Anyone has secrets. Everyone makes such an act for which he does not praise. Having brought up in the public framework and traditions, a person understands that people familiarly share the actions of others around good and bad.
What would happen if people did not divide the actions on good and bad? Then people would have committed less mistakes. First, the desire to make a bad act is dictated by the fact that a person is prohibited to do it. For some people, the ban is a motivator that makes them come around. If prohibited, it means that you need to do it. Secondly, if people had not shared actions on bad and good, as their lives, each person would have made everything that only he was in his head. And then he would have understood that it was not necessary to act, but to make concrete actions to receive the desired results.
But back to public morality, which says: If you have done something bad, admit. Do I need to confess that you will not forgive you? If you know that the person you decide to confess, will not forgive you, then why does he disclose his secrets? To facilitate your soul or even more pain to him?
It is better not to admit, rather than to punish yourself, and another person to upset. In lies there is a good side: while they do not know about her, everyone happily lives. Any ranting on the account that you need to be honest are only a question of morality. In reality, the following happens: you confess, because of what another person punishes you (you knew that otherwise he would not go) and he begins to feel bad. Who needs the truth if she is harmful to everyone?
Another situation when you understand that you can tell another person your mystery. There are people who are not punishable, but even thank that they opened in front of them, what bitter would be true.
If you confess in your sins, because it is necessary, you are engaged in morality. But if you understand what people do not need to tell the truth, and which they can forgive you, then do real life.