There Can Be No Confession For Public Sinners

Catholicism is logical. It is a coherent set of rules which fit into each other. They fit so, that if you try to manipulate one of the rules you soon discover this has a domino effect and other rules are affected, creating greater and greater damage.

The Church has always maintained that one who lives in public sin cannot be admitted to the sacrament of confession. The reason is obvious: the Sacrament is not an automatic dispenser of absolution; on the contrary, repentance and firm purpose of amendment are required.

The Church rules are logical. They are merciful, but not dumb. They aren't made for Jesuits, but for Catholics. It being utterly ridiculous that a public sinner may obtain an absolution presupposing a firm purpose of amendment that goes on for exactly the five seconds necessary to get out of the confessional, and then simply goes home to keep living in public sin the Church has always states that, as they say in Italy, here nobody is stupid: first you put an end to the public scandal, then and only then you approach the confessional to obtain absolution for your still not absolved sins of adultery and public scandal.

Nor can any sensible Catholic think even for one second that a person dead to grace (this is what being in mortal sin is) would need, or have any right to ask, that he be absolved from other mortal sins even as he chooses to remains in mortal sin anyway.

It's not a point system. It's not that a major sinner may think he can “improve his mortal sin score” by getting rid of some as he keeps accepting others. To be in mortal sin is to be dead to grace. Dead is dead, and there is no state of being “less dead” because some of the sins are – in hypothesis – absolved. Therefore, there is not only no need at all to have the public adulterer “confess other sins”, but this would be even counterproductive as there is no way this sinner would not go out of the confessional thinking either “absolved is absolved; therefore, I am now in the state of grace” or “I have my mortal sin counts down to one; hey, it could be much worse”. Then the question would pose itself how can a person dead to grace, and who chooses to remain dead to grace, obtain the grace of sincere repentance. Similarly the other question would pose itself on how the priest could, in hypothesis, absolve such a sinner. “Ego the absolvo”, but no communion? What absolution it is, one that leaves the penitent in mortal sin? How can a priest absolve anyone of any sin, who chooses to remain dead to grace?

A person in mortal sin is separated from Christ. The Chuch has always – charitably, and therefore firmly – maintained that such a person has no business trying to go around the point, and must be reminded at all times that when one is in mortal sin there is no fluffing around, and there only one thing to do: put an end to the state of mortal sin. Every other solution would not help the sinner to abandon his sinfulness in the least; on the contrary, it would reinforce him in his deluded idea that he is “almost all right”.

The public sinner must be excluded from communion. He must actually also be excluded from social life, and treated like a pariah in his own environment. He is a public sinner: not only bent for hell himself, but uncaring of the fact his scandal helps Satan to get other souls, too.

There is no way of making a tip-tap dance around this. Public sinner, in mortal sin, dead to grace, and bent for hell. The enforcement of such basic concepts, both on a sacramental and social level, provides the best chance for the sinner to see the error of his way and repent. Every false “acceptance” (and much more so: tampering with the sacraments in any way, shape or form) makes the work of the devil.

Mortal sin and public scandal? No confession unit the scandal has ceased. This is how the Church has always dealt with the matter when Truth came before niceness.



Posted on April 19, 2016, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. Public sinners can very well approach the confessional. A good priest can offer sound instruction to help amend their lives. Whether they get absolution or not is another matter.

    The public shaming bit won’t work in most parts of the western world today where concubinage and bastardy are the norm.

    • No. I have it from safe sources (extremely famous Catholic blog) that the priest must refuse to hear the confession. This is also what the Church has traditionally done with public sinners.

      However, everyone can talk to a priest, of course, and ask him what he should do.

  2. You put the matter clearly and concisely yourself. Thank you. However, quite apart from the festering sore of the last two years of Synods, followed by the tedium of AL to give scandal to the Church, we have suffered for some years the public and shameless reception of Holy Communion by unrepentant politicians. Those who support abortion, changes to the legal definition of marriage, and now using the law to remove longstanding safeguards of segregated bathrooms and changing facilities.Those who now promote gender delusions among the mentally ill, to the danger of everyone, but especially children. Card. Wuerl and the other bishops who collude in (even mandate) this practice, themselves give great public scandal to Catholics. He Who commanded “Do not give what is holy to dogs” is Himself betrayed by these hierarchs and delivered literally into the hands of those who are doing the devil’s work in corrupting the world.

  3. Thank you for your vigilance in pointing out the daily absurdities. As if we are to be comforted that the Austrian Cardinal S. meant the sacrament of Penance and not Holy Eucharist in his tract. Wicked men yanking our chains like demented sadists. I know my neck is maggot infested by their depravity.

  1. Pingback: Sex, Lies and Videotape – non veni pacem

  2. Pingback: Running Afoul Of The Lex Armaticus | The Deus Ex Machina Blog

%d bloggers like this: