The Sin-Eater

[drakkoby]

Hi,

I’m new here, a protestant. I just watched a movie that was called The Sin Eater, only now it’s called The Order. It has Heath Ledger in it.

It raised some questions. It’s hard to tell where they are kidding us because I don’t know catholicism very well.

Is there an Order called the Carolingians? When people become priests, do they still belong to their Orders, or are those only for monks and nuns?

Does the church still have exorcists? Do they get training on how to see and repell spirits and demons? Can they see demons like we see normal people?

The movie claims some ex-priests would put bread on a dying person’s chest and then eat the bread and so absorb the dying person’s sins, thus giving him absolution. (in the movie these people could not go for Last Rites or confession because they had been excommunicated or something, I didn’t understand that part)… so is this true? Were sin-eaters real?

Thanks for any answers. I know the questions are rather dumb.

 

[Irish_Melkite]

drakkoby:

Is there an Order called the Carolingians? When people become priests, do they still belong to their Orders, or are those only for monks and nuns?

Drakkoby,

Carolingians refers to those of the royal family of Charlemagne.

There are both secular and religious priests. Secular priests are those trained for and ordained to the diocesan priesthood. Religious priests refers to those trained for and members of a religious order. So, no, those who belong to a religious order do not cease to do so at ordination.

Does the church still have exorcists? Do they get training on how to see and repell spirits and demons? Can they see demons like we see normal people?

Yes, there are still exorcists. Read an interview with the Vatican’s chief exorcist at Vatican’s Chief Exorcist

The movie claims some ex-priests would put bread on a dying person’s chest and then eat the bread and so absorb the dying person’s sins, thus giving him absolution. (in the movie these people could not go for Last Rites or confession because they had been excommunicated or something, I didn’t understand that part)… so is this true? Were sin-eaters real?

From Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable

Persons hired at funerals in ancient times, to take upon themselves the sins of the deceased, that the soul might be delivered from purgatory.

Notice was given to an old sire before the door of the house, when some of the family came out and furnished him with a cricket [low stool], on which he sat down facing the door; then they gave him a groat which he put in his pocket, a crust of bread which he ate, and a bowl of ale which he drank off at a draught. After this he got up from the cricket and pronounced the case and rest of the soul departed, for which he would pawn his own soul.

—Bagford’s letter on Leland’s Collectanea, i. 76.

The practice was most common among Celtic peoples. It was neither a Church practice, nor performed by priests.

Many years,

Neil

 

[Apologia100]

Sin-Eating is pure, unadulterate Hollywood bunkum. unrepentant excommunicants are not open to sacraments. There is no priest on the planet that is allowed to confer the sacraments upon an excommunicant until they have repented and are reinstated by the ordinary who has authority to do so. If a person was excommunicated by a local bishop, that bishop or one of his successors can “undo” the excommunication. One excommunicated by the Pope (rare as that may be) could only be undone by the Pope. There isn’t a priest on the planet who has the sacramental effecacy to overturn the excommunication and administer the sacraments to them. Additionally, this whole “sin eating” proposition undervalues the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

 

[Charliemac]

drakkoby,
This is just Hollywood at its worst. There are a lot of good answers here. Just about the only issue that I did not see mentioned, unless I missed it, is that a priest is a priest forever. An “ex-priest” would be one who had been stripped of his faculties. This might happen because of some grave issue, or because he had requested that he be relieved of the obligations of the priesthood. When that happens, he is still a priest, he still has the priestly powers that he received at ordination, but he does not have the authority to administer the sacraments.
I have witnessed a person receiving the “Last Rites.” It is common for the priest to hear the person’s Confession if possible, and to give Holy Communion if they are physically able to receive. At the “Last Rite” the Communion is referred to as Viaticum which means Food for the Journey. Special prayers are said by the priest, and the person is anointed. An ex-priest would not have the the Eucharist, nor would he have the holy oil. However, a priest may ALWAYS administer to a person in danger of death. Under the circumstances I think that the priest who had concern for the dieing person who attempt to hear his confession. The rest is nonsense.

Questions are only dumb when we don’t voice them.
Charliemac

 

[Aurelia]

Don’t believe everything you see in the movies about the Church. When it comes to religion, Hollywood writers haven’t a clue.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

<<Don’t believe everything you see in the movies about the Church. When it comes to religion, Hollywood writers haven’t a clue.>>

I agree with your first sentence. However, while some Hollywood writers <don’t have a clue> I think that some OTHER writers have a personal agenda in trying to make religion (at least, Christian, and often more specifically Catholic) look as bad as possible.

You know, things are good if they are “spiritual”–i.e., mention God, or “the force”, make you feel good. But “religion” in the sense of Christianity is usually patriistic, controlling, man-made, repressive, full of silly rituals, useless, hypocritical, etc. That’s because “religion” has taken away the (or feminine, or oneness, or whatever gnostic or gender bender wants to have). Oh, how corrupt RELIGION is, and how sweet the spiritual, loving, pantheistic, animalistic, pureness of a life free of religion! <<<(Major sarcasm alert here)>>>

In other words, Hollywood is rather over-represented in the secular humanistic department.

 

[Socrates]

Aurelia:

Don’t believe everything you see in the movies about the Church. When it comes to religion, Hollywood writers haven’t a clue.

Actually today you’d be pretty safe if you didn’t believe ANYTHING you see in movies about the Church. Especially in thrillers like “The Order.”

That’s disappointing considering how many true stories about the Church have the potential to be fabulous movies.

 

[Matt16_18]

drakk

The movie claims some ex-priests would put bread on a dying person’s chest and then eat the bread and so absorb the dying person’s sins, thus giving him absolution.

That sounds similar to a Protestant folklore ritual that is still practiced in the rural South. A friend of mine that grew up in the rural South once told me about the practice of eating “soul cakes” after a funeral. Apparently this folk ritual has some beneficial effect for the deceased about which I never clearly understood.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Apologia100:

…There is no priest on the planet that is allowed to confer the sacraments upon an excommunicant until they have repented and are reinstated by the ordinary who has authority to do so. If a person was excommunicated by a local bishop, that bishop or one of his successors can “undo” the excommunication. One excommunicated by the Pope (rare as that may be) could only be undone by the Pope. There isn’t a priest on the planet who has the sacramental effecacy to overturn the excommunication and administer the sacraments to them. …QUOTE]

But do note
Can. 1357 §1. Without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. 508 and 976, a confessor can remit in the internal sacramental forum an undeclared latae sententiae censure of excommunication or interdict if it is burdensome for the penitent to remain in the state of grave sin during the time necessary for the competent superior to make provision.

§2. In granting the remission, the confessor is to impose on the penitent, under the penalty of reincidence, the obligation of making recourse within a month to the competent superior or to a priest endowed with the faculty and the obligation of obeying his mandates; in the meantime he is to impose a suitable penance and, insofar as it is demanded, reparation of any scandal and damage; however, recourse can also be made through the confessor, without mention of the name.

§3. After they have recovered, those for whom an imposed or declared censure or one reserved to the Apostolic See has been remitted according to the norm of ⇒ can. 976 are also obliged to make recourse.

 

[space_ghost]

is this movie out for rental… hard to comment without seeing…

 

[parishminister]

You can rent “The Order” at Blockbuster…it’s been out for several months and is a bunch of nonsense, imho and beyond that, it isn’t even very well made. Of course, the handsome young priest, throws his vows out the window for the love of a beautiful young woman…

Peace…

 

[loyola_rambler]

Parish minister is probably closest to hitting it on the head.

I did actually see the movie. I also have a PhD in European History with an emphasis on the French Church of the Middle Ages and Renaissance. To the best of my knowledge, the order was made up, but very close to the Sulpicians in the way they were depicted.

In the early Middle Ages, there was a tradition in some communities that an old hermit or someone “disreputable” in the community would indeed eat or purchase the sins of the dying. Was the actual practice depicted in the movie? No, not really. But it was an interesting practice in its own right and was really a big superstition that was outside the realm of Catholicism. The Church obviously never condoned it, but it was done anyway.

Also, for those who didn’t see the movie, the priest in question was the last living member of his community and he resigned from the ministry for breaking his vows. He was tricked into becoming a “sin-eater” by someone who had been doing it since the building of the Sistine chapel (yes, sin-eaters in the movie become immortal). Only when he could find someone to eat his own sins could the old sin-eater finally die. Obviously that’s all superstition and there’s no theology behind it.

To keep it in perspective, though, this movie is dealing with nothing more than age-old superstitions. It’s not dealing with real Catholic theology.

 

[Matt16_18]

The X-Files did an episode that was a twist on the folklore of the “sin eater”.
The Gift
Writer: Frank Spotnitz
Director: Kim Manners

… [Mulder’s] destination was the small community of Squamash, where a town filled with desperately sick people have been harboring a Native American Soul-Eater, a being that can consume the sickness and pain of others and make them well again. The only catch is that, in order for the Soul-Eater to do this, it must consume the entire person, then vomit them back up again.

Ewwwwww.

the11thhour.com/archives/022001/tvreviews/xf_thegift.html

… John Doggett’s decency and compassionate nature came to the forefront in this gloomy atmospheric episode and Robert Patrick played it perfectly. … If you can get by the fact that John Doggett was eaten and regurgitated, this was a great traditional X-Files episode and it makes my All-Time Top 20.

lauracapo2000.com/S8DOGGETTPg2.html

 

[loyola_rambler]

Matt16_18:

The X-Files did an episode that was a twist on the folklore of the “sin eater”.

The Gift
Writer: Frank Spotnitz
Director: Kim Manners

… [Mulder’s] destination was the small community of Squamash, where a town filled with desperately sick people have been harboring a Native American Soul-Eater, a being that can consume the sickness and pain of others and make them well again. The only catch is that, in order for the Soul-Eater to do this, it must consume the entire person, then vomit them back up again.

Ewwwwww.

Ewwwwww is right!

 

[TheGrowingGrape]

I saw this movie, The Order.

Hollywood hates Catholics! Just look at how they treated poor Mel. He’s practically been blacklisted. Hollywood is a city run by Satan, so keep in-mind the real source.

There are so many errors in this film! First of all, there is no such thing as a Sin Eater. It’s pure fiction.

Also, the writer of the movie obviously didn’t understand the ABC basics of Catholicism. The movie’s entire plot was based upon the assumption that an ex-communicated priest is no longer a priest, and therefore cannot administer the Sacraments. This is not true.

Yes, jurisdiction is normally required to administer the sacrament of Confession /absolution, but the Code of Canon Law stipilates an exception in the event of a life-threatening emergency or if someone is in danger of sudden death. Any priest, even if he’s been ex-communicated, even if he’s renounced his priesthood, can still absolve sins under the right circumstances. The circumstances surrounding the death of the girl in the film qualify as emergent.

Heath Ledger is a priest in the movie. He is then excommunicated because he gave up the priesthood for a woman. Stupidly, the movie assumes Ledger is no longer a priest!

At the end of the movie, Ledger’s girlfriend dies wihtout recieving the sacrament of Confession and absolution. She is about to goto Hell. Instead of administering the emergency sacrament of Confession, Ledger’s character becomes a Sin Eater, and damns his own soul to save hers.

The writer didn’t know that a priest is always a priest, and obviously has never read the Code of Canon Law, which, as previouly stated, stipulates that in emergency situations, one can administer the sacraments of Confession and Extreme unction, even if one is excommunicated.

Heck, even Martin Luther could’ve absolved her and annointed her for Extreme Unction.

The writer of the film obviously wasn’t a Catholic.

I laughed at the end of the movie, because the writer invalidated his own plot! The whole premise of the movie was flawed!!! Heath Ledger didn’t have to become a Sin Eater! He was a priest! All he had to do was say the words … after all … she was willing to confess.

Furthermore, even if he hadn’t absolved her, the writer of this film has obviously never heard of Perfect Contrition. If one has Perfect Contrition, it is possible to enter into the Church Suffering (Purgatory) if one has been Baptised. I think her character had been Baptised. A place in Purgatory guarantees that one will one day enter heaven. (Oh, and if she hadn’t been baptised, even a lay person could administer the sacrament in the event of an emergency. Heck, she could even by baptised without water or someone to administer by Baptism of Desire).

Stupid Hollywood. Very stupid screwup on this film.

The writer should’ve studied Catholicism or run the script by a priest before making a fool of himself. The fact that no one in the production process caught these HUGE and obvious errors says a lot about the spiritual state of Hollywood-ites.

 

[TheGrowingGrape]

That’s disappointing considering how many true stories about the Church have the potential to be fabulous movies

The Sound of Music is the only movie( that I can presently recall) that depicts Catholics accurately. I LOVE this movie.

The Passion of the Christ, and Jesus of Nazareth were made by Catholics, and are excellent, though neither specifically mentions Catholicism by name.

Quite honestly, I can think of no more!!!

 

[loyola_rambler]

The Sound of Music is the only movie( that I can presently recall) that depicts Catholics accurately. I LOVE this movie.

The Passion of the Christ, and Jesus of Nazareth were made by Catholics, and are excellent, though neither specifically mentions Catholicism by name.

Quite honestly, I can think of no more!!!

Aw be fair…

Spencer Tracy was an awesome Fr. Flanagan.

John Wayne did several excellent films on Catholicism, including The Quiet Man and one (whose name escapes me) on football saving a small Catholic college.

Can we dare dismiss any of Bing Crosby’s “priest” roles, especially The Bells of St. Mary’s?

Can we possibly forget the movies about Notre Dame, especially Sean Astin in Rudy or Knute Rockne: All American?

Was anything less than accurate and positive in Susan Sarandon’s role of a nun ministering in a prison in Dead Man Walking?

In the 80s there were excellent films on the missionaries in Central and South America…both fair and accurate.

Les Miserables was full of Catholicism…and Catholic charity. It was not only a broadway smash, but has been made into several very successful movies.

Even Shogun showed the very strong, positive effects of the Jesuits on the opening of Japan to the west.

 

[raphaela]

I didnt’ mind the movie…but i took it as a movie, nothing true… I hardly doubt that by eating sins, you live forever. It’s hollywood and it’s fiction, keep that in mind.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Frank Sinatra gave a good, and practical, portrayal of a priest in The Miracle of the Bells. Montgomery Cliff was good as a priest in I Confess.

 

[ORION86]

research people… research.
A sin-eater is a traditional type of spiritual healer who uses a ritual to cleanse the dying of their sins. The sin-eater absorbs the sins of the people he or she serves and typically works for a fee. As the sins are usually consumed through food and drink, the sin-eater also gains a meal through the transaction. Sin-eaters are often outcasts, as the work may be considered unsavory and is usually thought to lead to an afterlife in hell due to carrying the unabsolved sins of others. The Roman Catholic Church regularly excommunicated sin-eaters when they were more common, not only because of the excessive sins they carried, but also because they infringed upon the territory of priests, who are supposed to administer Last Rites to the dying according to Church Doctrine.The sin-eater saves the dying not only from hell, but also from wandering the earth as a ghost - thereby performing a service for the living as well. In some traditions, sin-eaters perform their work for the moribund, while in others, the ritual takes place at the funeral. The sin-eater is usually associated with the British Isles, but there are analogous customs in other cultures as well.

A sin-eater typically consumes bread as part of the ritual of taking on the dying person’s sins. He or she may also eat salt or drink water or ale. Sometimes, special breads are baked for the purpose of the sin-eating ritual, perhaps featuring the initials or image of the deceased. The meal is sometimes passed over the dead or dying body or placed on its breast to symbolize its absorption of the person’s sins. The sin-eater may also recite a special prayer.

Some cultures have customs that are similar to sin-eating and may have evolved from more traditional forms of the ritual. Instead of a designated, outcast sin-eater serving a village, for example, the deceased’s nearest relatives may perform the service, as was once traditional in Bavaria and the Balkan Peninsula. In the Netherlands and some parts of England, ritual baked goods were given to the attendants or pallbearers at a funeral. This latter tradition lived on for a time in New York. Today, the custom of the sin-eater has largely died out, though it is often referenced in popular culture.