Now I think I've heard everything RE: Confession!

[Rachel_J]

They said they were trying to make it easier for people to return to the Church who were uncomfortable with confessing their sins.

I don’t understand this. I’m in RCIA at the moment and one of the things that initially drew me to the Catholic church was the sacrament of reconciliation. If my Priest suggested we bypass initial confession for this… I’d leave. At least his parish… had it been early in my conversion process possibly the church entirely.

 

[bett_ur_kidding]

… had it been early in my conversion process possibly the church entirely.

It’s never 2 late

 

[BSHoop96]

I was recently on another thread discussing priests forgiving sins.

Someone said the priest doesn’t need to see into a person’s heart to absolve them for their sins, because Christ is right there and Christ knows the condition of their heart - if they are truly repentant.

So I am wondering why the priest would be required to read the sins for it to be a valid confession, since God knows what was written on those pieces of paper.

Well if you don’t say them to the priest, and then you write them and he doesn’t even read them, what’s the point? Of course God knows what’s in your heart. God knows what’s in your heart before you even step into the confessional but that doesn’t negate the Catholic teaching that you “confess your sins”. If we don’t, we are following the non-Catholic logic of “why do I have to confess to a priest in the first place, I can just confess to God”.

 

[Ginger2]

Well if you don’t say them to the priest, and then you write them and he doesn’t even read them, what’s the point? Of course God knows what’s in your heart. God knows what’s in your heart before you even step into the confessional but that doesn’t negate the Catholic teaching that you “confess your sins”. If we don’t, we are following the non-Catholic logic of “why do I have to confess to a priest in the first place, I can just confess to God”.

I think I’ve already agreed if this is the doctrine of the church, that it must be verbally said to a priest to be valid, then that’s the way it should be done.

 

[Ruthie]

I’ve been to a retreat where something like this was done. It did include confession to the priest.

I thought it was pretty lame, but that’s because some 30 years ago I did one of those intense New Age training things where they teach you how to control the universe, and that if you don’t get what you want, it’s all your fault. There were several similar events where we wrote down bad stuff and burned it.

It took me a few weeks to see through the bad logic, but I did, and I’ve looked down my nose at that kind of stuff ever since. Uncharitable of me, I know.

But, at the retreat, I did see tears in several people’s eyes afterward. So it must have merit for some. And if I hadn’t had that garbagey training back when, I bet it would have worked for me, too.

So, who am I to judge?

As long as it does include the Sacrament of Reconciliation, of course!

Blessings,

Ruthie

 

[Elizabeth502]

To me, the act of burning the lists is less apt than what one of my local churches has done often on Days of Reconciliation near Good Friday:

They have placed a large portable wooden cross prominently in the sanctuary. After you confess your individual sins to a priest, you are given one deep red rose. First of all, I like the color as symbolizing the blood shed by Christ for our sins. Second, what you’re supposed to “do” with that rose, after confession, is lay it at the feet of that cross. To me, that’s more spiritually powerful: it’s acknowledging the effect of our sin in the Passion drama. It’s also surrendering that sin to Christ – giving it over (which has just occurred in the sacrament). It’s also a symbol of the continuing presence of sin in our lives, and our need to lay those sins at the foot of the cross. I don’t like in the OP’s example the act of burning the sins, because that implies they have vanished. Yes, particular personal sins have vanished (&hence, I understand the “lists”), but maybe I’m just the minority of those who would do well to keep past sins in cautious consciousness, so as to be vigilant to avoid them. I know that I can be tempted too easily to repeat them, so for me, “giving them over to Christ” is more powerful, as it implies a continuing need for grace & willingness to receive that grace (against those sins).

 

[Phemie]

To me, the act of burning the lists is less apt than what one of my local churches has done often on Days of Reconciliation near Good Friday:

They have placed a large portable wooden cross prominently in the sanctuary. After you confess your individual sins to a priest, you are given one deep red rose. First of all, I like the color as symbolizing the blood shed by Christ for our sins. Second, what you’re supposed to “do” with that rose, after confession, is lay it at the feet of that cross. To me, that’s more spiritually powerful: it’s acknowledging the effect of our sin in the Passion drama. It’s also surrendering that sin to Christ – giving it over (which has just occurred in the sacrament). It’s also a symbol of the continuing presence of sin in our lives, and our need to lay those sins at the foot of the cross. I don’t like in the OP’s example the act of burning the sins, because that implies they have vanished. Yes, particular personal sins have vanished (&hence, I understand the “lists”), but maybe I’m just the minority of those who would do well to keep past sins in cautious consciousness, so as to be vigilant to avoid them. I know that I can be tempted too easily to repeat them, so for me, “giving them over to Christ” is more powerful, as it implies a continuing need for grace & willingness to receive that grace (against those sins).

 

[Feanor]

It’s my understanding that the term Sacrament of Penance is the preferred term over the Sacrament of Reconciliation, or Cofession for that matter.

Also I am of the opinion that we should just “keep it simple”. Celebrate the Sacrament in it’s normal face-to-face setting in the confessional with perhaps 2 of these communal services with individual confessions a year.

 

[Phemie]

It’s my understanding that the term Sacrament of Penance is the preferred term over the Sacrament of Reconciliation, or Cofession for that matter.

Also I am of the opinion that we should just “keep it simple”. Celebrate the Sacrament in it’s normal face-to-face setting in the confessional with perhaps 2 of these communal services with individual confessions a year.

The Catechism gives this sacrament multiple names:

I. WHAT IS THIS SACRAMENT CALLED?

1423 It is called the sacrament of conversion because it makes sacramentally present Jesus’ call to conversion, the first step in returning to the Father5 from whom one has strayed by sin.

It is called the sacrament of Penance, since it consecrates the Christian sinner’s personal and ecclesial steps of conversion, penance, and satisfaction.

1424 It is called the sacrament of confession, since the disclosure or confession of sins to a priest is an essential element of this sacrament. In a profound sense it is also a “confession” - acknowledgment and praise - of the holiness of God and of his mercy toward sinful man.

It is called the sacrament of forgiveness, since by the priest’s sacramental absolution God grants the penitent "pardon and peace."6

It is called the sacrament of Reconciliation, because it imparts to the sinner the live of God who reconciles: "Be reconciled to God."7 He who lives by God’s merciful love is ready to respond to the Lord’s call: "Go; first be reconciled to your brother."8

 

[brigid12]

It is not valid. It is a grave abuse and should be confirmed (in writing) with the pastor and, if it really happened , it should be reported to the Bishop. Don’t expect to get an answer, however.

Yup. I heard Fr. Serpa address this very thing a few years ago on the radio (CA radio).

 

[brigid12]

It took me a few weeks to see through the bad logic, but I did, and I’ve looked down my nose at that kind of stuff ever since. Uncharitable of me, I know.
Blessings,

Ruthie

As long as what you are looking down your nose at is an idea(s) or practice(s), you don’t need to worry about being uncharitable.

 

[benedictgal]

It is not valid. It is a grave abuse and should be confirmed (in writing) with the pastor and, if it really happened , it should be reported to the Bishop. Don’t expect to get an answer, however.

In my case, telling a prelate-friend of mine certainly shot that straight into my local Ordinary’s ear. As I noted in one of my posts, the Cursillo center was going to have a Communal Reconciliation service that was along the same vein as what the OP described (with some vairances). I disagreed with it and, having had no recourse with the staff, I told my friend and he informed the bishop at a meeting. One call from the local Ordinary nipped it in the bud. So there is hope that a bishop will intervene. I experienced that myself.

 

[Lujack]

As far as I can tell, there isn’t anything wrong with the burning of the paper. That, I would imagine, is quite powerful and cathartic. The abuse comes when it is used in place of the sacrament itself, correct? If it accompanied the sacrament instead of replacing, would there be anything wrong with it?

 

[benedictgal]

As far as I can tell, there isn’t anything wrong with the burning of the paper. That, I would imagine, is quite powerful and cathartic. The abuse comes when it is used in place of the sacrament itself, correct? If it accompanied the sacrament instead of replacing, would there be anything wrong with it?

The problem is that you are adding something that is not necessary to the Sacrament. It really doesn’t do anything and it doesn’t mean anything. If weneed a visual representation of what just happened to us in the Confessional, then, with all due respect, I believe that we haven’t totally understood the Sacrament. Our sins, pretty much, have been burned away with the prayer of absolution. We dont need to make a funeral pyre for something that is already gone.

 

[Lujack]

The problem is that you are adding something that is not necessary to the Sacrament. It really doesn’t do anything and it doesn’t mean anything. If weneed a visual representation of what just happened to us in the Confessional, then, with all due respect, I believe that we haven’t totally understood the Sacrament. Our sins, pretty much, have been burned away with the prayer of absolution. We dont need to make a funeral pyre for something that is already gone.

We’ll never truly understand the sacrament, just as we’ll never truly understand the graces of God. If we didn’t need visual representations to make things clear to us, we wouldn’t stained glass windows in churches, or crucifixes above the altar, or statues of saints and Mary.

 

[HouseArrest]

Our priest does that with our school kids from time to time. He hears the confessions first, then collects the papers, then burns them. I think they learn from it.

 

[benedictgal]

We’ll never truly understand the sacrament, just as we’ll never truly understand the graces of God. If we didn’t need visual representations to make things clear to us, we wouldn’t stained glass windows in churches, or crucifixes above the altar, or statues of saints and Mary.

I would suggest this, then. During Lent, EWTN broadcasts the Communal Reconciliation from St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican. I have seen this on a couple of occasions. The service is presided by James Cardinal Stafford, the Apostolic Plenary (I think that it is title) and none of this silliness happens there. In fact, the Holy Father joins the liturgy and occupies a confessional to hear confessions.

What I am saying, regarding this “burning ritual” is that it is not needed, especially since it is not in the Rite. This is one such case where a personal idiosyncracy is being inserted where it has no place. We do not add anything to the other sacraments that does not belong there. Why should the Sacrament of Penance be any different?

Just as in the Mass we don’t have the right to insert or delete things from the Holy Sacrifice, we don’t have the right to add or subtract things from sacramental ceremonies such as the Communal Reconciliation service. The fact that my bishop personally intervened and stopped the silliness that was about to occur made it very clear to me that this kind of activity is not supposed to happen.