G
Goblin_Taters
Guest
I have questions pertaining to two early sacraments in the early Church: Baptism and Confession.
Firstly, Baptism. I know that, from an early time, Infant Baptism was to be found in the Church. I also know that, in the Eastern tradition as well as in places like North Africa (and possibly even in Rome itself) baptized infants would receive the Holy Gifts of the Eucharist.
However, I also am aware of another tradition of holding off on baptism until a later adult age, since there was a belief that serious post-baptismal sins could not be forgiven, and even if so, one had to go through great penances before being readmitted into the Church on Holy Thursday.
So, my first question is: how did these two traditions interact with each other? It seems odd that there was, on the one hand, a desire to baptize infants so they didn’t go to hell if they died; on the other hand, there is this desire to hold off baptism for the fear of serious post-baptismal sin. Did these traditions grow together, or were they found separately in different places, different times?
My second question deals with the sacrament of confession. I know that the auricular confession prevalent today is influenced by Irish Christianity and by the Eastern Christian traditions from which it oftentimes drew. I am told that, before auricular confession, there were different ways to be forgiven of sin. For less serious sins, one simply prayed, paid alms, etc. For more serious sin, one had to inform the bishop, be enrolled in the penitential list, and was barred from the Liturgy (or at least those parts after the Liturgy of the Word) until fully reconciled with the Church on Holy Thursday.
Today we have the concept of venial and mortal sin. It seems that early Western theologians like St. Augustine and St. Ambrose also made the distinction between less serious and more serious sin. However, I wonder if their understanding was slightly different.
For example, if I were a 5th century French peasant, and I deliberately stole an apple from the market, just because I was slightly hungry but didn’t have the money, I would, by today’s standards, likely be committing mortal sin. Stealing itself is a grave matter found in the 10 commandments, I have the knowledge that stealing is sinful, and I completely consented to steal the apple (nobody forced me).
So, several questions: Firstly, if I were to commit a sin such as the above, would it, in the early Church, have been considered a lesser sin that could be forgiven by almsgiving and prayer, or a greater sin, for which I would have to inform the bishop and be put on a penitential list? It seems to me that the greater sins would be murder, adultery, fornication and the like.
Secondly, for lesser sins that could be forgiven through almsgiving and prayer, did these sinners have to receive absolution from their priest for the sin to be forgiven? I know that general absolution services might have been more prevalent in the early Church, but what about the periods between these general services?
From first appearances, it seems that the early Church had a more limited range of “mortal sins” that had to be confessed to a priest, the majority of sins being forgivable simply through almsgiving and prayer. But perhaps others know more about this.
Thanks!
Firstly, Baptism. I know that, from an early time, Infant Baptism was to be found in the Church. I also know that, in the Eastern tradition as well as in places like North Africa (and possibly even in Rome itself) baptized infants would receive the Holy Gifts of the Eucharist.
However, I also am aware of another tradition of holding off on baptism until a later adult age, since there was a belief that serious post-baptismal sins could not be forgiven, and even if so, one had to go through great penances before being readmitted into the Church on Holy Thursday.
So, my first question is: how did these two traditions interact with each other? It seems odd that there was, on the one hand, a desire to baptize infants so they didn’t go to hell if they died; on the other hand, there is this desire to hold off baptism for the fear of serious post-baptismal sin. Did these traditions grow together, or were they found separately in different places, different times?
My second question deals with the sacrament of confession. I know that the auricular confession prevalent today is influenced by Irish Christianity and by the Eastern Christian traditions from which it oftentimes drew. I am told that, before auricular confession, there were different ways to be forgiven of sin. For less serious sins, one simply prayed, paid alms, etc. For more serious sin, one had to inform the bishop, be enrolled in the penitential list, and was barred from the Liturgy (or at least those parts after the Liturgy of the Word) until fully reconciled with the Church on Holy Thursday.
Today we have the concept of venial and mortal sin. It seems that early Western theologians like St. Augustine and St. Ambrose also made the distinction between less serious and more serious sin. However, I wonder if their understanding was slightly different.
For example, if I were a 5th century French peasant, and I deliberately stole an apple from the market, just because I was slightly hungry but didn’t have the money, I would, by today’s standards, likely be committing mortal sin. Stealing itself is a grave matter found in the 10 commandments, I have the knowledge that stealing is sinful, and I completely consented to steal the apple (nobody forced me).
So, several questions: Firstly, if I were to commit a sin such as the above, would it, in the early Church, have been considered a lesser sin that could be forgiven by almsgiving and prayer, or a greater sin, for which I would have to inform the bishop and be put on a penitential list? It seems to me that the greater sins would be murder, adultery, fornication and the like.
Secondly, for lesser sins that could be forgiven through almsgiving and prayer, did these sinners have to receive absolution from their priest for the sin to be forgiven? I know that general absolution services might have been more prevalent in the early Church, but what about the periods between these general services?
From first appearances, it seems that the early Church had a more limited range of “mortal sins” that had to be confessed to a priest, the majority of sins being forgivable simply through almsgiving and prayer. But perhaps others know more about this.
Thanks!