"Reconciliation Service"

  • Thread starter Thread starter kleary
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kleary

Guest
At a local parish here they had a ‘reconciliation service’. Part of this service was where the people in the pews were given a branch to write a sin they committed on then process outside and throw it into the fire made out there. After that the pamphlet said, "individual reconciliation will be available after the service.

Is this proper?
 
As long as the opportunity was given for private confession/reconciliation afterwards, yes.

Remember that confession of venial sins is not required, although highly recommended.
 
kleary said:
At a local parish here they had a ‘reconciliation service’. Part of this service was where the people in the pews were given a branch to write a sin they committed on then process outside and throw it into the fire made out there. After that the pamphlet said, "individual reconciliation will be available after the service.

Is this proper?
Click to expand...
I remember reading about a Franciscan Saint possibly Bernardine of Siena, who encouraged the people to bringing whatever led them to sin, whether that be a book , or whatever and had them throw it into a large fire. People came from everywhere to do this. Seems like a good penitential practice. Whether or not he did in within a liturgy I dont know. This is a little different, but I dont see anything wrong with it. I’m sure you werent forced to participate in the writing and fire if you didnt want to. They had individual Confession so hopefully they encouraged that more than the fire. While the Confession remits all sin, it is still good to do indulgences as well because indulgences destroy the punishment due to sin.
 
kleary said:
At a local parish here they had a ‘reconciliation service’. Part of this service was where the people in the pews were given a branch to write a sin they committed on then process outside and throw it into the fire made out there. After that the pamphlet said, "individual reconciliation will be available after the service.

Is this proper?
Click to expand...
What would be IMproper would be that people would be led to believe that the “burning” took the place of individual reconciliation, or that it had the same effect, which it clearly doesn’t.
 
kleary said:
At a local parish here they had a ‘reconciliation service’. Part of this service was where the people in the pews were given a branch to write a sin they committed on then process outside and throw it into the fire made out there. After that the pamphlet said, "individual reconciliation will be available after the service.

Is this proper?
Click to expand...
As long as they offered individual reconciliation, that’s all that matters. The other part about throwing the branch in the fire just seems silly - kind of like one reconciliation service I saw where each person was supposed to take a cut out star (like the snowflakes kids would cut out of paper) and put it in a bowl to remind them that God loves them. I kid you not - this was for an adult reconciliation service.
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
That sounds odd liturgically. And theologically.
Click to expand...
This. Why not just have a Rite II service? Admittedly, I have participated in something like this before and can understand where whoever thought it would be a good idea is coming from but, that disclaimer aside, the sacrament of reconciliation deserves to be made an integral part of the liturgy (otherwise, what’s the point) and not just relegated to an after-thought.
 
What really affronts me here is that all the time the priests spent officiating at this hokey, made-up service would better have been spent in the confession, hearing the confessions of the faithful - you know, the part that actually matters.
 
There was an opportunity for Confession according to the OP.
Keep in mind that many people in the pews have not been to confession in 20 years or more.
If this small exercise takes away some of the anxiety and encourages them to approach the sacrament what is the harm?

It didn’t REPLACE the sacrament. It’s a learning tool. An experience of repentance, admission of remorse.
 
pianistclare said:
There was an opportunity for Confession according to the OP.
Keep in mind that many people in the pews have not been to confession in 20 years or more.
If this small exercise takes away some of the anxiety and encourages them to approach the sacrament what is the harm?

It didn’t REPLACE the sacrament. It’s a learning tool. An experience of repentance, admission of remorse.
Click to expand...
👍
 
bardegaulois said:
What really affronts me here is that all the time the priests spent officiating at this hokey, made-up service would better have been spent in the confession, hearing the confessions of the faithful - you know, the part that actually matters.
Click to expand...
You appear to be very easily affronted, as the OP said that the priests “spent their time in confession, hearing the confessions of the faithful”. Perhaps you read the OP too fast to catch that part.

It always amazes me that someone (who may very well dislike certain things) has the ability to stand in judgement of how others react to it - particularly those who react in a very deep-felt positive way.

And the service was neither hokey nor “made up”. It would not surprise me in the least to find a rather conservative bishop having no problem with it at all.
 
Please remember to post in charity per forum rules. Thank you all.
 
pianistclare said:
There was an opportunity for Confession according to the OP.
Keep in mind that many people in the pews have not been to confession in 20 years or more.
If this small exercise takes away some of the anxiety and encourages them to approach the sacrament what is the harm?

It didn’t REPLACE the sacrament. It’s a learning tool. An experience of repentance, admission of remorse.
Click to expand...
I do think sometimes these type of things can be well meaning but potentially push more people away. Most men I know would follow thier eyes that rolled out the door.
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
I do think sometimes these type of things can be well meaning but potentially push more people away. Most men I know would follow their eyes that rolled out the door.
Click to expand...
Having experienced something very similar at a Men’s retreat, I would have to disagree with you.

I do not suggest that everyone would be positively impacted by something similar, but I think you overstate the matter.

If one approaches such a ritual flippantly, undoubtedly they will be put off. But ritual can have a very deep impact - which is why we have ritual.
 
otjm said:
Having experienced something very similar at a Men’s retreat, I would have to disagree with you.

I do not suggest that everyone would be positively impacted by something similar, but I think you overstate the matter.

If one approaches such a ritual flippantly, undoubtedly they will be put off. But ritual can have a very deep impact - which is why we have ritual.
Click to expand...
This is the problem with the touchey freely stuff. Yes, some men may find an excecise like this ok. But many would not. Many would be turned off by it. So why do something that may make SOME uncomfortable!? It belongs on a couch in an office, not in a quasi liturgical setting.

If been to stuff like this.
Not a lot of men…
Of course that can be said for Mass sometimes too.:eek:
 
Touchy-feely?

:confused:

*Let’s just get it over with. *
Yeah. That’s real effective for dealing with real people and real problems.
People complain here all the time that many Catholics don’t understand the Sacraments or why they need them. And then we shoot the messenger/educator (in this case, the priest).

I’ll never understand that. The pastor is trying to reach people. That’s part of his job. Contrary to common belief, it’s not his job to sit in the confessional for hours and not seeking to enlighten through homilies, or prayers. Conversion of heart is HARD for many people. Anything within guidelines that helps them on the path should not be so lightly dismissed by others.

I’m surprised that those who don’t care for this sort of thing would even show up. I would think they would be the Saturday morning get in line types. :confused:
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
They don’t show up… again.
Click to expand...
Thanks fro admitting that.
That’s the whole point isn’t it?
To make up for the catechesis that they have missed along the line.
Rejoice that people are finally are being taught something, even when we believe we already got the memo.
peace
 
pianistclare said:
Thanks fro admitting that.
That’s the whole point isn’t it?
To make up for the catechesis that they have missed along the line.
Rejoice that people are finally are being taught something, even when we believe we already got the memo.
peace
Click to expand...
I don’t know what the point is. We are talking about an innovation in some sort of “service” where people are symbolically burning sins.
We tried this sort of thing with youth groups and found a response with few people. It made most people uncomfortable.

Personally I think encouraging people to write a sin down even if it’s going to be destroyed is foolish.

The point is if you are attempting an emotional response, it may backfire.
These types of things don’t generally lead to a full confessional and expanded hours…
And they may in fact drive some people away. So why do it?
 
If this gets people who are apprehensive about confession, to go to confessions, then great!

However, the potential problems I see here are:
  1. People might think their sins are “all gone” once they burn the piece of twig. It seems (based on the original post) that individual confessions are presented as an optional thing.
  2. Has a “new age” feel to it.
  3. Yes, Catholicism has plenty of rituals to go around. It just seems weird to make up new ones that don’t seem particularly Christian - - like just “acknowledging” the sin is enough.
Just my opinion on why these things seem problematic to some of us! : )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top