mass had to be said in Latin, for example, was a mere disciplinary rule - faith and morals (core beliefs) are not affected by the language Mass is said in. Or their change from public to private confession as a matter of convenience - that’s a mere disciplinary rule, because faith and morals (core beliefs) are not affected by the manner of confessing. It’s a subtle distinction sometimes.
 
JMJ

My protocol is instant act of contrition, and as soon as the office is open i call the priest and confess. I live very close to the Shrine of Divine Mercy so they have confessions twice per day.

Trick is though, NOT to commit a mortal sin.
Ditto the OLAM Shrine in Hanceville. We are soooo blessed here, on the buckle of the Baptist Bible Belt 😃

DaveBj
 
The Church’s teaching on sin and contrition and their effects is NOT a changeable ‘rule’ - it’s a dogmatic teaching, binding and infallible, beause it’s a matter of faith and morals. It goes to our beliefs about the very nature of sin and forgiveness, and is not just a procedural matter.

Their stipulation that Mass had to be said in Latin, for example, was a mere disciplinary rule - faith and morals (core beliefs) are not affected by the language Mass is said in. Or their change from public to private confession as a matter of convenience - that’s a mere disciplinary rule, because faith and morals (core beliefs) are not affected by the manner of confessing. It’s a subtle distinction sometimes.
Ok, thanks. Just so I’m clear, Church teaching on what is and what is not a mortal sin and the teaching that mortal sins may not be forgiven without confession (unless perfect contrition is there) and venial sins may be forgiven without Confession are rules that were in place at the very beginning of the Church and have never changed or evolved. Is this a correct statement?
 
Ok, thanks. Just so I’m clear, Church teaching on what is and what is not a mortal sin and the teaching that mortal sins may not be forgiven without confession (unless perfect contrition is there) and venial sins may be forgiven without Confession are rules that were in place at the very beginning of the Church and have never changed or evolved. Is this a correct statement?
Ditch the word ‘rules’ altogether and you’d be closer.

After all, the Church didn’t make ‘rules’ that God is Trinity, that Jesus is both fully man and fully divine, or that certain books are inspired scripture. What it did was teach Divine knowledge and Divine truths about these things that were revealed to it by the Holy Spirit.

Now - have all these divine truths been taught since the beginning of the Church and never changed? They HAVE always been truth, no mistake about that - God HAS always been Trinity, Jesus WAS fully human and fully divine, and certain writings ARE inspired scripture. Whether they were always explicitly taught - well, we don’t have complete records from all who taught, so we don’t really know. Some of them certainly were.

The important thing is that they always WERE true, even during the first two or three centuries when there was debate about the Trinity, about whether Jesus really was both divine and human, or about which books should be included in scripture (which there still is today, of course).

These things didn’t BECOME true only when they were pronounced as dogma at the Councils of Chalcedon, Nicea, Hippo and Carthage.

So in relation to sin - the truth that the Church teaches today about sin has always been true, and certainly is implicit in one of John’s epistles, which distinguishes clearly been sins that are ‘unto death’ (mortal) and sin which is NOT ‘unto death’ (venial). Even if all of it hasn’t always been explicitly taught or formalised as dogma, it is true and to be believed. The nature of sin doesn’t change, although our understanding of it, and God’s revelation of it to us, can. Just as His revelation of Himself changed from OT monotheism (since Christ had not yet been incarnated) to Trinity in the NT.
 
All the more reason to keep the First Five Saturdays devotion:

"I promise to assist at the hour of death with the graces necessary for salvation all those who, in order to make reparation to me, on the First Saturday of five successive months, go to confession, receive Holy Communion, say five decades of the Rosary, and keep me company for a quarter of an hour, meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary.”

Then at least you know even if you have committed a mortal sin you’ll have Our Lady to help you either find confession or make a perfect act of contrition or whatever she needs to do to give you a chance to make it to Heaven.

Of course, you’ll have to choose to work with those graces. But at least they’ll be there for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top