Catholic Confession and LDS Repentance Process

[Devobah]

Hi all!

I'm mainly doing this as a way to calm down. A coworker and I got in a heated discussion about Latter-Day Saint practices when it comes to this process. "Cult" was thrown around a lot and I just tried to be respectful but it didn't get rid of the pit in my heart.

A few days ago a friend of mine were discussing her dating life. She was talking about finding someone who is Catholic or Christian for dating, even though she isn't a practicing Catholic currently. She grew up in a mixed home (dad is Catholic and mom was (I think) non-denominational), and didn't grow up actively attending church.

I actually had to take her through some Catholic church history (I won't go through specifics here but for my Catholic or Orthodox posters I believe I did you justice) and some of the differences between Catholics and Orthodox. Somehow we got on the subject of confession and she wanted to talk to me about the differences between the two. I believe there are some gaps in my knowledge regarding this process, but I got through the basics fairly I believe.

I think one of the things that I appreciate about the Catholic Confession (or Sacrament of Penance) is the simple thing of having someone saying outright that you are forgiven of the sins that you confessed to. In the LDS repentance process, at least in my case, there isn't really a point where someone really says this to you. You work through these things on your timing and have to come to terms with these sins and the process on your own. I think I have a flawed mindset of this because I'm very goal oriented. I like my steps. I go from step one to step ten and the goal is completed. I'm a bit more logical in that way. 

This is what LDS Bot had to say when I asked it to compare the two:

Great question! Let's dive into some differences between Catholic confession and the LDS repentance process.

Catholic Confession

Sacrament of Penance: In Catholicism, confession is a sacrament called the Sacrament of Penance. It's one of the seven sacraments and a way to receive God's grace.

Role of a Priest: Confession involves speaking to a priest who acts as an intermediary. The priest provides absolution, which is the forgiveness of sins in God's name.

Frequency: Catholics are encouraged to confess their sins regularly, often before receiving the Eucharist.

Ritual Elements: Confession typically includes an examination of conscience, contrition, confessing sins, receiving penance, and absolution.

LDS Repentance Process

Personal Process: In the Latter-day Saint faith, repentance is a personal process between the individual and God. It does not involve confession to a priest but may involve talking to a bishop for serious transgressions.

Steps of Repentance: The process includes recognizing the sin, feeling godly sorrow, confessing to God and, when necessary, to the offended party, making restitution, and forsaking the sin.

Ongoing Process: Repentance is considered a lifelong, continuous process. Members are encouraged to examine their lives regularly and make necessary changes.

No Formal Sacrament: Unlike Catholics, Latter-day Saints do not have a formal sacrament of confession. Instead, repentance is integrated into their daily lives and church activities.

Both processes are designed to help individuals come closer to God by seeking forgiveness and striving to live a more righteous life. They reflect the theological and ritual differences in how each faith understands the process of forgiveness and reconciliation with God.

What are some misconceptions that you have had about the repentance process? For my Catholic posters, what are some things about the Sacrament of Penance that you find most interesting or that I have misrepresented in any way?

 

 

[MiserereNobis]

From a purely psychological point of view, it is nice (as you say) to have closure. You go in to the confessional with guilt, and emerge (rebirth imagery) clean as snow.

The human psyche craves ritual.

1 hour ago, Devobah said:

It does not involve confession to a priest but may involve talking to a bishop for serious transgressions.

I did have a question about this from the LDS bot. What's the difference between confessing and talking to? Doesn't the bishop assign penance (like not receiving the sacrament)?

[MustardSeed]

2 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

did have a question about this from the LDS bot. What's the difference between confessing and talking to? Doesn't the bishop assign penance (like not receiving the sacrament)?

I think it’s essentially the same, just called different names.  We don’t say we “need to confess to bishop” we say we “need to talk to bishop”.  But we are in essence confessing our sin. 
It seems to me LDS are expected to “confess” to God all our sins but just “confess” our sexual or W.O.W. sins to Bishop, but Catholics confess all the sins to priest? 

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

 

I did have a question about this from the LDS bot. What's the difference between confessing and talking to? Doesn't the bishop assign penance (like not receiving the sacrament)?

I don't know how most members refer to it, but in lessons and talks it's almost always referred to as confessing sins to the Bishop.  Because that's basically what has to happen.

How it was explained to me was that confession to your bishop is only necessary when the sin could endanger your standing in the church.  This is because bishops are considered a 'judge in Israel' and one of their specific duties has to do with the worthiness of the members of their congregation and their relationship with the church.  They are also there to counsel and help someone through the repentance process of course, and that is probably the 'talking to' part of the equation you asked about.  They can also instruct someone not to take the sacrament or not to go to the temple, etc., but not as an act of penance.  It's not an outward sign of repentance, it's more a part of working towards a change of heart while repentance is happening.  

Bishops do not declare forgiveness.  Forgiveness is between the person and Christ.  In the confessional process the bishop's role is to declare/determine when someone is in good standing in the eyes of the church. Someone's relationship with the church is not the same as their relationship with Christ.  Bishops (and sometimes stake presidents) are in charge of judging one but not the other.

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, Devobah said:

.....................................

What are some misconceptions that you have had about the repentance process? For my Catholic posters, what are some things about the Sacrament of Penance that you find most interesting or that I have misrepresented in any way?

What happens in Washington State if a RC priest or LDS bishop refuses to break the secrecy of confession?  The RC Church has announced that any priest who breaks that seal will be excommunicated.  What about LDS bishops?

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

What happens in Washington State if a RC priest or LDS bishop refuses to break the secrecy of confession?  The RC Church has announced that any priest who breaks that seal will be excommunicated.  What about LDS bishops?

Excommunication for breaking the confessional seal has a LONG history in Catholicism, documented around 1000 years. There are no exceptions to the rule (life, law, etc). The excommunication is automatic (it happens the moment the priest violates the seal) and can only be lifted by the Pope.

[Calm]

8 hours ago, Devobah said:

In the LDS repentance process, at least in my case, there isn't really a point where someone really says this to you. You work through these things on your timing and have to come to terms with these sins and the process on your own. I think I have a flawed mindset of this because I'm very goal oriented. I like my steps. I go from step one to step ten and the goal is completed. I'm a bit more logical in that way. 

I think I could have benefited from the idea there is a point where we can say a particular effort to repent is finished. As is, it seems to me to be open at least until death because of the idea if one ever repeats an old sin, one hadn’t really repented.  The goal of never doing a sin again shifts the focus in a less productive way because I think it may increase self doubt since there is a lot of attention to the past rather than present and future,  I would prefer to see that in cases where a significant amount of time has past as a new and separate episode in most cases rather than a continuation because it feels like it’s been a burden all along and therefore can never be technically put down until death because I prefer spending energy on stuff I am changing rather than on worrying about change isn’t going to stick.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

seems to me LDS are expected to “confess” to God all our sins but just “confess” our sexual or W.O.W. sins

Those do seem like the most common ones talked about, but I think we include anything criminal or truly abusive.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Excommunication for breaking the confessional seal has a LONG history in Catholicism, documented around 1000 years. There are no exceptions to the rule (life, law, etc). The excommunication is automatic (it happens the moment the priest violates the seal) and can only be lifted by the Pope.

The RC Church made a special announcement about this in response to a new law passed in Washington State requiring priests to break that seal.  I am well aware of the seal of the confessional.  What I am asking is what will LDS bishops do?

[Amulek]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The RC Church made a special announcement about this in response to a new law passed in Washington State requiring priests to break that seal.  I am well aware of the seal of the confessional.  What I am asking is what will LDS bishops do?

The same thing we do in other jurisdictions - follow the law of the land. 

For whatever reason, the Church doesn't regard priest/penitent communications to be sacrosanct the way our Catholic brethren do. 

 

[Devobah]

22 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

It seems to me LDS are expected to “confess” to God all our sins but just “confess” our sexual or W.O.W. sins to Bishop, but Catholics confess all the sins to priest? 

 

14 hours ago, Calm said:

Those do seem like the most common ones talked about, but I think we include anything criminal or truly abusive.

I think it's good to really try and separate what needs to be "confessed" to a bishop and what needs to be confessed to God. Angry at my wife? Confess to God. Abusive to wife? There's a lot more that needs to be done to fix the mindset, so we go to the Bishop to get help with that. (Before people come at me, yes I know it's not a perfect system and there are many holes that need to be addressed when it comes to how it is handled and reported. But that's not the subject.) Having never been to a Catholic confession, I don't think that it's very much a laundry list you take to the priest of every impure thought, every time you were mad or frustrated, and every time you said a bad word, as much as is something like when we would meet with a bishop of a ward. You select one thing, maybe two, and confess that. I'm sure there are other ways or means to help with these things as well. Perhaps @MiserereNobis can tell us. Are there any programs that the Catholic Church specifically sets up in order to deal with things like addiction or abuse, or is there a partnership with another organization?

[Devobah]

22 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

From a purely psychological point of view, it is nice (as you say) to have closure. You go in to the confessional with guilt, and emerge (rebirth imagery) clean as snow.

The human psyche craves ritual.

I mentioned it above that I am a very goal oriented person. I'm also slightly autistic, so cues are hard for me to pick up on. I can't really say that I've felt the Spirit more than a handful times in my life. I can say that I have recognized the Spirit though. I liken it to a person searching for a particular radio station. Lots of words, maybe some quotes, until I settle on one that makes the most sense to my situation.

I just like to have something tangible (I can't really think of another way to describe it currently) that tells me that the goal has been completed.

[Tony uk]

23 hours ago, Devobah said:

Hi all!

I'm mainly doing this as a way to calm down. A coworker and I got in a heated discussion about Latter-Day Saint practices when it comes to this process. "Cult" was thrown around a lot and I just tried to be respectful but it didn't get rid of the pit in my heart.

A few days ago a friend of mine were discussing her dating life. She was talking about finding someone who is Catholic or Christian for dating, even though she isn't a practicing Catholic currently. She grew up in a mixed home (dad is Catholic and mom was (I think) non-denominational), and didn't grow up actively attending church.

I actually had to take her through some Catholic church history (I won't go through specifics here but for my Catholic or Orthodox posters I believe I did you justice) and some of the differences between Catholics and Orthodox. Somehow we got on the subject of confession and she wanted to talk to me about the differences between the two. I believe there are some gaps in my knowledge regarding this process, but I got through the basics fairly I believe.

I think one of the things that I appreciate about the Catholic Confession (or Sacrament of Penance) is the simple thing of having someone saying outright that you are forgiven of the sins that you confessed to. In the LDS repentance process, at least in my case, there isn't really a point where someone really says this to you. You work through these things on your timing and have to come to terms with these sins and the process on your own. I think I have a flawed mindset of this because I'm very goal oriented. I like my steps. I go from step one to step ten and the goal is completed. I'm a bit more logical in that way. 

This is what LDS Bot had to say when I asked it to compare the two:

Great question! Let's dive into some differences between Catholic confession and the LDS repentance process.

Catholic Confession

Sacrament of Penance: In Catholicism, confession is a sacrament called the Sacrament of Penance. It's one of the seven sacraments and a way to receive God's grace.

Role of a Priest: Confession involves speaking to a priest who acts as an intermediary. The priest provides absolution, which is the forgiveness of sins in God's name.

Frequency: Catholics are encouraged to confess their sins regularly, often before receiving the Eucharist.

Ritual Elements: Confession typically includes an examination of conscience, contrition, confessing sins, receiving penance, and absolution.

LDS Repentance Process

Personal Process: In the Latter-day Saint faith, repentance is a personal process between the individual and God. It does not involve confession to a priest but may involve talking to a bishop for serious transgressions.

Steps of Repentance: The process includes recognizing the sin, feeling godly sorrow, confessing to God and, when necessary, to the offended party, making restitution, and forsaking the sin.

Ongoing Process: Repentance is considered a lifelong, continuous process. Members are encouraged to examine their lives regularly and make necessary changes.

No Formal Sacrament: Unlike Catholics, Latter-day Saints do not have a formal sacrament of confession. Instead, repentance is integrated into their daily lives and church activities.

Both processes are designed to help individuals come closer to God by seeking forgiveness and striving to live a more righteous life. They reflect the theological and ritual differences in how each faith understands the process of forgiveness and reconciliation with God.

What are some misconceptions that you have had about the repentance process? For my Catholic posters, what are some things about the Sacrament of Penance that you find most interesting or that I have misrepresented in any way?

 

 

Devobah, well done. You have done a better job of explaining the Sacrament of Penance, than most of the Catholics that I have come into contact with. My own learning on the matter, has RC. Nowadays, the person in confession, confesses to the priest, where appropriate, the priest discussed with the penitent, ways of overcoming certain types of behaviour of concern. The priest absolves the penitent, and asks the penitent to say a few prayers as way of showing forgiveness. Mine, is a fairly basic run through of the matter. 

[Devobah]

1 hour ago, Tony uk said:

Devobah, well done. You have done a better job of explaining the Sacrament of Penance, than most of the Catholics that I have come into contact with. My own learning on the matter, has RC. Nowadays, the person in confession, confesses to the priest, where appropriate, the priest discussed with the penitent, ways of overcoming certain types of behaviour of concern. The priest absolves the penitent, and asks the penitent to say a few prayers as way of showing forgiveness. Mine, is a fairly basic run through of the matter. 

As much as I appreciate the acknowledgement, I think the majority of the thanks goes to the AI that I used to tell me the differences between the Sacrament of Penance and the LDS Repentance process. I'm still learning. I appreciate the encouragement though.

[Robert F. Smith]

13 hours ago, Amulek said:

The same thing we do in other jurisdictions - follow the law of the land. 

For whatever reason, the Church doesn't regard priest/penitent communications to be sacrosanct the way our Catholic brethren do. 

So. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says: "The Church’s policy is to obey the law" (Church Handbook 32.4.5).  No exceptions.

That negates the confidentiality of the LDS confessional -- whenever secular law so dictates.  Truly??

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

So. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says: "The Church’s policy is to obey the law" (Church Handbook 32.4.5).  No exceptions.

That negates the confidentiality of the LDS confessional -- whenever secular law so dictates.  Truly??

In the US, my guess is if it gets to the Supreme Court and mandated reporting is upheld over religious freedom, we will see the confessional change from being confidential for that one particular action, but that until then constitutionality or other legal challenge will continue….as is obeying the law of the land n my view since the law of the land allows for such challenges when people see conflicts between laws.

Does anyone know of any cases outside the US where LDS bishops have been challenged on not reporting or know of them obeying the law and reporting?

Edited May 15, 2025 by Calm

[Calm]

12 hours ago, Devobah said:

just like to have something tangible (I can't really think of another way to describe it currently) that tells me that the goal has been completed.

I am very good at second guessing myself in most situations and even in cases where I solidly believe something, I can intellectually accept I could be very wrong (everyone is fallible and our memories are pretty easily manipulated imo, then there is the issue of never having complete information about things we make judgments on).  So something tangible, someone else being involved to just underline it for me would be helpful.

Edited May 15, 2025 by Calm

[Devobah]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

I am very good at second guessing myself in most situations and even in cases where I solidly believe something, I can intellectually accept I could be very wrong (everyone is fallible and our memories are pretty easily manipulated imo, then there is the issue of never having complete information about things we make judgments on).  So something tangible, someone else being involved to just underline it for me would be helpful.

The first time I went through a faith crisis, I found things that intellectually satisfied me, but the ache in the heart didn't go away. I was really concerned about that for a bit. It took lots of prayer, meditation, and TONS of breathing to help get that down to a reasonable normalcy.

[Amulek]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

So. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says: "The Church’s policy is to obey the law" (Church Handbook 32.4.5).  No exceptions.

That negates the confidentiality of the LDS confessional -- whenever secular law so dictates.  Truly??

That's how it is in Texas, and I haven't seen any signs that the Church is interested in fighting it, so I assume they'll do the same thing in Washington. 

Personally, I don't really care for the wishy-washy approach the Church has taken on this. I feel like they should take a principled stand one way or the other: either decide that (1) the welfare of children supersedes the the sanctity of the confessional and have all bishops behave as mandatory reporters always, or (2) stand with the Catholics and say that confessional is sacrosanct. And then use the Church's resources to support those who follow through on that moral position - regardless of what the law may be.

 

[Robert F. Smith]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

In the US, my guess is if it gets to the Supreme Court and mandated reporting is upheld over religious freedom, we will see the confessional change from being confidential for that one particular action, but that until then constitutionality or other legal challenge will continue….as is obeying the law of the land n my view since the law of the land allows for such challenges when people see conflicts between laws.

Does anyone know of any cases outside the US where LDS bishops have been challenged on not reporting or know of them obeying the law and reporting?

LDS bishops are going to be treated the same as any other clergy in foreign counties.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priest–penitent_privilege .

Does denial of confidentiality result in an immediate lowering of rates of confession?

This matter has been discussed here in the past, 

 .

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, Amulek said:

That's how it is in Texas, and I haven't seen any signs that the Church is interested in fighting it, so I assume they'll do the same thing in Washington. 

Personally, I don't really care for the wishy-washy approach the Church has taken on this. I feel like they should take a principled stand one way or the other: either decide that (1) the welfare of children supersedes the the sanctity of the confessional and have all bishops behave as mandatory reporters always, or (2) stand with the Catholics and say that confessional is sacrosanct. And then use the Church's resources to support those who follow through on that moral position - regardless of what the law may be.

Yes, I agree.  Moreover, would we want to apply these same rules to spousal privilege, attorney-client privilege, and to doctor-patient privilege?

[3DOP]

Catholic confession is ordinarily anonymous. The priest never asks the sinner to identify themselves. Never. I have wondered at times if priests recognize my voice. I suppose they think they do sometimes, but how is that "evidence" supposed to work in court? The priest testifies in court: "A person whose voice reminded me of Rory McKenzie's confessed to (fill in the blank)." Really? I can get charged in Washington for child abuse because somebody else sounded like me? The legislation out of my home state shows a true ignorance about how the Sacrament is ordinarily administered.

It is the Lord Jesus Christ who forgives the sinner through the priest. The Lord knows who I am! But the priest never knows. Maybe Washington State should prosecute the Lord for not revealing the identity of those He forgives?

[3DOP]

On 5/13/2025 at 11:48 AM, Devobah said:

Hi all!

I'm mainly doing this as a way to calm down. A coworker and I got in a heated discussion about Latter-Day Saint practices when it comes to this process. "Cult" was thrown around a lot and I just tried to be respectful but it didn't get rid of the pit in my heart.

A few days ago a friend of mine were discussing her dating life. She was talking about finding someone who is Catholic or Christian for dating, even though she isn't a practicing Catholic currently. She grew up in a mixed home (dad is Catholic and mom was (I think) non-denominational), and didn't grow up actively attending church.

I actually had to take her through some Catholic church history (I won't go through specifics here but for my Catholic or Orthodox posters I believe I did you justice) and some of the differences between Catholics and Orthodox. Somehow we got on the subject of confession and she wanted to talk to me about the differences between the two. I believe there are some gaps in my knowledge regarding this process, but I got through the basics fairly I believe.

I think one of the things that I appreciate about the Catholic Confession (or Sacrament of Penance) is the simple thing of having someone saying outright that you are forgiven of the sins that you confessed to. In the LDS repentance process, at least in my case, there isn't really a point where someone really says this to you. You work through these things on your timing and have to come to terms with these sins and the process on your own. I think I have a flawed mindset of this because I'm very goal oriented. I like my steps. I go from step one to step ten and the goal is completed. I'm a bit more logical in that way. 

This is what LDS Bot had to say when I asked it to compare the two:

Great question! Let's dive into some differences between Catholic confession and the LDS repentance process.

Catholic Confession

Sacrament of Penance: In Catholicism, confession is a sacrament called the Sacrament of Penance. It's one of the seven sacraments and a way to receive God's grace.

Role of a Priest: Confession involves speaking to a priest who acts as an intermediary. The priest provides absolution, which is the forgiveness of sins in God's name.

Frequency: Catholics are encouraged to confess their sins regularly, often before receiving the Eucharist.

Ritual Elements: Confession typically includes an examination of conscience, contrition, confessing sins, receiving penance, and absolution.

LDS Repentance Process

Personal Process: In the Latter-day Saint faith, repentance is a personal process between the individual and God. It does not involve confession to a priest but may involve talking to a bishop for serious transgressions.

Steps of Repentance: The process includes recognizing the sin, feeling godly sorrow, confessing to God and, when necessary, to the offended party, making restitution, and forsaking the sin.

Ongoing Process: Repentance is considered a lifelong, continuous process. Members are encouraged to examine their lives regularly and make necessary changes.

No Formal Sacrament: Unlike Catholics, Latter-day Saints do not have a formal sacrament of confession. Instead, repentance is integrated into their daily lives and church activities.

Both processes are designed to help individuals come closer to God by seeking forgiveness and striving to live a more righteous life. They reflect the theological and ritual differences in how each faith understands the process of forgiveness and reconciliation with God.

What are some misconceptions that you have had about the repentance process? For my Catholic posters, what are some things about the Sacrament of Penance that you find most interesting or that I have misrepresented in any way?

 

 

About frequency...the Church teaches that confession of sins that are what we call venial...that do not entail the entire loss of grace or the love of God in the soul, help us to move forward in perfection. We should be sorry for the least trespass against the will of God. 

One cannot assume that those in the line for confession are guilty of grave sins. Rather, they might be trying to gain victories over a loose tongue or of entertaining thoughts about things they would never do. 

And yes, the Sacrament is also for those who want to overcome habitual serious sins, like child abuse. The priest is expected to use his judgment if he perceives the person he is hearing is not really sorry, and lacks any desire to amend his ways. Absolution cannot be given if that is what the priest is hearing.

I have never heard a confession except my own, but why would one who is caught up in terrible habits come to confession, except that he had faith, sincerely desiring forgiveness, and grace to overcome those evil habits? A part of the reason I became Catholic thirty years ago, was that I read a pamphlet by a priest who claimed that he never knew of a sinful habit that could not be overcome by frequent confession.

[halconero]

I've discussed this elsewhere, but part of this stems, in my opinion, from our lack of a universal theory of atonement. I'm not suggesting we lack doctrines of the atonement, but we don't always organize them in relation to each other and ourselves in an X → Y → Z fashion. Put more simply, what problem(s) is the atonement trying to solve? When did it solve them? What fundamentally changed about ourselves individually and the world around us the day Christ condescended (our Catholic and Orthodox friends might prefer the term "incarnated"), on that Friday afternoon he was crucified, or that Easter Sunday when he rose?

My understanding is that Catholic theology on the atonement is primarily grounded in a framework that first developed under Anselm of Canterbury and Bernard of Clairvaux, and later Doctors of the Church like Thomas Aquinas, and is commonly referred to as Satisfaction Theory. My external understanding (looking outside-in) is that sin dishonours are relationship to God. God himself in Christ, suffers for us and more-than restores this honour to God. It is not so much that Christ was punished in our stead, but that Christ acted with perfect obedience and honour towards the Father, including in his suffering. Given Anselm and Bernard's medieval worldview, my own personal comparison is that of King Arthur, Sir Lancelot, and Sir Galahad. Where Lancelot dishonoured his relationship to Arthur, Sir Galahad acted above and beyond with perfect love and duty. His obedience was such that it not only restored a proper relation to God, but provided an abundant surplus that transform us from not only being innocent, but saintly, should we yoke ourselves with Christ.*

Considering this, I personally think it lends itself quite well to the practice of confession. The priest, as proxy, affirms the forgiveness of sin, or the restoration of honour between God and the penitent, because we are able to conceive of how Christ's perfect love and obedience completes the quest necessary to restore this relationship. That isn't a criticism on my part, or an accusation of oversimplification. I likewise don't think a satisfaction model of the atonement is incongruous with other conceptualizations. It's just a subjective observation on my part.

By contrast, I think there is a sort of subconscious question on the part of Latter-day Saints with regards to what we want or hope the atonement is doing for us. Is it releasing us from the long-term consequences of sin? Are we being healed from the consequences of our own actions or that of others? What exactly is sin doing to us and what does forgiveness look like? I actually don't think there is anything prohibiting bishops—morally or procedurally—from affirming that someone is forgiven, but there may be some hesitancy in doing so in order to not elevate ourselves to the level of God or assume a particular individual outcome for an individual given the varying nature of sin.

The ironic part, if my idea is true, is that we routinely act vicariously for God in applying the atonement to others, both living and dead, through the administration of ordinances. I remember watching a training video when I was a worker in the temple that described ordinances as "portals of grace," and couldn't help but reflect on my own gratefulness for being able to serve as the conduit to others seeking to access this grace. It's not that I was a gatekeeper, but rather, playing the role of opening doors to people who were seeking to enter anyways. In that sense, there are times where it may be entirely appropriate for a bishop working with someone to affirm their engagement with Christ, explain how they've worked with various mechanisms of grace in their lives, and confirm, given their journey, that they are indeed forgiven.

*Please feel welcome to correct me, @3DOP and @MiserereNobis. I'm limited but adverse to understanding Catholic teaching on the atonement as I understand it, so the last thing I want to do is mischaracterize teachings on this matter.

[The Nehor]

I have mostly soured on the whole mandatory reporting thing. We are focusing too much on detection and surveillance when effort would be better spent hitting at many of the root causes. Also mandatory reporting with penalties for not reporting lead to a surplus of reports. Mandatory reporters have to report to avoid penalties even if that report is dubious so resources are wasted. The sad truth is that reporting a problem does not mean it gets fixed. In some cases it gets worse.

We are doing it wrong.