REVIEW: The new iPhone app for confession – useful but flawed

TwitterAbout a million people have written to me about the new “confession” app for the iPhone.  Well… not a million, but a lot.

I am all for anything that gets people to go to confession.  But let’s be clear about something:

The iPhone app is for preparing to go to confession.  It is not a substitute for going to confession.

The app costs $1.99 in the iTunes app store.  It has an imprimatur from Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne – South Bend.

The app store says that it was developed by Fr. Thomas Weinandy, OFM, the Exec. Dirpaector of the Secretariate for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices for the USCCB and Fr. Dan Scheidt, pastor of Queen of Peace Catholic Church in Mishawaka, Indiana.

WDTPRS applauds their effort.

We have to face facts.  As a Church we have collectively dropped the ball when it comes to the Sacrament of Penance or Reconciliation.  Call it what you want, people aren’t going.

If you, dear reader, have not been to confession for a while – for whatever reason, including laziness, fear, confusion about what to do, maybe a priest was mean, you don’t think you’ve sinned (which I seriously doubt in most cases) – get off your backside an GO!  For the love of God, GO TO CONFESSION!

Now that I’ve had my little rant, let’s look at this app for the iPhone.

There are two major flaws in this app, which I will indicate down the line.

You have to create a user and password.  I wonder how secure that is were someone to get your phone and hack it.

iphone app confession

In your profile you include your state in life and date of last confession.  I suppose that if you don’t know it, you guess and put in a date.

iphone app confession

Then you move to your examination of conscience.

There are broad categories.

iphone app confession

Perhaps they needed a category for Responsibilities to Self.

Under each broad category you are given questions about sins.

You check the boxes of the relevant sins.  As you look at these shots of the screen, do you notice anything missing?

iphone app confession

You can create your own categories.

iphone app confession

I see they did not shy away from including sexual sins.

iphone app confession

It seems not to be overly politically correct.

iphone app confession

When you are doing with your examination of conscience, you are directed to make your confession.

THIS IS NOT A SUBSTITUTION FOR CONFESSION.

It leads you step by step through what you ought to say.

This could be useful for those who haven’t been to confession… and there are quite a few who, as children, were not required to make their confession before 1st Communion and, to this day, have never gone.   Or they haven’t gone since.  But there is a real problem in the app.

iphone app confession

After using this a couple times, you should be able to skip this.  Right?

Also, the app does not indicate that you really should tell the priest your state in life as you are beginning.  That should be added to the next version.

In trying out the app, I just checked the top sin in each category to see what would turn up.

So, you are ready to make your confession.  You are given your consolidated list of things you checked.  But something is still missing.

iphone app confession

There is NO INDICATION TO CONFESS THE NUMBER OF TIMES you committed the sin.  You are never informed that you must confess the number and not just the kind.

This is a serious flaw in this app that must be corrected.

It gives you an Act of Contrition.

iphone app confession

I like the older Act better.

But wait! You can set your own default version of an Act of Contrition under the Prayers tab.

iphone app confession


Notice that they included Latin!

I can set this other Act as the default.  Very nice.

iphone app confession

And also under that tab there are some handy prayer texts.  This could be useful if the priest tells you to say a Memorare, for example.  But Catholics ought to have these memorized too.

iphone app confession

Concluding.  There is something missing here.

There is no mention of the penance you will receive and the obligation of the penance as a necessary part of the sacrament.  You should be instructed to listen carefully for the penance and to be able to understand and remember it (so that you can perform it).

iphone app confession

Then a quote from Scripture popped up.  Nice.

iphone app confession

To see what would happen, I changed myself into a single twenty-something male.

I got a different structure for an examination of conscience based on the 10 Commandments.  I don’t know if this is connected to the profile of the user or if it is random.

iphone app confession

I am glad they did not avoid the sin of homosexual activity.

iphone app confession

They still include a couple of the categories I saw under the other examination.

iphone app confession

VOTE FOR WDTPRSIf you leave blank the last time since you were at confession, you are prompted.   This is good.  Many people just launch in without saying when the last time was.   Apparently the app remembers the date for next time.

iphone app confession

A different quote popped up this time.  I don’t know if they are tailored to the user profile or random.

iphone app confession

All in all, it is useful.

But there are flaws.

In a next version, I think the very first thing that the user should see is a message that this is NOT a substitute for confession.  This is only a tool to help make a good confession.

They must must must adjust this so that people are informed that they must must must confess sins in kind (the sort of sin) and number (how many times).  This is a deep flaw in this app.

There is no indication in the app about a distinction of venial and mortal sins.  I guess you can’t include everything.  But maybe in a future version they can add a section, along with the Prayers section, which discusses more in depth what this sacrament is.  Perhaps they could include, for example, the section from the Catechism of the Catholic Church about the sacrament.

The app is good, but it needs some additions in order to be very good.

UPDATE 2057 GMT:

One of the developers chimed in in the combox, below.   He is a stand up guy for doing so.

Fr. Z,
As one of the developers, thank you so much for your review. We want this app to be not just good, but very good. We have made notes of all of your suggestions and we will be including them in our next version. If you have any other suggestions or questions, please let me know. We really appreciate the review.

I hope participants here will give thoughtful comments.  You might make a difference.

UPDATE 2143 GMT:

An alert commentator, below, reported that you cannot set up a profile as a female and chose “Priest” as your vocation.

Take that wymynpryst wannabes out there!

iphone app confession

UPDATE 9 Feb 2053:

The aforementioned developer contributed this comment, below.

Fr. Z,
I just want to give you an update. I have submitted an update to the app (apple still has not reviewed it yet, so you won’t see it yet). I couldn’t implement all of the changes you suggested yet because some of them will require changes to the database structure and logic, but we will get them implemented. In response to Fr. Lombardi’s comments, I added a bit of text to the first page of the confession page on the bottom:
“This app is intended to be used during the Sacrament of Penance with a Catholic priest only. This is not a substitute for a valid confession.”
I reviewed the text with our parish priest before submitting the update. I’ve seen a few of the other comments on here and I’ll reply when I get a chance. Thanks for helping us to make this app better.

WDTPRS KUDOS.

And who needs Fr. Lombardi when you can get it from WDTPRS (and common sense)?

Posted in REVIEWS, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged , ,
46 Comments

QUAERITUR: folded chasuble

folded chasubleFrom a reader:

Yesterday, a 75-year old monsignor asked me if I’d ever seen a chasuble folded in front.   I replied, No, only in the back. At TLM ordinations.

He said he’d seen chasubles folded on the front once, back at the seminary he attended in the 1950’s, but didn’t remember why they were folded that way.

Would you know?

Before the reforms of the liturgy back in the 1950’s there was a vestment called the folded chasuble, planeta plicata.  It was used in penitential times.  They were either cut very short in the front, or they were folded and button up or tied.  They were worn by the deacon and subdeacon.   I think they were still used in some rites such as ordinations for some time after.

The folded chasuble also developed into the “broad stole”, which was the folded chasuble folded a lot more and worn as a band diagonally across the chest.  You can see it to the right of the circled folded chasuble, above.

Posted in ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged ,
10 Comments

How to cook for a Super Bowl Party

Did you see the Cowgirls contribution to Super Bowl Food?

I said it before, I’ll say it again.

If I ever get to that part of Oklahoma, I would like to meet this gal.  She is an artist.

Posted in Just Too Cool | Tagged
11 Comments

There are converts, reverts and unverts… deverts?

Via Creative Minority Report:

Novelist Anne Rice is working out some of her issues very publicly and attacking the Church.

Carl Olson writes:

Novelist and Unvert Anne Rice (who is also a Notable Catholic Commentator, according to Nicholas Kristof) was recently interviewed by her homosexual son, Christopher, and spoke at length about the Catholic Church. The MetroWeekly has transcribed some of “highlights” (and also has the videos); here are a few:

•”I am completely confident that gays are winning the battle for equal rights in our country. And that the battle for same-sex marriage will be won. And that Don’t Ask, Don’t tell is going down.”
•”I hadn’t been a Catholic for 38 years, so I began to study it. I began to live it…. And I came to the conclusion 12 years later that it was not a fine religion, that it was dishonorable, that it was dishonest, that it’s theology was largely sophistry… and that it was basically a church that told lies. And that it was for me, for my conscientious standpoint, an immoral church; and I had to leave it.”  <font color=”#ff0000″><b>[No one who lives her Catholic faith leaves the Church.  I don’t know what she was living or thought she was living.]</b></font>
•”They’re very eager to blame the liberals, but the liberals have had no power in the Church all these years.  <font color=”#ff0000″><b>[She must be taking some sort of hallucinogenic drug.]</b></font> And 75% of the priesthood and the hierarchy are gay.”  <font color=”#ff0000″><b>[B as in B.  S as in S.  That’s just a pure lie.]</b></font>

Since announcing to great fanfare last summer that she was ditching the Church, Rice has revealed that she possesses a wealth of emotional baggage and a poverty of knowledge about Church history, practice, and theology

Posted in The Drill | Tagged
25 Comments

QUAERITUR: How can I leave the Catholic Church?

From a reader:

I joined the Church through RCIA about five years ago. My experience as a Catholic has been pretty unsatisfactory and I’m beginning to wonder if I haven’t made a mistake. If I do decide that I’m not a Catholic after all should I renounce my new faith? Is there a formal process to do so or should I just walk away? (It seems more honest and honorable if I were to formally pursue a separation).

I suppose you would have to make a formal act of apostacy.  You would probably need to present a letter to the pastor of your parish, or to the place where you were baptized/received, or your local bishop, stating your intention.

That said, if you believe that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ and is His true Church, and you leave it anyway, you cannot be saved.  (Lumen gentium 14)

Give this time. Just because Holy Church’s members have flaws, that doesn’t mean that the Catholic Church is not Christ’s Church. And there is a difference between questions and doubts.

As a matter of fact, Christ gave us the Catholic Church because we are flawed, not in spite of our flaws.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged ,
89 Comments

QUAERITUR: Should I remove chapel veil to read during Mass?

From readerette:

I recently feel called to wear a chapel veil and wore it for the first
time this weekend. It was a very humbling experience. My pastor asked me to take off the veil when reading so as to not call attention to
myself. What would be liturgically correct?

This is one of those questions that can only arise as younger people are beginning to reclaim their traditions.

Liturgically correct?   There is nothing which says that women cannot wear chapel veils in church, whether they are in the pews with toddlers, reading to people in the pews, scraping gum off the pews, or sitting quietly and praying in the pews.

It is not as if you had a green Mohawk and eye-brow rings.

I think Father should mind his own business about this one, frankly.

And what you you want to be that Father would not have told a black woman not to wear one of her fancy church-going hats?

I can’t advise you.  I don’t know what your comfort zone is or how important reading is to you.   Perhaps some of the readers can chime in, especially women who may have been in a similar position or priests who have faced this particular situation.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged
84 Comments

Obama Administration rewards another pro-abortion nun

There are women religious in the US who are trying to usurp the bishops’ right to teach and govern the Church in the USA.  I nicknamed this the Magisterium of Nuns.

We have seen Marlene Weisenbeck before, here and here.

Remember the Star Trek cameo she did?

Marlene Weisenbeck

They were “farewelling” her.  No. Really.

Badger Catholic alerted me to this his post.  I present it to make it visible to a larger number of people.  His emphases and comments:

From WhiteHouse.gov

President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts, 2/4/11 WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships:

  • Sister Marlene Weisenbeck, Member, President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships

Sister Marlene Weisenbeck, Appointee for Member, President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
Sister Marlene Weisenbeck is a member of the Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration[La Crosse, WI].  Sister Weisenbeck is an officer and past president of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, a canonically approved membership organization[Can you believe they added that tidbit???  Do they have a bit of a credibility problem over at the LCWR that they have to explain they are canonically approved.  And is it not sad that they use that as a weapon against the Church?] which exists as a support system and corporate voice for leaders of religious institutes of Catholic Sisters in the United States[who dissent from the bishops of the United States].  She also serves as Chairperson of the Catholic Health Association’s Sponsorship/Canon Law Committee and is a consultant in religious law.  Sister Weisenbeck was president of the Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration from 2002-2010.  She is also past president of the National Conference of Vicars for Religious and Chancellor for the Diocese of La Crosse[I’ll give you one guess who brought a quick end to that, someone with a bit more understanding of Canon Law].  Sister Weisenbeck holds a B.M. Ed. degree from Viterbo University, an M.M. from George Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, a J.C.L. in Canon Law from Saint Paul University-Ottawa, and a Ph.D. from theUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison.

You might remember that precisely at the time where Catholics needed to show their firm opposition to any forced participation in abortion, Sr Weisenbeck led a charge of dissident women who hoped to provide enough cover for the Obama administration to pass a bill that in the future can “codify Roe v Wade.”  Since FOCA became widely unpopular, the president chose to make his health care legislation the foundation forunlimited abortion funding.  Frantic for power and prestige these sisters lead by Weisenbeck publicly opposed the Catholic Church’s long held teaching that every life is sacred.  I was told that Weisenbeck wascalled to Rome after that debacle which it seems has not affected her interest in pursuing her political career.  Obviously this appointment tells the real story behind her opposition of pro-life efforts and the USCCB.  She scratches Obama’s back and he scratches hers.  Do you think she’ll get a pen now too?

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras | Tagged ,
22 Comments

It’s the small things, sometimes

A friend and I went to have dim sum at the Golden Unicorn in Manhattan’s China Town.

Some shots.

Posted in On the road | Tagged
9 Comments

Why does the old fashioned style of Catholic-Anglican dialogue continue?

Remembering that Pope Benedict, who had the CDF issue Anglicanorum coetibus, is the Pope of Christian Unity, I share here an piece by William Oddie of the UK’s best Catholic weekly, the Catholic Herald.

He asks a necessary question.  Now that the Catholic-Anglican landscape has been made much clearer, why does the old fashioned style of Catholic-Anglican dialogue continue?

Thus, Oddie with my emphases and comments:

I begin with a simple news announcement, as reported by Zenit, the Catholic online news outlet:

The Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) is opening a new phase of dialogue with a meeting scheduled for May 17-27.

A communiqué from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity noted that this new phase of work was mandated by Benedict XVI [The same Pope who had the CDF issue Anglicanorum coetibus, btw.  I wonder, however, if he knew much about this meeting.] and the Anglican archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, at their meeting in November 2009.

The first meeting of the new phase of the commission will take place at the Monastery of Bose in Northern Italy.

The communiqué noted that ‘the task of this third phase of ARCIC will be to consider fundamental questions regarding the “Church as Communion – Local and Universal,” and “How in Communion the Local and Universal Church Comes to Discern Right Ethical Teaching”. [Sounds like a topic which might interest Pope Benedict.]

Thus, and much more, Zenit. Zenit doesn’t comment on such matters: but it doesn’t give much background, either. You wouldn’t guess from this straightfaced announcement (and perhaps the boys and girls at Zenit don’t even realise) that the said meeting will not only be an expensive freebie for those involved but also utterly futile, an absolute and total waste of time. But you can probably gather that from the Catholic Herald report: I’m pretty sure the Herald newsdesk does know it, though their report doesn’t actually say so (and probably better not; it’s hardly necessary, since unlike Zenit’s, the Herald report does give the necessary background for us to come to that conclusion ourselves):

Pope Benedict XVI and Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury, spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion, met in late 2009. They pledged to continue the formal dialogue even as the ordination of women as priests and bishops, the blessing of gay unions and the ordination of openly gay clergy threatened the unity of the Anglican Communion and made it more difficult for Catholics and Anglicans to see a way for their communities to draw closer together. [Sigh.  Talk for the sake of talk?  Talk because there is nothing else?]

Shortly after the Pope and archbishop met, the Vatican announced that a new round of dialogue, referred to as ARCIC III, would deal with “fundamental questions regarding the Church as communion local and universal, and how in communion the local and universal Church comes to discern right ethical teaching”.

In the wake of the recent collapse of Muslim-Catholic dialogue, you have to ask what that word “dialogue” has come to mean these days: two groups of irreconcilables, each churning out yet again their own point of view in case their interlocutors weren’t already perfectly well aware of what they think about absolutely everything? [Indeed.] I remember as a Catholic-minded Anglican desperately hoping, back in the 70s, in the early days of ARCIC, that a series of statements would somehow emerge which would uncover a common faith, on the basis of which corporate reunion might be a distant prospect. The statements did emerge, on Ministry, Sacraments and so forth: but they were never officially accepted by Rome as being a sound or adequate representation of Catholic belief, and nor were they.

The trouble with ARCIC always was (as a former Catholic member of it once explained to me) that on the Catholic side of the table you have a body of men (mostly bishops) who represent a more or less coherent view, being members of a Church which has established means of knowing and declaring what it believes. On the Anglican side of the table you have a body of men (and it was only men, on both sides, in those days) the divisions between whom are just fundamental as, and sometimes a lot more fundamental than, those between any one of them and the Catholic representatives they faced: they all represented only themselves.

And they all, Catholics and Anglicans, quite simply belonged to very different kinds of institution. It isn’t just that Catholics and Anglicans believe different doctrines: it’s that there is between them a fundamental difference over their attitude to the entire doctrinal enterprise. [This is rather interesting.] I remember very vividly, in my days as an (Anglican) clergy member of the Chelmsford Diocesan Synod, a debate on one of the ARCIC documents followed by a vote on whether to recommend to the General Synod in London that it should be accepted. The document was accepted overwhelmingly. At lunchtime, standing at the bar with a number of clergy, I asked how they had voted; they had all voted affirmatively. I then asked them if they had read the document. None of them had; and most of them, it became clear, had little idea of what it contained. “Well”, I asked, puzzled, “why did you vote for it, then?”  “The point is,” one of them replied, “the important thing is unity. The RCs are frightfully keen on doctrine. You have to encourage them: so I voted for their document”. There you have it: what the late Mgr Graham Leonard, when he was still an Anglican bishop, once called “the doctrinal levity of the Church of England”.  [Ultimately, the teachings and practices of the C of E must follow societal trends.]

And in the end, that fundamental disqualification of ARCIC remains: it is an endless time-consuming discussion between representatives of the Catholic Church on one side, and a varying group of individuals who represent only themselves on the other.  And so it will be at the next ARCIC meeting. Some of the Anglicans will be quite close to the views of their (hum, hum) “spiritual leader”, Rowan Williams; others will be very far from them. A document so general that they can all subscribe to it will somehow be cobbled together. Nobody will read it: and the whole operation will at great expense achieve nothing.

Can anybody explain to me why we carry on with ARCIC? Is there any real intention, as 30 years ago there undoubtedly was, of actually achieving something? Is it a continuing self-delusion on the part of those participating? Or is ARCIC III just a PR exercise, designed to avert attention from the fact that we have now, inevitably but finally, come to the bitter end of the ecumenical road?

Whatever it is, we will all, finally, have to face reality: and, surely, the sooner the better.

Posted in Pope of Christian Unity | Tagged ,
33 Comments

QUAERITUR: Should I teach my child to confess sins in kind and also number?

From a reader:

I’m preparing my oldest child for his First Holy Communion. This great little Communion book from TAN publishers instructs the child to confess his sins and the number of times he committed them. Now for myself, in confession I always understood that I only tell the amount of times I’ve sinned mortally. As most children do not commit mortal sin, I’m unsure what to do. I want to instill good habits into my son but I don’t want him stressing over the amount he committed each venial sin. Should I teach him to tell the number of
times no matter?

Yes, I believe you should.  Start forming good habits early.  Don’t stress it to a point where little stupor mundi becomes worried, however.

Also, I am not sure about “children can’t commit mortal sin” thing.  I have looked into the eyes of a three year old.   I’m just sayin’….  o{]:¬)

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged , ,
16 Comments