Communal Reconciliation Approach - from the Church?

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Just for clarification purposes, this is what the Circular Letter I referenced in my previous post says regarding General Absolution:

But nowhere did the OP talk about general absolution. Why are you working so hard at opposing something that’s not being discussed?

I don’t have the Rite of Penance book in front of me. There’s a version online here] but I can’t say it’s totally accurate. (It is accurate as far as I know but it’s not from an official source.)

This page has the rite for several penitents. As you can see, people have already had Scripture readings, a homily, and an examination of conscience. They pray the Confetior and the Lord’s Prayer. Then after all of that they confess their sins to a priest.

This isn’t some wacky shortcut way of going to confession. It’s an approved rite of the church. Don’t use a straw man argument to condemn it.

 

[John_Lilburne]

…I am little concerned about the business of saying “hello” and omitting the formal greeting. The omission of the Act of Contrition is also a bit unsettling. Now, my old parish in Austin was known for being rather progressive; however, when it came time for individual confession after the communal penance service, no such instructions were given to us. We were simply told to proceed as a normal confession.

Doing things as for normal confession is incorrect. From the Rite of Penance:

1. Then the penitents go to the priests designated for individual confession, and confess their sins. Each one receives and accepts a fitting act of satisfaction and is absolved. After hearing the confession and offering suitable counsel, the priest extends his hands over the penitent’s head (or at least extends his right hand) and give him absolution. Everything else which is customary in individual confession is omitted.

The Rites Volume One, Liturgical Press, 1990, ISBN: 0-8146-6015-0, page 556.

 

[benedictgal]

But nowhere did the OP talk about general absolution. Why are you working so hard at opposing something that’s not being discussed?

I don’t have the Rite of Penance book in front of me. There’s a version online here] but I can’t say it’s totally accurate. (It is accurate as far as I know but it’s not from an official source.)

This page has the rite for several penitents. As you can see, people have already had Scripture readings, a homily, and an examination of conscience. They pray the Confetior and the Lord’s Prayer. Then after all of that they confess their sins to a priest.

This isn’t some wacky shortcut way of going to confession. It’s an approved rite of the church. Don’t use a straw man argument to condemn it.

I would be most appreciative if you were to read things in their full context before making assertions. A clearer reading of posts will help everyone. In my first post, I acknowledged that:

Now, I’m not saying that this was anywhere indicated in the OP; however, other parishes have been known to get rather creative with the sacrament, as the Aussies did (to the point that the Holy Father had to take them to the liturgical woodshed).

Furthermore, inasmuch as you have a copy of the Rite, it’s also very helpful to look at the Circular Letter. It provides much-needed clarification on things. Ultimately, it ensures that whatever Rite is celebrated should be done with full integrity and in the manner the Church requires.

I was answering another poster’s remarks regarding General Absolution.

 

[benedictgal]

Yeah, I’ve experienced that ‘one sin/burned paper’ baloney at one penitential celebration with General Absolution. Glad it was only once.

Now that we have no General Absolution we have few people show up at a penitential service. Last Tuesday we had about 24 people out of 400+ families. It was the perfect opportunity but nobody took advantage of it. Too many other things happening in town that night. Not to mention the downplaying of the need for confession that we’ve experienced for the last 10 years.

My DD (darling Dad) and I are going to mosey over to the Cathedral next week for their Communal Penance Service. He and the administrator are going to also figure out how they’ll be able to administer the sacrament to the residents of the Senior Citizens home. Many of the residents have been asking the pastor (my dad’s former pastor–DD is now at the Cathedral) to hear their confessions, but, he’s not even bothered to give them a call. What is worse is that the priest in question lives across the street from the retirement home and has not gone to visit any of them. So, the administrator (who is also the diocesan director of Divine Worship) is going to work out a plan where he and his parochial vicar can take care of these folks before Easter.

 

[puzzleannie]

yes what is described in OP is correct for the second form of the Rite, yes there will be individual confession of all grave sins in kind and number. yes the act of contrition may be recited together, and the same penance may be assigned to all. the rite and instructions are available on the bishops website

 

[John_Lilburne]

yes what is described in OP is correct for the second form of the Rite, … yes the act of contrition may be recited together, and the same penance may be assigned to all. …

No, it is not an option to say an individual act of contrition.
No, each individual is to be given their own penance.
As I posted above in #22, from the Rite of Penance:

1. Then the penitents go to the priests designated for individual confession, and confess their sins. Each one receives and accepts a fitting act of satisfaction and is absolved. After hearing the confession and offering suitable counsel, the priest extends his hands over the penitent’s head (or at least extends his right hand) and give him absolution. Everything else which is customary in individual confession is omitted.

Also:

1. … The penitents who desire to confess their sins go to the priest of their choice. After they have accepted a suitable act of penance, the priest absolves them, using the formulary for the reconciliation of an individual penitent.

(The Rites Volume One, Liturgical Press, 1990, ISBN: 0-8146-6015-0, pages 538 and 556).

 

[Brendan]

• You should expect very little conversation and advice from
the priest because others are waiting.
.

THIS is the part that worries me. The penitent should indicate the lenght of time since their last Confession, AND they should recieve suitable counsel.

The ‘suitable’ corresponds to the penitent’s condition, NOT to the number of people waiting.

 

[Newzie52]

THIS is the part that worries me. The penitent should indicate the lenght of time since their last Confession, AND they should recieve suitable counsel.

The ‘suitable’ corresponds to the penitent’s condition, NOT to the number of people waiting.

Our parish does communal reconciliation services at least twice a year, with many, many people attending. There are about 12 priests, with the option of face to face, behind a screen, or with a priest who doesn’t have a screen but has his head averted. We are also told not to get into lengthy discussions and counseling; this is because of the number of people. Our pastor does stress making an appointment, or coming to the regularly scheduled confessions if counseling is needed. What he’s doing must be working, as there is never a lack of participants at these communal services.

 

[benedictgal]

THIS is the part that worries me. The penitent should indicate the lenght of time since their last Confession, AND they should recieve suitable counsel.

The ‘suitable’ corresponds to the penitent’s condition, NOT to the number of people waiting.

Exactly. Let’s say that someone who hasn’t been to confession in a jillion years finally decides and is moved to go during one of these services. The penitent needs to have that counsel and be able to experience the mercy of God.

What the OP made it sound like (based on what was written, not on the poster) made it akin to a McConfessional drive-through. Just like the mere fact that having a jillion EMHC’s will cut down Communion time (if there are quite a few communicants) is frowned upon (heavily) in Redemptionis Sacramentum, the practice outlined in the OP (at least the time element) just doesn’t seem right.

While this particular section of the Circular Letter doesn’t make direct reference to my concerns, it does give some serious food for thought.

1. The Holy Father has pointed to the personal nature of sin, conversion, forgiveness and reconciliation 17 as the reason why the Rite of Reconciliation of several penitents with individual confession and absolution “demands the personal confession of sins and individual absolution”.18 Since individual and integral confession of sins is not only an obligation "but also an inviolable and inalienable right"19 of the faithful, any innovation which would interfere with their fulfillment of this obligation, such as when penitents are invited or otherwise encouraged to name just one sin or to name a representative sin, is to be eliminated.

As I’ve stated before, I’m not saying that any of the last portion of this quoted section should be inferred from the OP (nor did the OP state any of this); however, the wham, bam, thank you ma’am approach is not a good thing, either.

Hey, even people like me may need some time, especially if we’ve got some serious sins troubling us. For many people, this may actually be one of the few times they even get to receive the Sacrament (for any number of reasons).

 

[lak611]

I just went to a communal penance service this evening. There was an opening hymn, then the pastor of the church did the sign of the cross, read from the Gospel, gave a homily, did general intercessions. Then we knelt and recited the Confiteor which he said would take the place of the act of contrition, which we were instructed not to say during our confessions. Then the pastor introduced all the priests and said where they were going to be hearing confessions. Confession included everything that is always done during confession except the act of contrition. The priest did mention a few things to me before giving me my penance and then absolution. I did not find the experience to be any different than when I go to confession at its regularly scheduled time at my parish. In most of my experiences, confession does not include lengthy counseling. Then again, I have never made an appointment for confession, nor have I specifically requested spiritual direction from a confessor. I would suspect that if I was to make an appointment and request spiritual direction that my confessor would offer it to me.

 

[Doudell]

It sounds as if the benefit for this type of confession is to save time for the priest. I think that if I wanted to, or decided I needed to go to confession, I would prefer the personal & not communal approach. Thanks to all. D

 

[msproule]

I agree with Doudell, benedictgal, Brendan, and others.

In my opinion, this whole discussion underscores the grave need for more and better vocations to the priesthood, as well as better catechesis for the lay faithful. Indeed, we have witnessed in the last few months a lot of speculation and real stories about reinforcing the awareness of sin and the need for repentance.

While I am sure the original intentions of instituting this type of communal service were good, I know of* far* too many instances where it is used by penitents as an “easy way out”, so to speak. In fact, I am currently trying to convince a local pastor that his general (so-called) absolution service is clearly illicit and of questionable validity. So far he is not very interested in what I have to say!

Admittedly, one can often find priests taking shortcuts even in private confessions (bypassing scripture readings, editing the prayer of absolution, not asking for an act of contrition, etc.). This is why many priests need to be re-instructed, as well. But surely, if all those penitents who attend communal services sincerely sought to confess their sins in the ordinary form, privately with a priest, in a confessional, there would be no temptation to stage a watered-down, drive-thru type of service, where the penitents are instructed to “keep it brief”. For goodness sake! That is really a disservice to everybody…

 

[benedictgal]

I agree with Doudell, benedictgal, Brendan, and others.

In my opinion, this whole discussion underscores the grave need for more and better vocations to the priesthood, as well as better catechesis for the lay faithful. Indeed, we have witnessed in the last few months a lot of speculation and real stories about reinforcing the awareness of sin and the need for repentance.

While I am sure the original intentions of instituting this type of communal service were good, I know of* far* too many instances where it is used by penitents as an “easy way out”, so to speak. In fact, I am currently trying to convince a local pastor that his general (so-called) absolution service is clearly illicit and of questionable validity. So far he is not very interested in what I have to say!

Admittedly, one can often find priests taking shortcuts even in private confessions (bypassing scripture readings, editing the prayer of absolution, not asking for an act of contrition, etc.). This is why many priests need to be re-instructed, as well. But surely, if all those penitents who attend communal services sincerely sought to confess their sins in the ordinary form, privately with a priest, in a confessional, there would be no temptation to stage a watered-down, drive-thru type of service, where the penitents are instructed to “keep it brief”. For goodness sake! That is really a disservice to everybody…

If your pastor doesn’t believe you, perhaps you should give him a copy of the Circular Letter regarding the Intergrity of the Sacrament of Penance. You may find it at:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20000630_circolare-sulla-penitenza%20_en.html

The important section for him to read (albeit, the whole document should be studied) is this one:

1. In giving consideration to the authentic discipline of the Church concerning “general absolution”, the recent interdicasterial meeting of the Roman Curia with a representation of Bishops of the Episcopal Conference of Australia noted that:

. . . communal celebrations have not infrequently occasioned an illegitimate use of general absolution. This illegitimate use, like other abuses in the administration of the Sacrament of Penance, is to be eliminated.

The teaching of the Church is reflected in precise terms in the requirements of the Code of Canon Law (cf. esp. canons 959-964). In particular it is clear that "A sufficient necessity is not … considered to exist when confessors cannot be available merely because of a great gathering of penitents, such as can occur on some major feastday or pilgrimage" (canon 961, § 1, 2).

The bishops will exercise renewed vigilance on these matters for the future, aware that departures from the authentic tradition do great wrong to the Church and to individual Catholics.

1. With respect to the administration of “general absolution”, the exclusive authority enjoyed by Diocesan Bishops to determine whether a grave necessity is truly present in a given case in their diocese does not permit them “to change the required conditions, to substitute other conditions for those given, or to determine grave necessity according to their personal criteria however worthy.” Indeed, the Diocesan Bishop makes "this judgement graviter onerata conscientia, and with full respect for the law and practice of the Church."

If your pastor continues to insist on this illicit practice (and, I might add, grave abuse), then you do have a legitimate complaint to take to your bishop. This is not easy, I can assure you; however, if you know that the integrity of the Sacrament of Penance is being compromised, then I believe that you do have a moral obligation to inform your bishop, if your priest does not cease this reprobated practice.

 

[msproule]

benedictgal,

I have provided him all the necessary documentation and evidence to show that he is in error, on this and other issues. I have proceeded very charitably so far, but I also have a note prepared for the Archdiocese that will find its way shortly (unless this priest demonstrates that he does intend to reform his illicit practices).

For the record, this is no longer my parish. However, it was the parish through which I entered the Church almost ten years ago!

 

[benedictgal]

benedictgal,

I have provided him all the necessary documentation and evidence to show that he is in error, on this and other issues. I have proceeded very charitably so far, but I also have a note prepared for the Archdiocese that will find its way shortly (unless this priest demonstrates that he does intend to reform his illicit practices).

For the record, this is no longer my parish. However, it was the parish through which I entered the Church almost ten years ago!

Even though you are no longer a member of his parish, you might consider writing a factual letter to your bishop regarding what this priest is doing. That is your right within the confines of Redemptionis Sacramentum.

There will be some in these threads who discourage doing that; however, the documents are thee for a reason. Far from being liturgical/sacramental police, the people of God have the right to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments administered in the manner the Church requires. This is something very sacred and important that should not be taken lightly.

 

[Nancyannheath]

Is Communal Pennance Services for venial sins only?

I go to confession regularly, and I can imagine how busy it will be this week and especially since a lot of folks who dont usually go will be in confessions so they can complete their Easter duty so I was going to (for the first time) attend a communal pennance service, but I was under the impression they are for venial sins only?

I have nothing to back me up, I am just assuming.

 

[SMHW]

Well, [edited by Moderator] in theory any type of sin can be addressed at a communal service with individual confession. In practicality, many priests don’t want to spend the time with each penitent that serious sins warrant. They should spend the time but they might not.

 

[Ferdy_000]

Is Communal Pennance Services for venial sins only?

but I was under the impression they are for venial sins only?

I have nothing to back me up, I am just assuming.

I think that would be the case for all sins, but under the condition that you still confess the mortal sins. As I understand “General Confession” is only for people who don’t have access to Confession regularly, as in before a battle or a chance that you may not come back, and/ or where you live is in the boonies , where getting to church would be a bear on a regular basis…I heard this from Jimmy Akin… and it says the same in the Catechism.

1482 The sacrament of Penance can also take place in the framework of a communal celebration in which we prepare ourselves together for confession and give thanks together for the forgiveness received. Here, the personal confession of sins and individual absolution are inserted into a liturgy of the word of God with readings and a homily, an examination of conscience conducted in common, a communal request for forgiveness, the Our Father and a thanksgiving in common. This communal celebration expresses more clearly the ecclesial character of penance. However, regardless of its manner of celebration the sacrament of Penance is always, by its very nature, a liturgical action, and therefore an ecclesial and public action.90

1483 In case of grave necessity recourse may be had to a communal celebration of reconciliation with general confession and general absolution. Grave necessity of this sort can arise when there is imminent danger of death without sufficient time for the priest or priests to hear each penitent’s confession. Grave necessity can also exist when, given the number of penitents, there are not enough confessors to hear individual confessions properly in a reasonable time, so that the penitents through no fault of their own would be deprived of sacramental grace or Holy Communion for a long time. In this case, for the absolution to be valid the faithful must have the intention of individually confessing their sins in the time required.91 The diocesan bishop is the judge of whether or not the conditions required for general absolution exist.92 A large gathering of the faithful on the occasion of major feasts or pilgrimages does not constitute a case of grave necessity.93

I hope this helps

 

[BeluvdLily]

Well, I made it through the Parish Reconciliation service tonight! lol.

It was actually very nice. I do recall that somehow I missed it last year. I thought I was home free because with 6 priests, I was sure they would use the confessionals! The joke was on me! They didn’t. It was all face to face. lol.

At any rate, it was only my third confession but it was wonderful, a very sweet, kind priest (the only kind I’ve encountered so far anyway) and I’m getting so much more comfortable with it. I’m getting over my face to face phobia. Plus it was very moving and humbling to see line after line of people waiting to confess. Wow.

Can’t even tell you how peaceful I feel now and I really tend to be very anxious and do an inordinate amount of worrying about a lot of things.

Thanks for all the advice and explanations on the other post. You’re such a nice and helpful bunch of people here and now I feel so good and I’m looking forward to Holy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter. I love being Catholic!

Amie

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

I guess I’m surprised the Church actually says things such as “You don’t need to make the sign of the cross” and “You may say hello”. It seems like something very ‘bare bones’.

Well, it’s a try not only to provide a fertile ground to to examine one conscience and get absolved, but to get a lot of people to come out and getabsolved (safety in numbers and all that). So if a lot fo people show up, the priest(s) need to move them along, before they get restless.