Confession: Catholic compared with Anglican

  • Thread starter Thread starter rightness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
With Anglicans, and Protestants in general, it is difficult to discuss the benefits of the sacraments, because most have never had a valid communion, or in this case, confession.

Confessing “directly to God” is the only recourse a Protestant has. If done honestly, it could even be a act of perfect contrition, which would indeed remit sin. (As Catholics, we recognize in limited circumstances the ability to disavow sin out of perfect love of God as a way to forgive mortal sin immediately prior to confession.)

When a Protestant lacks the objective experience of receiving a particular sacrament, it is very difficult to discuss the subjective benefits that accompany reception. Thus, when they describe communion as “symbolic” or private confession as optional, they are accurately describing the faith they know and practice.
 
High Church/Anglo-Catholic/and more. Individual auricular confession, yes. Corporate confession efficacious likewise, yes.Yes, motley bunch.
 
Although to clarify, my Anglo-Catholic parish considers it a full blown sacrament and offers confessions in the side chapel every Saturday morning just prior to Daily Mass
 
Last edited:
Which is a RC perspective. Anglicans, not being bound by Apostolicae Curae, have a different take on the matter (form/intent).
 
You are going to confuse folk with the “Lady Chapel” reference.

We do it with our Mary Shrine (OL of Walsingham).

Oh, and sacrament, yes.
 
Huh? I never said anything about form/intent…

And yes, on forums.catholic.com, I expressed the Catholic perspective.
 
I know. And" matter" there, was a double entendre, referring both to the idea of Anglican orders, as in Apostolicae Curae, and linking that use of the word to it’s suggestion of sacramental matter, and then tying that to the sacramental form/intent that was the central point of Apostolicae Curae, which judged Anglican orders as null and void. Which Anglicans take no heed of, not being bound to Aspotolicae Curae, as are RCs.

I do that exercise a lot.
 
I cannot comment on whether Anglicans believe that the penitential rite in their Eucharist service actually forgives sins. However, I do know that at least one Anglican church does make provision for individual confessions and that is the Church of England. Its Book of Common Prayer (1662) makes provision for individual confession. However, I do not think the majority of Anglicans make use of this provision. I’ve even had a hard time convincing some of them this exists!

The problem with Anglicanism is you cannot say Anglicans believe A, B and C and do X, Y and Z because not only do individual Anglican churches differ there is a lot of difference within a single church. There are churches, for example, in the Church of England where other than for the use of English you may think you’d been transported by a time machine back to a Catholic church before Vatican II. In others you may think you’d strayed into an Evangelical church rather than an Anglican one.
 
Indeed and Amen. And part of my on-line mission (I’m thinking of retiring, or going part time; I’ve been at this for 20 years plus) is to make the point in your para 2. Motley. There’s a reason I use that a lot.

As to para one, I agree. I have no idea how many Anglicans use individual aural confession. But I do know that the number who do is probably far less than the ones who look at the corporate confession and say “But I just confessed. And the priest just absolved me. Weren’t you listening?” Which is to point out , in addition, that the Rite isn’t the action. It’s the priest, absolving that does the deed. The Rite is the occasion.
 
Last edited:
When I talk to Anglicans on this matter I find it very frustrating and have almost given up because I do not want it to descend into the argument it nearly always gets into. It really only seems to be Anglo-Catholics who get it. A lot of Anglicans, it seems to me, believe confession is something ‘those Catholics do’. It is not part of the Anglican heritage. Well officially it is but I suppose in actual practice it is not.

Anglicans also do not seem to understand the real complexities of the sacrament. They think that Catholics go to confession on Saturday morning, have the slate wiped clean, and may then do whatever they want until they go and get the slate wiped clean again next Saturday. I can not get through to them, and suspect often they do not want me to, that it is nothing like that.
 
A mixed lot, those Anglicans.

I must needs go mix with some of them, now.
 
Yeah, haha, I found that out soon enough, from Anglicans who pray the Rosary and want to be under the Pope’s authority to Anglicans who are basically like Methodist Evangelicals.

For what I’m talking about are those who believe in confession through the form of general confession and receiving absolution through their service from their pastor rather than personal confession, which is to say like the Catholic’s Penitential Act done at the beginning of every Mass (to prepare ourselves for the rest of the Mass). For this Anglican denomination, at least they think they need absolution from their pastor.
 
In the Western Church auricular confession was made obligatory by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. The Church of England abrogated this (annual) obligation in the 16th century. Despite the obligation being abrogated, auricular confession has always remained available in the CofE.

There are two places in the 1662 BCP where auricular confession is commended. One is to be found in an exhortation in the Communion rite where we are warned about receiving Communion unworthily; the other is found in the rite for the Visitation of the Sick.
 
Your comment is nonresponsive, because my comment was not about what Anglicans believe. Rather, my comment was advise to a Catholic about discussing sacramental experiences with a noncatholic.

That Anglicans can believe whatever they want is not disputed. However, with conflicting beliefs only one party (or neither party) can be correct. Two fundamentally conflicting statements can not be true.

A Catholic is going to share the faith from the postion that his beliefs are true. To merely point out that Anglicans believe something thay is in conflict with Catholic belief does not advance the discussion.
 
It helps point out what Anglicans do/might believe.

From your first post I replied to:

“With Anglicans, and Protestants in general, it is difficult to discuss the benefits of the sacraments, because most have never had a valid communion, or in this case, confession.”

From my 1st reply.

“Which is a RC perspective. Anglicans, not being bound by Apostolicae Curae, have a different take on the matter (form/intent)”.

Which was about what Anglicans might/do believe. About the validity of their sacraments and how they thus might compare with those of the RCC.

You, from above

“A Catholic is going to share the faith from the postion that his beliefs are true. To merely point out that Anglicans believe something thay is in conflict with Catholic belief does not advance the discussion.”

Of course a RC is going to and should do that. And of course what I posted advances the discussion. It addresses Anglican/vs Catholic confession, as the title of the thread says.

Been making precisely the same point, as appropriate, for the 14 +plus years I’ve been on the board. Usually also emphasizing that what the RCC teaches on this (or any other) matter (that word again) a RC should affirm, at the appropriate level of theological certainty.

Discussion is not one way. Comparison takes presentation of both sides.

Been doing it for years here, will continue to do so.
 
Last edited:
Well, I’ll argue that because of the belief in Sacramental Rites rather than Sacraments, that has caused a schism within the Anglican Church. What I’m talking about is marriage. If marriage isn’t God given, it is, as Luther points out, not to be handled by the church, but handled by the civil government.

That’s why many Anglican churches allow same-sex marriage simply because they are following what the government is saying. Marriage is no longer sacred if it is not considered a Sacrament. And if the Sacrament of Reconciliation is treated the same way, Anglicans/Protestants might just find it not necessary despite it being very Biblical where Jesus would spend most of the Gospels teaching about reconciliation and setting it up for His kingdom.
 
This is more or less accurate, for those Anglicans who think in the way you are suggesting. And it is not merely that there are those who follow what is the current societal norm, on such things. There are those who actively have worked to establish that societal norm, while adopting it as their own norm, within the Church However, Anglicans differed on the nature and number of Sacraments before the issue of same sex appeared on the horizon. For some Anglicans, status of a sacrament would not affect the “need” to adjust to “changing conditions”. As to confession, whether considered a sacrament or a rite, it has been part of the Anglican liturgy from the beginning, as part of the preparation to receive the Eucharist.

Remember that generalizing about Anglicans is generally a mistake. Anglicans are odd, but not uniformly odd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top