An Abused Sacrament: Penance and Reconciliation

One of the problems many non-Catholics have with their Catholic brothers and sisters is in regard to the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation. The thrust of their argument goes something like this: “Catholics think they can do anything they want, whenever they want, no matter what the sin, and all they have to do is go to Confession to get forgiveness. Then, the next week, if not the very next day they are out doing the same things again”.

I hate to be the one to say it, but...far too often they are right. Now, I am not saying all Catholics think and believe this way, mind you. No, I think the majority of true Catholic believers take all the Sacraments of the Church seriously, and see all Sacraments as a public expression of Faith, and more importantly, as rites instituted by Jesus Christ, by which invisible grace and inward sanctification are communicated to the soul. Yet, there are also many, who from their actions and words fail to fully grasp the importance and necessity of what the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation really entails and means. For the sake of both brevity, and clarity to non-Catholics unfamiliar with the term “Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation”, I will from this point on refer to this Sacrament by its more popularly known and understood name, “Confession”.

Whenever a person sins, his or her sins : a. hurt themselves; b. hurt their neighbor; and c. wounds the Body of Christ, the Church. Thus, our sins have a far reaching affect, more so than most people want to realize or to admit. As our sins have such an impact on ourselves, on others, and on the Body of Christ, we are duty bound as true believers in the Mercy of Christ, and as sons and daughters of the Church, to confess our sins, both venial and mortal as completely as possible, as well as soon as possible.

We should have “contrition” for our sins. Contrition being, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: Sorrow of the soul and hatred for the sin committed, together with a resolution not to sin again. Contrition is the most important act of the penitent, and is necessary for the reception of the Sacrament of Penance (1451). Thus, we should have deep sorrow for committing the sin, wishing we had never committed the sin. We should detest the sins, grieve for having committed the sins, and make a determination to never sin again. It means that we have the desire to regain friendship with God, that has been lost or injured by sin.

We should give a full and complete confession, as explained in “The Pocket Catholic Dictionary” by Father John A. Hardon, S.J., : “It must be objectively complete in that the penitent confesses every mortal sin according to number and kinds that he has committed since his last worthy reception of the sacrament of penance. In extraordinary circumstances a subjectively complete confession is sufficient, that is, when circumstances prevent a person from accusing himself of all his grave sins. He is nevertheless obliged to confess all his mortal sins in a later reception of the sacrament. When there are no mortal sins to confess, it is sufficient to confess any previous sins from one's past life or any present venial sins of which a person has been guilty, in order to obtain absolution and the grace of the sacrament of penance”.

 

Now, if we go into Confession, and confess a sin, our confession is not valid if our intent is to make a confession for a sin or sins, and we know that we will be committing this very same sin or sins again! If we know in our hearts (and you do know) that tomorrow, or next week, or next month, we will be committing the same sin or sins again, then we have not lied to just another man by lying to the priest. We have lied to Jesus Christ Himself, as the priest is standing in Christ's place before us when we make our confession! Then, when we take the Holy Eucharist, we have then bought condemnation upon ourselves for having received the Body and Blood of Our Lord unworthily!

Further, The Catholic Encyclopedia states (emphasis in bold italics is mine): It is not true that for the Catholic the mere "telling of one's sins" suffices to obtain their forgiveness. Without sincere sorrow and purpose of amendment, confession avails nothing, the pronouncement of absolution is of no effect, and the guilt of the sinner is greater than before.
 

While this sacrament as a dispensation of Divine mercy facilitates the pardoning of sin, it by no means renders sin less hateful or its consequences less dreadful to the Christian mind; much less does it imply permission to commit sin in the future. In paying ordinary debts, as e.g., by monthly settlements, the intention of contracting new debts with the same creditor is perfectly legitimate; a similar intention on the part of him who confesses his sins would not only be wrong in itself but would nullify the sacrament and prevent the forgiveness of sins then and there confessed.

Let us always keep in our minds and in our hearts, to make our confessions as completely and as sincerely as possible, and that we be determined to not commit sin again. Let us also keep in mind, that as Catholic Christians, no matter where we are, no matter what we do, no matter what we say, to those non-Catholics who know us as Catholic Christians, WE represent the Church and what the Church is to THEM!

1 Corinthians 11:26-30: For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he come. Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you: and many sleep.

Copyright © 2005 Steve Smith. All rights reserved.

Politics and Receiving Communion

With the 2004 election, we began to hear more and more about communion and politicians who support abortion. Several bishops from around the country made headlines when they either refused, or stated that they would refuse communion to any politician who proclaims them self “pro-choice” while still nominally maintaining that they are Catholic. This became an almost weekly news event, especially when certain high profile Catholic politicians attended Mass, and reporters waited to see if that politician would be denied communion.

Lets make one point absolutely clear in the terminology in vogue in regard to abortion. When a politician, or any other ordinary citizen states that he or she is “pro-choice” or supports “reproductive rights”, they are proclaiming themselves PRO- ABORTION. No nice little clean terms like “pro-choice” or “reproductive rights” hides that fact nor changes it, and hopefully the American people are not blind to that fact. The pro-abortion faction is also adamant in insisting that a bishop or priest denying them communion crosses the line on the so called “separation of church and state”, which is another term thrown at random by anyone who opposes anything the Church teaches. Although those people are hard pressed to show where this is supposedly contained in the United States Constitution. They are hard pressed because it does not exist anywhere within the Constitution.

The hue and cry over this began when Pope Benedict XVI, when he was still known as Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, sent a letter to American Bishops entitled “"Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles". Stated in "General Principles," no Catholic should seek to receive Holy Communion if he or she is guilty of "a grave sin," and abortion is a grave sin. Further, he wrote that a priest "may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin,”. (An interdict, which can only be imposed by a bishop, bars a Catholic from receiving any of the Sacraments, including Holy Communion.) Banning communion is not limited to those who perform abortion Cardinal Ratzinger also wrote that it included anyone "whose personal cooperation becomes manifest," including "the case of a Catholic politician consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws. The pastor should meet him, instructing him about the Church's teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of the sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Holy Eucharist."

In the end, any politician who campaigns or votes in a manner that is pro-abortion effectively excludes himself or herself from receiving Holy Communion. Further, any Catholic who votes for any pro-abortion politician based on the politicians pro-abortion stance, then that voter has also excluded him or her self from receiving Holy Communion as well. In both cases, the politician and the voter should partake in the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation (Confession) before going to receive the Holy Eucharist.

This does not cross the line in the so called “separation of Church and State” at all. As stated previously, nowhere in the Constitution of the United States of America, does the term “separation of Church and State” exist. Go read the Constitution yourself and find out. Don't take my word for it, alone. A well known Catholic politician once told a group of Baptist ministers that he would never allow the Catholic Church to influence any of his decisions for the United States. In essence, what that politician was saying was, that he would not allow God's One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church to influence any of his decisions, and thereby making such a statement, he was also saying, that he would not allow God to influence any of his decisions as well. No one, in any walk of life, be they king, president, politician, bishop, priest, or citizen, can not leave out God, God's influence, or God's Church from their decisions, public or private. To leave out God is to invite destruction and ruin within their lives, with those whom they lead, and with those whom they love.

Let's look at Catholic Teaching on abortion from the “Catechism of the Catholic Church”:

2258 "Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being." (CDF, instruction, Donum vitae, intro. 5.)

2268 The fifth commandment forbids direct and intentional killing as gravely sinful. The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.(Gen 4:10) Infanticide, fratricide, parricide, and the murder of a spouse are especially grave crimes by reason of the natural bonds which they break. Concern for eugenics or public health cannot justify any murder, even if commanded by public authority.

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person—among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life. (Cf. CDF, Donum vitae I, 1)

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. (Jer 1:5; cf. Job 10:8-12; Ps 22:10-11)

My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth. (Ps 139:15)

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.

(Didache 2, 2: SCh 248, 148; cf. Ep. Barnabae 19, 5: PG 2, 777; Ad Diognetum 5, 6: PG 2, 1173; Tertullian, Apol. 9: PL 1, 319-320)

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"(CIC, can. 1398) "by the very commission of the offense,"(CIC, can. 1314) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. (Cf. CIC, cann. 1323-1324) The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death." (CDF, Donum vitae III)

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights." (CDF, Donum vitae III)

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safeguarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."

(CDF, Donum vitae I, 2)

Copyright © 2005 Steve Smith. All rights reserved.