What is in Kelvin's Head?

The Sacraments: Reconciliation

11/08/2016

People sometimes know the sacrament of reconciliation by another name – sometimes people call it Penance and sometimes people call it Confession which, strictly speaking is only a part of what is going on. In the sacrament of reconciliation, the idea is that people are brought back into a right relationship with God and get the chance to sort out whatever it is that they have done which seems to be separating them from God and to hear afresh the news that their sins are forgiven.

There are two formal ways in which people within an Anglican/Episcopal tradition get the chance to confess sins and hear of God’s forgiveness.

During many of the liturgies of the church the people confess their sins by reciting a simple prayer. This is followed by the assurance of God’s forgiveness which is pronounced by a priest, something which is called absolution. The idea is that this gives everyone present the opportunity to call to mind those times and places where they feel they have fallen short of being the person that God might want them to be and indeed fallen short of their own best expectations too. Simply reciting the prayer without taking the chance to think of the things in life that one regrets and desires forgiveness for does not constitute the sacrament of reconciliation. The sacrament depends completely on what is happening inside a person and is not simply about the form of words that they use. In this, reconciliation is like the other sacraments – outward symbols conveying deep spiritual realities.

The other way that someone might experience the sacrament of reconciliation is by meeting with a priest on a one-to-one basis to make a confession. A common way for this to happen is for the person to make an appointment with the priest. The priest and the penitent may meet for a discussion about what is on the person’s mind before completing the sacrament with a simple liturgical invitation to name before God those sins which the person wishes to confess. Once these have been outlined by the person, the priest may give some advice and then pronounce in God’s name that those sins have been forgiven. In participating in the sacrament in this way, the priest and the penitent enter into an agreement that what is discussed there is not discussed elsewhere. This “seal of the confessional” is binding on the person seeking forgiveness as well as upon the person pronouncing God’s forgiveness.

In our tradition we have a rule about confessing sins to a priest – “All may, none must, some should”. The sacrament is available to all members of the church and indeed is sometimes sought by those who don’t belong to the church in any other way. However, there is never any compulsion that anyone must go to confession. You don’t have to make a confession at any time for any reason other than that you feel the need to do so. It is our experience as a community though that some people do need to make this a part of their spiritual practise and for them, they should seek it regularly.

All priests in the Scottish Episcopal Church are required by Canon Law to hear a confession if someone asks them to hear one or to point them towards another priest who is able to hear it if they themselves are not able to do so for some reason.

The seal of the confession is regarded as absolute. What is discussed in the course of this ministry is never discussed elsewhere.

Some people have the tradition of asking for a penance when the priest has pronounced forgiveness. A penance is not a punishment for sin – sin has already been forgiven. A penance is the chance to take on a small spiritual discipline or an activity that will remind the person that they have been forgiven and help them to reorientate their life towards God. A penance is not supposed to be arduous but to be a joyful and life-affirming reminder of why forgiveness was sought and that forgiveness was given.

Confession is about turning our lives around. One of the technical words for this is metanoia a Greek word which refers to changing one’s mind in a way that analogous to turning and facing in a new direction. Repentance is at the heart of confession and is the consequence of wanting to put things right with the world and with God. God’s forgiving love is the inevitable consequence of someone’s sincere repentance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What if a priest heard someone confess to a murder or from someone who said they were going to harm someone – shouldn’t they report it to the police
People often ask this question about confession but it is a bit of a distraction from the simple and beautiful task of restoring someone’s relationship with God which is usually a good deal less dramatic than this. The sacrament of reconciliation for almost everyone, almost all the time, isn’t about the consequences of murders.

Yes but what if…?
A priest is free to respond to this situation in the way that they feel best. One thing that they might insist on would be to make an pronouncement of absolution conditional on an act such as reporting oneself to the authorities.

Won’t I feel funny seeing the priest and knowing that they know things about me that I would rather someone else didn’t know?
Most priests who hear confessions regularly will remark that God gives them the gift of forgetting what people say in confession. The priest isn’t a scapegoat and doesn’t absorb the sins that she or he hears someone confess. Most people engaged in this kind of ministry learn how to put things out of their minds very quickly for their own good and the good of those coming for confession.

Can any priest hear confessions?
Yes, but it is wise for someone to have had a few years of priestly ministry and be instructed by a more experienced priest in hearing confessions before they do so regularly.Does

a confession have to be heard in church?
No – a confession can be heard anywhere and sometimes take place in very public places such as train stations, airports or even on the battlefield before conflict. Sometimes they take place in places like hospitals or hospices where sometimes the sacrament may become important to someone if they know that they are likely to die soon. However in our tradition, it is most common for a confession to be heard in church by prior arrangement with a priest.

Is there a confessional box at St Mary’s?
No – confessions are usually heard in a quiet side chapel

20 responses to “Apologies have consequences too”

Andrew Cain

15/04/2016

You say so often and so eloquently what I feel.

Reply
1. Father Ron Smith
  
  16/04/2016
  
  Food for serious thought, Father Kelvin. I don’t suppose there has been any objection raised by the Church of England Bishops about the liberalising ativity of our Norwegian partner’s in Christ. It is this continuing double-mindedness that exposes us Anglicans to the charge of structured hypocrisy. Keep up the good work you are doing on your web-site. Christ IS risen, Alleluia!
  
  Reply
Alan Wilson

15/04/2016

Thank you, Kelvin. It’s certainly a change of the mood music going on, but self-lacerating apologies are subject to the law of diminishing returns unless they indicate what we call “Metanoia” – change of mind, aka repentance. This means things real change. Without it, apologies breed cynicism, not hope. When, for example, a bishop tells us he is ashamed whenever he encounters homophobia in the church, curious minds want to ask him “when did you last encounter what you call homophobia in the church? What was it like? How was it separable from the ideology that validated it? And since it’s such a shameful thing, what are you going to do about it?”

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  16/04/2016
  
  The real disconnect for me is that Justin Welby is someone who clearly does know something about what reconcilliation is. He can’t have done that job in Coventry and not known and he can’t have named reconcilliation as one of the key strands of his time as Archbishop without knowing that metanoia is part of the deal if that is what you are chasing after.
  
  However, I can only come back again and again to the possibility that there are those who simply think that LGBT are indeed actually worth less than real people.
  
  Reply
  1. June Butler
    
    18/04/2016
    
    Kelvin, after I read your words about the empty apologies by authorities in the church after which their behavior does not change, I could not help but think what you stated in your comment, that the leaders, with exceptions like Alan Wilson, believe LGTB folks are lesser. What else can we think? My advice would be to stop apologizing and be honest, which would be a step in the right direction, because at least the hypocrisy would end.
    
    Reply
adrian copping

16/04/2016

Thank you for this. Something similar has been happening here in Wales in the past week or so where our Bishops have apologised AND issued some prayers which are authorised for use in connnection with ministry to LGBTI people. This is to be welcomed as a sign of a step in a positive direction but, at the same time, leaves a lot of questions and many disappointed.

Reply
Bob Webster

16/04/2016

Saying it is a “constant source of deep sadness that people are persecuted for their sexuality” is not an apology. At best it is a request that someone should stop making him feel bad. That could be the people doing the persecuting, or it could be us who should just be quiet and preferably go away. An apology would be “I apologize for the hurt I have caused and as a consequence of recognizing my sin I will cease that behaviour and do everything I can to get others to stop as well.”

Reply
Ruth Richards-Hill

16/04/2016

Kelvin, you are an expert at stating things so eloquently that makes everyone else in the Anglican communion squirm.

I was not oblivious to the fact that as a lesbian woman I entered a family of churches with a huge diversity of attitudes towards my sexuality. It was only because of the grace and love of Jesus Christ that I felt safe to come into the church despite my “flaws” and receive baptism. Is my baptism any less valid because I am a lesbian?

As a convert from Orthodox Judaism I suspect that I am sometimes more acutely aware than others at what should be in my mind a glaring hypocrisy. Rabbinical thought always looks for an alternatives to explain why a certain situation does or does not apply according to halachah (ecclesiastical law – much like the canons). But the balance either exists or it doesnt. Jesus speaks about divorce and makes it quite clear that its not really an option, while in rabbinical law, it certainly is an option. We are taught that he came to fulfil the law and yet we his church are part of a new covenant are we not? The church seems to have taken the easy way out and will marry people who have divorced, but will not marry gay couples. So if divorced people are part of the new covenant, why arent us gay folk?

I could get into all the biblical quotation arguments and as someone that reads Classical Hebrew better than most Anglicans I know, I have no fear in taking a stand on my point. (My Greek needs a little more work however.) That said, I dont see a balanced biblical foundation for excluding some that are automatically excluded by literal translation of scripture, but not others, but rather an inherited bigotry and hypocrisy that continues to thrive simply to satisy the whims of member churches whose societies havent quite experienced the journey that ours has. While that doesnt invalidate their position, neither does it invalidate the position of our society and our spiritual progress should not be hindered to satisy the agenda of those religious leaders that appear to be pandering to the demands of those churches that have not walked the path of ours.

I have arguments that cover more than simple translations and exegesis particularly surrounding what the rules were both before and after the death of Christ, but those are for another day. I know that I am a baptised Christian and Jesus loves me as much as any other, not because I am gay or straight, but because I am one of his, and therefore he wants me to thrive within his covenant rather than the stifling, unreasonable and hair splitting laws that came before – Ones that I personally know how incredibly impossible they are to live by, no matter what your sexuality, or colour, or intellectual ability. – I was there once.

When our Bishops and leaders realise that Christ died exactly to make the Christian lives of the likes of me equally valid as straight people, then perhaps we’ll make a little more progress and not see these “apologies” as merely lip service. Its almost embarrassing to LGBT people for whom their faith is a core part of their lives. It certainly is for me.

Reply
Ruth Harley

16/04/2016

Any child in my Sunday School group could tell you that repentance is not just “saying sorry” it is “saying sorry, being sorry, and changing”. Possibly ++Justin’s words make it as far as the first of these, but I’m not convinced they signify the second, and the third is nowhere in sight. Perhaps I should send my 5 year old theologians to Lambeth and/or Lusaka to explain! Or perhaps it’s just that those who are issuing these ‘apologies’ aren’t really thinking in terms of repentance, or seeing the need for it, at all.

Reply
Mark Falby

16/04/2016

Apologies mean nothing if not backed by action.

Reply
Junia

16/04/2016

Well I did recently get brutally and spectacularly dumped by an American lesbian, so perhaps they just are naturally more wicked over there…

In seriousness though, thank you for this wonderfully elegant post, Kelvin, summarising so much of what I have felt since ++Justin’s statement in January. I’m starting to get a little sick of being apologised to.

Reply
1. Cynthia
  
  17/04/2016
  
  Speaking as an American lesbian, I’m sure the Norwegian lesbians are much better people, and that we are “naturally more wicked…” 😉
  
  Kelvin expresses well the debacle of January. But interestingly, Justin just delivered an amazing sermon at ACC-16 that marks a major change of heart and theology if he’s sincere. We’ll see. A lot has happened since January.
  
  Have a look at the sermon, it’s in the Anglican Communion news. I’d hate to think that those are just empty words. Time will tell. But I want hope.
  
  Reply
  1. Kelvin
    
    17/04/2016
    
    Could you point us towards the sermon, Cynthia. I’m not seeing anything at all that’s new in relation to the things I’ve written about above.
    
    Reply
    1. Cynthia Katsarelis
      
      17/04/2016
      
      Here it is: http://www.anglicannews.org/news/2016/04/new-calls-for-new-times-archbishop-welbys-presidential-address-to-acc-16.aspx
      
      To me this seems like a new direction, born of recent realities, and perhaps inspired by the Holy Spirit.
      
      Of course, my hopes could be typical, off-the-charts American optimism. We wicked American Episcopal lesbians just know that the Promised Land is at the end of the next rainbow.
      
      Reply
      1. Kelvin
        
        17/04/2016
        
        Cynthia – this is what I was writing about above. It isn’t a new direction. It is what I’m complaining of. Talk of reconciliation whilst not engaging in it.
        
        There’s not a word in it about a new direction on the way the ABC relates to the Anglican Communion’s troubles. Not one.
      2. Cynthia Katsarelis
        
        17/04/2016
        
        It seems like he was asking people to focus on the major characters, climate change and religious violence, and to work together within our diversity. That sounds like a new tack. Of course, it will be interesting to see if this translates into action. Will the discrimination against married clergy stop? Will the ABC stop pandering to the primates who didn’t show up to ACC-16?
        
        You might be right, you seem very prophetic to me. But I want you to be wrong this time. I want hope, and to work together on things that actually matter.
      3. Kelvin
        
        17/04/2016
        
        There are simply no signs of what you hope for, Cynthia. None.
      4. Cynthia Katsarelis
        
        17/04/2016
        
        Perhaps not. But I was recently a TEC delegate to the UN Commission on the Status of Women where I met a posse of awesome women from the Anglican Communion Women delegation. We had great interaction and they affirmed a “walking together” statement they wrote in 2007. It says they are staying in communion, no matter what the guys do. We women in TEC are drafting a response, graciously receiving and affirming the statement. Against this, Justin doesn’t stand a chance and he might as well change his tune.
        
        PS. One of the awesome delegates was a Rachel from St. Andrew’s, Scotland.
Richard Barnes

17/04/2016

I was really hopeful about the Anglican Communion’s purpose from reading Rachael’s blogs from UN CSW last month. But not for long. ABC Welby’s Sermon reads like a random speech generator and says much the same as he’s been doing for months in global fora.
It’s like a couple who talk about the garden and the difficult neighbours because they don’t want to talk about their sex life.
Clever way to end ACC with everyone apparently united by talking about bigger issues.
But to read ++Welby asking for nuanced theology, when he’s totally binary (Christian=happy, healthy, wealthy & wise) just made me laugh.

Reply
Robin

19/04/2016

> In the last week we’ve had the latest document on family life to come from the Vatican and it is very clear that there’s a change in tone from the current pope and it is hard not to welcome that.

I don’t see any change of tone in the following, which is the beginning of paragraph 251 of “Amoris Laetitia”.

> 251. In discussing the dignity and mission of
the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, “as
for proposals to place unions between homosexual
persons on the same level as marriage,
there are absolutely no grounds for considering
homosexual unions to be in any way similar or
even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage
and family”.

I’d call that a monumental snub, deliberately administered, or an equally deliberately administered drenching with cold water.

Reply