Holier people than us are more-deeply sorry for even venial sins and imperfections than we are, but also they have less vanity about bringing sins clearly and succinctly to confession. However I think what they also have is the most important thing (in comparison to which the aforegoing does not matt…
Holier people than us are more-deeply sorry for even venial sins and imperfections than we are, but also they have less vanity about bringing sins clearly and succinctly to confession. However I think what they also have is the most important thing (in comparison to which the aforegoing does not matter), which is knowledge of and habitual use of *better cheat codes*, e.g. *demanding* assistance from the Holy Spirit or from Jesus, in full confidence of receiving it, fully *willing* to receive it (because sometimes the assistance is painful on arrival; we are after all talking about sins and Christ died for even the very little ones), and exhibiting to Him one's interior destitution (I have nothing, I cannot do this, You have to do it, You have to help me) which attracts the outpouring of grace like a vacuum being classically abhorred by nature in some science demo. St Teresa recommends (elsewhere for something else) "determined determination" and that would be a fine thing to ask for too (I am thinking about non-confession situations e.g. therapy-adjacent-"coaching", or therapy properly-speaking, where I have a sentence that I want to say because I have just realized something, and am just trying to physically be able to say it without sobbing and have to hold up a hand like "wait for it". The spirit is willing but the flesh is having a moment.)
Oooh yes the vanity part for sure but what I actually meant was they are holier so their shame is more properly ordered. As in there are objectively much more serious sins than masturbation or some other unchaste decisions so we SHOULD be more embarrassed of those in that sense. As in Dante’s circles of hell in which lust related activities are the outer most circle and the truly bad is much further in.
But yes less vanity in general would mean less self surprise at sin in the first place!
So far as I know, there are no canonical crimes regarding a priest absolving a person with whom he plotted and committed a murder or theft. Or even a blasphemy. But there is for sins against the sixth commandment. Euphemisms are a different layer of protection than law, but they're still a layer of protection.
I expect part of the reason is more difficult to say sexual sins explicitly, is because it renders a person more vulnerable *to the priest*, should the priest be the sort of person who advises gays to keep to one partner, or to consider the seminary, or who tries to get women to fornicate with him. This is especially the case if it is really hard for the person to struggle against sexual sins. A Saint might confess sins of the same type, but they are less vulnerable to them. People who have fewer wounds, either by never having them, or by having them healed, tend to be less vulnerable to spiritual abuse. Their confidence is not strictly related to a lack of vanity.
I was thinking about some of this too. I have never experienced even a whiff of unprofessional behavior from a priest anytime, including in the confessional, but I am still (maybe especially as a woman) incredibly aware that I am in a small, confined space with a man talking about very private things, even if a wall separates us. I'm sure that affects my manner of speaking, especially if I need to confess sins against chastity.
I have never experienced such behavior either. But I and a friend have both gone to Confession with a priest who was later removed from ministry and laicized for seeking sexual relationships with women and who had a reputation for very providing long, conversational Confessions.
Even if most priests are trustworthy, you can never find out if one isn't until afterwards. I can't imagine how that could fail to affect our way of speaking.
> Maybe holier people are not this way
Holier people than us are more-deeply sorry for even venial sins and imperfections than we are, but also they have less vanity about bringing sins clearly and succinctly to confession. However I think what they also have is the most important thing (in comparison to which the aforegoing does not matter), which is knowledge of and habitual use of *better cheat codes*, e.g. *demanding* assistance from the Holy Spirit or from Jesus, in full confidence of receiving it, fully *willing* to receive it (because sometimes the assistance is painful on arrival; we are after all talking about sins and Christ died for even the very little ones), and exhibiting to Him one's interior destitution (I have nothing, I cannot do this, You have to do it, You have to help me) which attracts the outpouring of grace like a vacuum being classically abhorred by nature in some science demo. St Teresa recommends (elsewhere for something else) "determined determination" and that would be a fine thing to ask for too (I am thinking about non-confession situations e.g. therapy-adjacent-"coaching", or therapy properly-speaking, where I have a sentence that I want to say because I have just realized something, and am just trying to physically be able to say it without sobbing and have to hold up a hand like "wait for it". The spirit is willing but the flesh is having a moment.)
Oooh yes the vanity part for sure but what I actually meant was they are holier so their shame is more properly ordered. As in there are objectively much more serious sins than masturbation or some other unchaste decisions so we SHOULD be more embarrassed of those in that sense. As in Dante’s circles of hell in which lust related activities are the outer most circle and the truly bad is much further in.
But yes less vanity in general would mean less self surprise at sin in the first place!
So far as I know, there are no canonical crimes regarding a priest absolving a person with whom he plotted and committed a murder or theft. Or even a blasphemy. But there is for sins against the sixth commandment. Euphemisms are a different layer of protection than law, but they're still a layer of protection.
I expect part of the reason is more difficult to say sexual sins explicitly, is because it renders a person more vulnerable *to the priest*, should the priest be the sort of person who advises gays to keep to one partner, or to consider the seminary, or who tries to get women to fornicate with him. This is especially the case if it is really hard for the person to struggle against sexual sins. A Saint might confess sins of the same type, but they are less vulnerable to them. People who have fewer wounds, either by never having them, or by having them healed, tend to be less vulnerable to spiritual abuse. Their confidence is not strictly related to a lack of vanity.
I was thinking about some of this too. I have never experienced even a whiff of unprofessional behavior from a priest anytime, including in the confessional, but I am still (maybe especially as a woman) incredibly aware that I am in a small, confined space with a man talking about very private things, even if a wall separates us. I'm sure that affects my manner of speaking, especially if I need to confess sins against chastity.
I have never experienced such behavior either. But I and a friend have both gone to Confession with a priest who was later removed from ministry and laicized for seeking sexual relationships with women and who had a reputation for very providing long, conversational Confessions.
Even if most priests are trustworthy, you can never find out if one isn't until afterwards. I can't imagine how that could fail to affect our way of speaking.