|
Post by homeschooldad on May 17, 2021 0:25:02 GMT
As noted in a previous post, I made a long-overdue confession today. I shall not get into what was confessed --- let's just say it was pretty much my besetting sin, that cur of a dog that nips at my heels on a daily basis, rarely mortal, and having nothing whatsoever to do with the Sixth or Ninth Commandments. I now have strength to attack that besetting area of sin.
At the end of my confession, the priest asked me two questions about two different species of sin. (Again, just to be clear, neither of these involved the Sixth or Ninth Commandment.) One of the species of sin, no problem, that's not my thing. The other species of sin --- and likewise, we are not talking about anything mortal here --- yep, it's something I struggle with. He gave me the courage to win the struggle.
I only mention this because some Catholics are deeply offended that the priest would ask questions about things that, obviously, he has some reason to suspect are "problem areas", but that the penitent didn't bring up. I'm not offended in the least. In fact, I was very pleased. I'd like to see priests do this more. If a priest has reason to suspect, he wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't ask. TBH, I find objection to this, to be kind of "snowflakey".
I understand Padre Pio did this kind of thing, and I would assume St-Jean Vianney did too. I call that being a good confessor.
Put another way, flip it around --- "even if a priest suspects that there is some area of sin that the penitent didn't bring up, he should not ask about it, because... [fill in the blank] ". And why would this be?
Thoughts?
|
|