jm, I can see that you well intentioned.I guess we just have a fundamentally different understanding of the sacraments.
That a priest would deny confession to a soul in pain is unthinkable. That he would do so on the basis that the poor fellow’s conscience has had the bad taste to bother him before the Easter vigil is even worse. It is contrary to everything that the Church teaches about the priestly ministry, the mercy of God, and the sacrament of penance.
It is also contrary to canon law: “Canon 213: The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments.”
This idea that pastoral need must be subordinated to the tyranny of the calendar has come to have greater currency in the culture of RCIA than the grace of the sacraments. This is a grave error.
I googled “period of purification” and learned that there is indeed such an institution in the culture of RCIA.It is “Stage 3” of RCIA, excuse me, The RCIA, and it has an elaborate protocol. Ironically, its full name is “period of purification and enlightenment,” implying that the RCIA instructors convey enlightenment. Well, as every good catechist learns early on, you can’t give what you don’t have! But I digress.
Then on a hunch I googled “rcia individual pastoral need” and one of the first page hits was a document from the USCCB website which says in part “When inquirers present themselves for the RCIA, personal and individual attention is a key element of pastoral care…”
Now we’re getting somewhere! Is it possible that the initial intent for RCIA was that it would deliver individualized pastoral services to inquirers, and that later this was somehow modified in practice, for reasons of administrative convenience, to put the whole class on a common schedule, moving together in lockstep toward the Easter vigil, and with individual pastoral needs necessarily subordinated to an arbitrary and universal standard of formal “preparation?” Yes, that would make sense, administratively if not pastorally.
But why is the absurdity of this situation not self evident? If the end game of RCIA is full participation in the life of the Church, and if sacraments are an essential part of the Christian life, then how can an RCIA administrator, acting with the authority of the Church, deny the sacrament to an initiated member in desparate need?
And on an even broader level, if salvation is the highest purpose of the Christian life, then how can we deny the one sacrament that is absolutely essential to salvation? (in most cases; deathbed baptisms, innocent children, etc. excepted)
And what is my authority for asserting that salvation is the highest purpose of the Christian life? Why it is the highest possible authority: the RCIA playbook! Here, from the script for The Rite of Acceptance into the Order of Catechumens, we read:
*Celebrant:
What do you ask of God’s Church?
Candidate:
Faith.
Celebrant:
What does faith offer you?
Candidate:
Eternal life.
*
There it is! Eternal life!
Let’s keep our eye on the ball, shall we? LET THE POOR MAN GO TO CONFESSION! Give him a shot at eternal life! After all, he is already baptized in the Catholic Church and never should have been tracked into The RCIA in the first place!
And how do I know THAT? Easy, the RCIA FAQ from the USCCB web site (emphasis added):
What is the RCIA?
The RCIA, which stands for Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults, is a process through which non-baptized men and women enter the Catholic Church. It includes several stages marked by study, prayer and rites at Mass. Participants in the RCIA are known as catechumens… The inquirer stands in the midst of the parish community and states that he or she wants to continue the process and become a baptized member of the Catholic Church.
