| | Is habitual sin recidivism? | | — Brian T. Mullady | | | Q:Would the constant confession of habitual sin constitute recidivism?
Ans: This is a classic question and has been answered well in the article in the New Catholic Encyclopedia of 1966 by Philip Mulhern, O.P. I refer the reader to that article, from which I will quote, but some points need to be clarified first.
The formation of the habit of sin can certainly result from repeated sins in such a way that the sinner not only does the deed but enjoys it. This would be the case in the intemperate as opposed to incontinent man, defined well by Aristotle. The incontinent man commits sin but does not have the habit of sin and so does not enjoy it. It creates a resistance in his character and he easily repents from his deed. The intemperate man, on the other hand, has so formed his character that he enjoys it. He repents with difficulty. One must also remember that moral habits like virtues and vices are not formed by mere frequency of acts, but by the force and inner freedom with which such an act is done. For example, with science, one hour of intense study is worth twenty half-hearted and distracted hours.
Many people are not malicious in their acts hut they are more victims of their lukewarm characters. They commit sins of weakness in which their passions are strong and in some ways overpower them. Some people have developed bad moral habits in youth through no fault of their own and they find it hard to break them. If these are sins of weakness, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear that moral responsibility can be affected so as to diminish sin. For example, regarding grave sexual sin: “To form an equitable judgement about the subject’s moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of |
| acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that can lessen, if not reduce to a minimum, moral responsibility.”
A recidivist is by definition a penitent who falls frequently into the same sin and makes no effort to avoid committing that sin. A recidivist may be a habitual sinner, but not always. What makes someone a recidivist is “the failure to make every effort to avoid a sin he has committed at least several times” (Mulhern, New Catholic Encyclopedia, “Recidivism”). As to absolution, the penitent’s present dispositions are essential, not the past or the future. If he shows a true sorrow and firm purpose of amendment, he should be absolved regardless of his success rate. “In such a case, if the sins are clearly sins of weakness, resulting from frailty, youth or temperament, and not sins of malice (which are due not so much to the vehemence of temptation as to an obstinacy of will) the penitent may be considered disposed for absolution” (Mulhern, “Recidivism”).
Generally, absolution should only be refused if it is clear to the confessor that the penitent only confessed as a matter of exterior form for some other purpose than seeking forgiveness. It is important to remember that the Sacrament is an exercise of the mercy of Christ and only a callous formalism would justify the denial of that mercy if sought. Generally the fact that a person has sought this mercy through confession shows his desire to amend even if he does not have the emotional or moral strength to carry it through, though not always. Denial or delay of absolution may occasion the person to abandon confession altogether, which would be most undesirable.
End of Article. | | |
|
