By DON FIER
In our consideration of the Sacrament of Penance, three acts were specified that are requisite of the repentant sinner in order to make a worthy confession: contrition or sorrow for all sins committed; confession of all serious sins committed since one’s last good confession; and satisfaction or atonement for those sins.
We saw last week that the Church has always taught that the disclosure of sins must be auricular — the priest must hear sins directly from the penitent. “For this reason,” explains Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ, “the confession of sins over the phone, in writing, or in any other manner in strictly forbidden” (Basic Catholic Catechism Course [BCCC], p. 163).
In her solicitude, however, the Church provides for a means of sacramental Confession for the deaf and/or dumb. In this situation, the repentant sinner may confess by sign language (with or without a translator), or by writing his sins on a slip of paper and handing it to the priest while making some sign to indicate that he accuses himself of those sins and that he is sorry for them (cf. ibid.).
Important to note is that a translator, like the priest, is bound by the “seal of Confession,” a topic that will be examined in more depth in a future column.
All mortal sins of which the penitent is mindful after a diligent examination of conscience must be recounted. Disclosure must be according to kind and number; likewise, any circumstance that alters the gravity of serious sins must be disclosed. At the same time, unnecessary details and rationalizing justifications are to be avoided.
Confession of venial sins, although unnecessary, is highly recommended. Through this practice (sometimes referred to as “devotional confession”), the grace of the sacrament, which helps us to overcome daily faults, is received; our love of God increases; and our awareness of the evil of sin grows.
Furthermore, as noted by Fr. Kenneth Baker, SJ, in volume 3 of Fundamentals of Catholicism (FoC-3), if a penitent has little new to confess since his last Confession, it is acceptable to mention already forgiven sins which one particularly regrets as an efficacious act of humility and submission to Christ (cf. p. 297).
Before leaving the topic of confessing one’s sins, it would be good to consider the immense psychological benefit that the sincere penitent receives from worthy reception of the sacrament. “The principal source of conflict in the human spirit,” states Fr. Hardon, “is the sense of guilt” (BCCC, p. 164). In like manner, Fr. Baker affirms that “sin and guilt place a heavy burden on the mind and soul” (FoC-3, p. 302).
Guilt, in turn, produces anxiety. Friendship with God, on the other hand, is accompanied by a certain peace of soul. This is a topic often spoken and written about by the Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen.
In his work entitled These Are the Sacraments, Archbishop Sheen contrasts the enormous differences that exist between psychoanalysis, which he describes as “an avowal of an attitude of mind,” and sacramental Confession, which is “an avowal of guilt.” In both cases, he asserts, “the human mind, when disturbed, seeks to throw off its burden” (p. 87). A person can be proud of his state of mind (even an atheist or a gangster); however, no one is ever proud of his guilt.
Another difference, His Excellency quips, is that in one instance the person is on a couch; in the other, he is on his knees. And what differences these are! This, by no means, is meant to be critical of the value of psychoanalysis, but only to say it can never replace Confession.
It is probably a relatively safe statement to say that the majority of faithful Catholics have experienced a profound sense of peace and relief after making a good Confession. The Council of Trent speaks of this: “The effect of this sacrament . . . is reconciliation with God, which sometimes . . . is wont to be accompanied by peace and serenity of conscience, with earnest consolation of spirit” (session 14, chapter 3).
It is important, however, to take careful note of the qualifier sometimes. Although consoling feelings are commonplace after one makes a sincere and heartfelt Confession, such feelings are not essential to the efficacy of the sacrament; forgiveness of sins is wholly independent of feelings of serenity or consolation (cf. FoC-3, p. 302). The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) now considers the last of the three acts required of the penitent: satisfaction. This, of course, is in reference to the penance the priest imposes on the person before leaving the confessional “by which the penitent makes reparation for the injury done to God through sin. This penance helps to satisfy the temporal punishment due to sin, for even though the sin has already been forgiven in the Sacrament of Confession, all the disorders to which the sin has given rise are not immediately healed. Lifted up from sin, the sinner has yet to recuperate fully and regain his spiritual health” (BCCC, p. 164).
The etymology of the word satisfaction is from the Latin satisfacere (satis, “sufficient, enough”; facere, “to do, make”). Fr. Hardon gives a precise definition in his Modern Catholic Dictionary: “The expiation of wrongdoing, especially the penance imposed by the priest before giving sacramental absolution. Essentially the satisfaction consists in the penitent’s willingness to accept the penance imposed and its actual fulfillment. The effect of these two elements is to remove more or less the temporal punishment due to the sins confessed” (p. 490).
To better understand the need for expiation, let us review what the Church teaches regarding punishment due to sin. For mortal sin, it is twofold: eternal punishment (final and lasting separation from God for all eternity), and temporal punishment (the pain, suffering, and trials that the sinner must still endure after the guilt of sin has been forgiven). Eternal punishment is not incurred for venial sins, but temporal punishment still applies. Expiation takes place either in this life (through prayer, fasting, and almsgiving), or by purification in Purgatory after death.
One can see the basis for this traditional teaching of the Church even in the Old Testament. For example, although Adam and Eve repented of their sin and were forgiven, they were expelled from the Garden of Paradise and suffered the consequences of their sin for the rest of their lives (see Gen. 3:16f). Even though Moses repented and was forgiven for his sin against the Lord, he was denied entrance to the Promised Land (see Num. 20:11-12).
Finally, consider the transgressions of King David; despite being forgiven for his adulterous affair with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband Uriah, he was punished because of his sins (see 2 Samuel 12:13f). St. Paul teaches the same truth: “When we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened so that we may not be condemned along with the world” (1 Cor. 11:32), where the term “chastened,” according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, refers to temporal punishment.
What form of satisfaction is required? The Catechism first reminds us that “many sins wrong our neighbor” (CCC, n. 1459). As a matter of simple justice, the repentant sinner must agree to do what is possible to repair the harm that has been done, for “every offense committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven” (CCC, n. 2487).
If one has slandered his neighbor, he must do what is possible to restore the reputation of the disparaged party. In the case of theft, money or property must be returned to the owner to the extent possible. Likewise, if injury or property damage results from sinful actions, compensation is due to the injured party to the extent possible.
The new Rite of Penance, issued a few years after the close of Vatican Council II, instructs: “The kind and extent of the expiation [satisfaction] must be suited to the personal condition of penitents so that they may restore the order that they have upset and through the corresponding remedy be cured of the sickness from which they suffered” (Ordo Paenitentia, n. 6c).
“It must correspond as far as possible with the gravity and nature of the sins committed,” explains the Catechism. “It can consist of prayer, an offering, works of mercy, service of neighbor, voluntary self-denial, sacrifices, and above all the patient acceptance of the cross we must bear” (CCC, n. 1460). Fr. Hardon further instructs us that the penance imposed by the priest “should be performed exactly, fervently, and promptly” (BCCC, p. 164). He further cautions that “deliberate failure to perform a penance imposed for mortal sin is gravely sinful.”
The Final Act
The penance we perform in satisfaction for our sins “helps configure us to Christ, who alone expiated our sins once for all” (CCC, n. 1460).
We should be always mindful that “the satisfaction that we make for our sins, however, is not so much ours as though it were not done through Jesus Christ. We who can do nothing ourselves, as if just by ourselves, can do all things with the cooperation of ‘him who strengthens’ us” (Council of Trent, session 14, chapter 8; as cited in CCC, n. 1460).
Indeed, as Pope St. John Paul II proclaimed in his 1984 apostolic exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, “Satisfaction is the final act which crowns the sacramental sign of penance” (n. 31 § 12).
+ + +
(Don Fier serves on the board of directors for The Catholic Servant, a Minneapolis-based monthly publication. He and his wife are the parents of seven children. Fier is a 2009 graduate of Ave Maria University’s Institute for Pastoral Theology. He is doing research for writing a definitive biography of Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ.)
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress