Confession question

If you have a sin that you are doubtful that it is mortal or not, but you just go ahead and confess it AS MORTAL.....is this a wrong thing to do?

I have that Moral Theology Manual that Rasha mentioned on a thread (the one by Fr. Jone) and it doesn't really cover this. It does however say that you can make a bad confession if you are questioned by the priest and then you exaggerate. But it says ignorance on the part of the penitent can excuse culpability in most cases.

Also, there is another sin I confessed which I was not absolutely sure I committed, but since I had other mortal sins that I committed that same night, I assumed it was and planned to just confess it as mortal. However, when I got to confession I started to present it as "I think I consented to such and such a thing" but then in mid sentence I changed it to "I am pretty sure I consented to such and such a thing......" Did I make a bad confession by doing this?

Would it be okay if I went to communion at daily Mass the next few days until I can get to a good priest to clarify this?

I am kind of in a dilemma about this. Please advise. I don't have very good priests that are knowledgeable in moral theology in my area, nor are they very traditional, especially in regards to Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. Even the TLM priests are not that great here.

We may be very opinionated on this forum, but spiritual advisers, we are not.

What transpires between you and your confessor (and our Lord), and in matters of the conscience, are not ours to judge.

The only thing I will say is that it is this layman's unqualified and worthless opinion that you are being over-scrupulous; but if you have legitimate doubts, then call or see a priest. I think I know what he will tell you, but I am not about to step into an area where I don't belong.

Seek the guidance of an ordained confessor and be done with it; that's my advice. If you don't trust the advise of your local priests, that's also a problem only you can resolve - though I would find such scruples very troubling.

I know a former SSPX priest who has an independent chapel in the area, but one may see him on any given Saturday afternoon in the confessional line of my parish Church. He confesses his sins to an ordained representative of our Lord possessing valid jurisdiction, he is forgiven, and is on his way. No small talk; no scruples, no questioning of the priest's training in moral theology. And yes, this same Independent priest who does no have valid jurisdiction hears confession before his regularly scheduled Sunday Mass in his illicit chapel and even prints this information in his bulletin.

I know this is a bit off topic, but somewhat relevant; I still find it a bit startling that SSPX types, for example, believe that they have some God-given right to a Spiritual Adviser in the confessional in the form of their illicitly ordained priest who has no jurisdiction in such matters; rather than going to confession to a priest who has valid jurisdiction, even if he is not disposed towards the SSPX traditions.

In such cases, the forgiving and cleansing action of our Lord does not depend on the orthodoxy or the competency in moral theology of the licitly ordained priest who possesses valid jurisdiction; what matters is that he was "sent" by Christ's true Vicar for just such a purpose.

Do I understand this correctly?

A former SSPX priest who has his own independent chapel goes to confession on Saturday to a priest of the diocese he is in and who has faculties, but on Sunday (or whenever) the former SSPX priest who does not have the faculties to absolve you from your sins hears confessions in his independent chapel.

Do I have it straight?

If so, please tell me (if you know) why the former SSPX priest doesn't direct his "parishioners" to the priest he himself goes to so that his "parishioners" can be assured that their sins have been absolved?

I am not an SSPX-er. I only go to priests who are in full communion with Rome be they Novus Ordo, Motu Propio priests, or Byzantines.

Yes, you understood that correctly.

The reason that he does not suggest to his parishioners that they go to confession to a priest with valid jurisdiction is because, he would say (and would be correct), he is obligated to provide the sacrament to those who approach him to have their sins forgiven. In such cases, supplied jurisdiction (supplied to the penitent) kicks in based on the ignorance of the penitence who assumes that the priest has "been sent", by virtue of his ordination, licit or not, to perform such priestly actions.

Of course, when an Independent priest advertises his availability for confession before mass, is it any wonder that his congregation remains in blissful ignorance of the fact that the priest does not possess valid jurisdiction?

This is the independent's version of "don't ask, don't tell".

I think "independent priests" have an obligation to explain the "rules" to their congregation, and if they still approach him for the sacrament, that up to them. This is an opinion shared by Fr. Paul Trinchard, S.T.L., whose opinion on the New Mass, I reject.

QuoPrimum wrote:I am not an SSPX-er. I only go to priests who are in full communion with Rome be they Novus Ordo, Motu Propio priests, or Byzantines.

I didn't think so, but it would not have mattered. Please don't get me wrong; I make no "judgments" whatsoever with respect to those who attend SSPX chapels. I did so myself for some time and attended the Independent chapel I mentioned earlier.

I would be lying if I told you that I don't miss the illicit smells and bells and traditional sermons. Liturgically, SSPX priests are some of the best, and I even attended the Mass of Bishop Fellay - and I was duly impressed with the example he leads in saying the Mass with such reverence and Liturgical precsion.

But I had to decide what was more important: Could I continue to justify an imperfect unity with the Holy Father (even if I know one can attend SSPX chapels in good conscience), vs. having only an occasional opportunity to attend an authorized TLM, while offering up as a true penance the goings on at a typical Sunday mass at my parish Church (which is probably not as bad as others, all things considered)?

My decision was mine, and I do not presume to judge others who do not share my convictions.

I think "independent priests" have an obligation to explain the "rules" to their congregation, and if they still approach him for the sacrament, that up to them.

Would the "Church supply" in that case?

Lourdes wrote:

I think "independent priests" have an obligation to explain the "rules" to their congregation, and if they still approach him for the sacrament, that up to them.

Would the "Church supply" in that case?

I don't know. I think most traditional priests would say yes. I suppose it would depend in large part on the disposition of the penitent.