Help with history of confession

[Jennifer_J]

My 2nd grade son is preparing for the sacarament of penance and first communion. We attended our first meeting this week and we were handed a sheet with the history of Reconciliaiton in the Church. I’m not sure how accurate it is, infact some of it seems just plain wrong. My knowlege of history in general is abismal and as a convert, I just don’t know enough about this part of church history.

Here’s what it lists (I’ll try to be brief)
early Church–understood baptism as one and only sacrament of forgivness, excommunicated those whose serious sin was a scandal to the community and disgraced the commitment of the believers, saw Eucharist as primary sacrament of forgiveness for most ordinary offenses

150-600–Canoncial Penance–applied to serious public sins, involved long and public penance, celebrated only once, so seldom celebrated for fear of not being able to use it again;at this time, many people put off Baptism until much later in life.

600–Private Penance–evolved from monastic pratice of daily examen, focused on growing in the faith and praising God’s mercy, reconciliation was seen as taking place in the Eucharist,

in 1215–approved and required of all at least once a year at the 4th Lateran Council

over time–evolution of focus and intent–lost centraility of community, increased focus on the individual’s sin and words of absolution led to notion that sins are private and don’t have an impact on the community, placed absolution before the completion of penance, which tended to de-emphasized the need for ongoing coversion and change of life

1974-today–Renewal of sacrament–re-emphasizes God’s mercy and the importance of community, makes clear the demands of conversion at the heart of the Christian life, recoginzes sin in the community, calls us to live life by Gospel values.

Now, the focus on confession at this meeting was wonderful and the emphasis placed on sin and the community was on target. I just wonder at this sheet and whether it’s correct. What’s a good indepth source for me to look at myself?
Thanks,
Jennifer (sorry for any typos, I’m doing this quickly!)

 

[maendem]

Jennifer–what in particular seems to be wrong or misleading here for you?

 

[Jennifer_J]

I understand the development of doctrine, ect. but I assumed, maybe incorrectly, that confession was consistant throughout the ages. It seems the early Church was a bit harsh in it’s judgements of sinful acts. I mostly just wanted a more indepth history so I can see it in context. I also am unsure about using the Eucharist as a means to reconciliation. I thought approaching the Eucharist unworthily was a mortal sin. Maybe unworthily is just with mortal sin, not venial? Again, I just need a reliable source of history so I understand.
Thanks
Jennifer

 

[puzzleannie]

the history is basically right, allowing for your truncating it to fit this space, what is unchanging is the doctrine that Christ gave the apostles the power to forgive sins, that it belongs to bishops, delegated to the priests they ordain, for the salvation of souls. Ways and means may have changed, but the sacramental nature of confession and absolution have not changed.

 

[Jermosh]

Jennifer J:

I understand the development of doctrine, ect. but I assumed, maybe incorrectly, that confession was consistant throughout the ages. It seems the early Church was a bit harsh in it’s judgements of sinful acts. I mostly just wanted a more indepth history so I can see it in context. I also am unsure about using the Eucharist as a means to reconciliation. I thought approaching the Eucharist unworthily was a mortal sin. Maybe unworthily is just with mortal sin, not venial? Again, I just need a reliable source of history so I understand.
Thanks
Jennifer

Yes they were very harsh in the early years. They even at times only allowed one confession after their baptism.

Imagine even before Christ what we had to endure for forgiviness once a year. They would have to slaughter and burn their best of the best of that year.

If you want a good book that is easy on the eyes and mind. Try “Lord have Mercy” by Scott Hahn. Its a 2-3 day read if your avid.

 

[GULaw]

Really quickly, from what I understand, the severeness of the early Church was neither harsh nor judgmental for the people participating; although penance could take many, many years for the deeply serious sins of murder, adultery, or idolatry/blasphemy (this one especially led to controversy, because the debate about what to do with people who denied Christ in the face of martyrdom is what led to Tertullian’s heresy), the goal of the Church was to expliate all temporal punishment for the sinner through the penance. I’d bet that the believers at that time spent far, far less time in purgatory than you or I will manage.

BTW, God bless you as a convert. Went through that myself, and it was most fulfilling experience of my life.

 

[otm]

It is truncated, but reasonably accurate.

As an aside, the Irish monks had much to do with the Sacrament of Reconcilliation being made private, as opposed to public, and the reduction in penance.

Vatican 2 wanted to have Moral Theology return to a more biblical perspective, from what had become a somewhat legalistic perspective. But too much of the world intervened (Situational Ethics, e.g.), and it is now starting to get back on track.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Thanks for the help! I guess I just need to study Church history a bit more in depth!
Jennifer