By: John Bergsma
Original article published online by Catholic Answers at: https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/how-to-read-the-bible-as-a-catholicThe question before us is, “How do we read the Bible as a Catholic?”
First, we should distinguish two possible senses of the phrase, “reading the Bible as a Catholic.” “Reading” could be a synonym for “interpreting” or “understanding,” which raises the question of a Catholic hermeneutic—an interpretive system or methodology. On the other hand, “reading” could be taken as “daily reading” or “devotional reading,” which raises the rather different question of the practical practices of incorporating the reading and meditation on Scripture into our daily prayer routine.
The Church distinguishes two senses of Scripture, the literal and the spiritual (115), and the spiritual can be further subdivided into the allegorical, the moral, and the anagogical subsenses.
To get at the literal sense, we “must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words” (109). To get at the author’s intention, we must “take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of fealling, speaking, and narrating then current” (110). Then, as we explore the spiritual sense—the deeper meanings of the text placed there by the Holy Spirit—the Catechism lays out three criteria (i.e. principles of discernment) offered by the Second Vatican Council: (1) “be especially attentive ‘to the content and unity of the whole Scripture’” (112); (2) “read the Scripture within ‘the living Tradition of the whole Church’” (113); and (3) “be attentive to the analogy of faith,” by which is meant “the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation” (114).
To help my students master a systematic approach to interpreting the Bible that “covers all the bases”—gets at the four senses while respecting the three criteria—I have developed a six-step process for interpreting any particular Scripture passage that analyzes in turn the historical, grammatical, rhetorical, canonical, liturgical, and magisterial dimensions of the text. The first letters of these six aspects can be remembered by the acronym “How Good Readers Can Learn Meaning from the Bible.” We will discuss each of these aspects below.
After the initial stage of familiarizing ourselves with a particular passage of Scripture (for example, the wedding at Cana, John 2:1-11) by reading it over several times and formulating in our mind some questions about the text and its meaning, the first stage of a more formal interpretive process is to study the historical (and cultural) background of a biblical text, when it is possible to determine such matters. (That is, sometimes we don’t know much about the background of a biblical text, and speculating about the possibilities can be fruitless or even misleading.) This follows the Catechism’s recommendation that “in order to discover the sacred authors’ intention,” we “must take into account the conditions of their time and culture” (110).
For example, a knowledge of ancient Near Eastern culture during the time the Old Testament was written can be helpful in understanding the true meaning of certain passages. Take this law from Deuteronomy:
You shall not boil a kid [i.e., a young goat] in its mother’s milk (14:21).
What is the point here? Is it that mixing milk and meat is an offense to God? A little research into ancient history and culture will reveal that boiling a kid in its mother’s milk was a magic ritual used in Canaanite sorcery. This helps us to understand the point of the passage: God doesn’t want his people to imitate the witchcraft practiced by their pagan neighbors.
Likewise, in the New Testament, a knowledge of the history and culture of the times is helpful. The Gospels, both in stories and parables, make frequent mention of the monetary unit called a denarius. This was a typical day’s wage for a common laborer. Knowing that helps us grasp the size and significance of the amounts of money discussed in certain parables:
After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard (see Matt. 20:1).
Here, the owner of the vineyard is acting in a fair and conventional manner: the denarius was the usual payment for a day’s labor, and he commits to give it to his workers.
At other times, a knowledge of the history and culture may not change interpretation, but it allows us a greater appreciation of what the author is communicating. Take, for example, this statement of Jesus to the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3:
I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth (vv. 15-16).
The city of Laodicea was notorious in the ancient world for its poor drinking water. Its water supply was brought from hot mineral springs many miles from the city. By the time it arrived in town, the water had cooled to lukewarm temperature, but still had a foul taste due to its high mineral content (especially sulfur).
In the modern day, there are a host of resources to get at the historical and cultural background of the biblical text. Most modern commentaries do a good job of this. There are also many excellent Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias that explore the historical context of the biblical world. We have to exercise care, however, because much “mainstream” biblical scholarship is colored by an anti-historical bias—the academic system in most developed countries encourages students in Scripture to be skeptical of the Bible’s claims, de-emphasize data that might support biblical historicity, and over-emphasize data that may challenge the Bible’s self-presentation. Thankfully, it usually does not take much reading to pick up the authors’ and editors’ attitude toward Scripture, and there are sufficient published resources out there by believing Jews, Protestants, and Catholics.
After researching the historical background of the text, we move on to analyze its grammar. Grammar comprises at least two aspects: the meaning of words (lexicon) and their arrangement (syntax).
Obviously, knowing the meaning of words is important to the exegesis of a text! That is why, in order to do serious exegesis, it is necessary to master the languages in which Scripture was written: Hebrew (and a little Aramaic and Greek) for the Old Testament, and Greek for the New.
When we don’t know the original languages, the best we can do is compare many translations and consult several commentaries that discuss the meaning of individual words. More recently, many excellent websites permit the student to “drill down” into the original language of the text and extract a great deal of information.
Here is an example of when the meaning of words can make a difference in interpretation. Older translations of John 14:2 used to say, “In my Father’s house are many mansions.” But the Greek word monai actually means simply “dwellings.” Thus, more recent translations render it as follows: “In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places” (NABRE). There is an important difference. When we translate with “mansions,” the emphasis seems to placed on the luxury of our heavenly accommodations. But when the proper word “dwellings” is used, we see that Jesus is emphasizing not the luxury of heaven, but simply the fact that there will be room for us there, and we will be in communion with him.
The second element of grammar is syntax—that is, how words are arranged. Again, it would be ideal to learn the original languages. Otherwise, we are again dependent on translations and commentaries.
Many verses have syntactical difficulties or ambiguities. For example, in John 7:37-38, the RSV renders the following:
On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and proclaimed, “If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink. He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’”
But many scholars would argue that the sentences of the Greek should be divided as follows:
On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and proclaimed, “If any one thirst, let him come to me, and let the one who believes in me drink. As the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’”
Whose heart flows with water? The first way, it sounds like the believer’s. The second way, it sounds like Jesus’.
Historical research comes into play here as well. The “last day” of the Feast of Tabernacles was when the Jewish people began to pray to God for rain. It makes sense that Jesus would rise on this day to emphasize that he is truly God, the source of life-giving water. For that reason, I think the second translation is preferrable.
After grammar, we look at rhetoric: all the higher-level literary features of a text beyond simply the meaning of the words and their arrangement. As the Catechism says, we should pay attention to “the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking, and narrating then current.” The study of rhetoric includes an analysis of at least the following: the genre, structure, and literary devices of a passage.
“Genre” refers to the kind of literature that a given biblical text is: history, poetry, hymn, psalm, proverb, parable, apocalyptic, etc. A great number of interpretive mistakes are made by confusing genres—reading poetry, for example, as if it were history. Take this description of God from Psalm 18:8, literally translated:
Smoke went up from his nostrils, and devouring fire from his mouth; glowing coals flamed forth from him (AT).
Does God really look like a fire-breathing dragon? Of course not. This is not historical or scientific writing; it is poetry, which uses images to communicate meaning.
“Structure” refers to the way a text is arranged as a whole. A common structural device in biblical literature is chiasm—arranging a text so that the first and last elements correspond, the second and second-to-last correspond, and so on. But there are many other structural patterns as well.
The structure of the Beatitudes (Matt. 5:1-12) shows something about their meaning. The Beatitudes consist of eight main statements of blessing and then an epilogue. The first (“poor in spirit”) and last (“persecuted”) of the eight main beatitudes promise the reward of the “kingdom of heaven” (see Matt 5:3, 10). This is an ancient structural device called an inclusio, where an author begins and ends on the same motif or concept. It generally shows what is most central or important point among all the things the author says, so in this case, we can say the “kingdom of heaven” is central to the Beatitudes, and therefore they can be thought of as “qualities of kingdom citizens.”
Finally, the analysis of rhetoric includes identifying and understanding literary devices. “Literary devices” cover a broad range of ways that words are used in artistic, unconventional, or non-literal ways. One literary device is hyperbole—making an overstatement for the sake of emphasis:
Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven (Matt. 23:9).
And yet there are at least eleven places in the New Testament in which the apostles themselves call themselves or other men “father” in both a biological and spiritual sense. The Church has always realized that Jesus was speaking non-literally here, using a provocative hyperbole to emphasize that all fatherhood ultimately comes from and resides in God.
Most commentaries will do a good job of discussing the various rhetorical aspects of the text (genre, structure, literary devices). When doing your own research, it is helpful to have a list of commong literary devices to look for, and such lists are available on websites like https://literary-devices.com.
The investigation of the historical, grammatical, and rhetorical dimensions of the text mostly helps with determining the literal sense and flow naturally from what the Church says about it (see CCC 110, 115). The next three dimensions—the canonical, liturgical, and magisterial—relate more directly to the spiritual sense(s).
The canonical dimension of a text is the position and role of the text within the context of the whole canon of Scripture (i.e., the Bible). This dimension has been neglected both in traditional Christian commentary (i.e., the Fathers and the Doctors) as well as in modern (i.e., post-Enlightenment) academic commentaries. Nonetheless, the Catechism calls us to be attentive to the “content and unity” of all of Scripture, so doing a thorough canonical analysis of a text is non-negotiable in the process of interpretation.
First, we should examine the passages that immediately precede and follow the one we are studying. This helps us grasp the immediate context. For example, the Beatitudes (Matt. 5:2-12) are immediately preceded by a remark that Jesus “went up on the mountain, and when he sat down, his disciples came to him” (v. 1, ESV). The ascent up the mountain to teach reminds us of Moses. Also, sitting was the authoritative posture of the teacher in Judaism—rabbis sat to teach. So Jesus assumes the posture of Moses the teacher before proclaiming the Beatitudes.
Second, we can analyze the place of our passage in the section of the book where it occurs. Matthew arranges Jesus’ activities and teachings into five large blocks, each ending with a sermon. The first and largest block (Matt. 3-7) ends with the Sermon on the Mount (5-7), where the Beatitudes have the first and most prominent place. They pair with the end of the Sermon on the Mount, the parable of the man who built his house upon a rock (Matt. 7:24-27). This alludes to Solomon, the greatest man who built the greatest house (the Temple) on the largest rock (the Temple Mount) in Israel’s history. The theme of the Beatitudes is the kingdom of God, and the concluding parable is about being like God’s greatest king.
Third, we should examine the role of our passage in the context of the whole book. Is your text related to other texts? Does another passage later or earlier in the same book speak to the same issues as your text, and if so, does that cast light on the significance of your text? For example, in the Gospel of John, the Blessed Mother appears only twice—at the wedding at Cana and at the foot of the cross. One event begins Jesus’ ministry; the other event closes Jesus’ ministry. Mary’s presence at both ties the events together and suggests (1) there is something important about Mary relevant to Jesus’ ministry and (2) the wedding at Cana and the cross are somehow related. When we read the two passages in light of each other, interesting correlations start to appear, and we discover nuptial images in the account of Jesus’ crucifixion.
Finally, we must examine the text within the context of the canon (the Bible) as a whole. This is what the Catechism means when it says to “keep in mind the content and unity of all of Scripture.” To do this well, the reader needs to (1) understand what place in the divine economy the text has and (2) be aware of related texts both earlier and later in the canon. (Related texts are texts that speak on the same subject, or perhaps serve as a source for the present text, or use the present text as a source.)
Let’s give an example of interpreting a text within the canon as a whole.
When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a bill of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house . . . (Deut. 24:1)
Does this verse imply that divorce is acceptable for God’s people? To answer that, we first have to be aware that Deuteronomy was written by Moses after struggling for forty years with the people of Israel and their rebellious ways. In several places, it has laws that have a clearly lower standard—especially from a moral and liturgical standpoint—than laws that were spoken earlier at Sinai.
Then we have to be aware of what Jesus says later on the same subject:
He said to them, “For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so” (Matt. 19:8).
Here Jesus holds up the creational model of one man, one woman, for life, as being the divine intention, not the concessions introduced by Moses due to the Israelites’ stubbornness for forty years in the wilderness. We also should ponder the following verse from an Old Testament prophet long preceding Jesus:
For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel. . . . So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless (Mal. 2:16).
The point is this: we cannot simply read Deuteronomy 24:1 and apply it directly modern life. When interpreted in the context of the whole canon, we see that God does not desire divorce, though for a time he allowed Moses to permit it for hard-hearted Israel. Why did God permit it? The rabbis said: to prevent spousal abuse or even murder among the Israelites.
So we can see how a canonical analysis of the text rather directly responds to the Catechism’s criterion of keeping in mind the “content and unity” of Scripture. But next the Catechism insists on keeping in mind the living tradition of the Church, and many theologians have emphasized that the liturgy is the privileged expression of the Church’s living tradition. Therefore, we can gain spiritual insight into the meaning of a text by observing its use within the liturgy.
Thus, when interpreting a text, it is always wise to examine if and where it is used in the Church’s liturgy, which usually means checking the index to the lectionary (both weekday and Sunday/Holy Day) and the Liturgy of the Hours, which is theologically an “extension of the eucharistic liturgy.” If possible, checking its use in the Church’s other rites (Byzantine, Ruthenian, Maronite, Syro-Malabar, etc.) is also helpful.
A striking example of the liturgy’s assistance in interpretation is Song of Songs 3:1-5. This text is read for the feast day of St. Mary Magdalene, and it is paired with John 20:11-18, the account of Mary finding Jesus at the tomb after his resurrection. When we examine both texts in light of each other, striking parallels emerge. In both cases, we have a woman going out in the dark to find her “beloved,” etc. The liturgy shows the ultimate meaning of Song of Songs 3:1-5 points not to human romantic love, but to Jesus, and to finding him who is our true beloved.
The final step of Scriptural interpretation is to review the teaching of the Magisterium about the text. As Dei Verbum and other magisterial documents have stated, the ultimate interpreter of Scripture is not the guild of biblical scholars (who never completely agree among themselves anyway), but the Church’s teaching authority. Therefore, it is necessary to see if the meaning of a given text has been defined authoritatively by the Magisterium at some point in Church history. The teachings of the Fathers is also weighty, and can even be infallible if there is a consensus among them. The teachings of the Doctors, the popes, and the saints should also be consulted, as they are significant witnesses to Tradition and the way the Holy Spirit has guided the Church to receive God’s word through history.
Discovering where and when Church authorities have spoken about any particular text is not always easy, but one excellent if not yet exhaustive resource is a website hosted by the Congregation for the Clergy: www.bibliaclerus.org. It allows us to search an electronic database of Patristic, medieval, and magisterial documents for references to a specific text. There are also software packages like Verbum that permit electronic searching of a large library of the Fathers, Doctors, and saints, along with papal and conciliar documents. Checking these authoritative witnesses to the Church’s interpretive tradition are crucial for ensuring that we interpret within the living tradition and the analogy of faith, the “coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of revelation.”
Once the interpreter has analyzed the Scripture passage in question from the historical, grammatical, rhetorical, canonical, liturgical, and magisterial perspectives, he should be in a good position to articulate its literal sense (the meaning of the words according to the intent of the author), the allegorical sense (the meaning it takes on in light of Christ and the new covenant economy), the moral sense (its significance for our behavior as disciples of Christ), and the anagogical sense (the way the passage leads us to contemplation and union with God).
Within the life of the Church—whether in preparing homilies, class lessons, Bible studies, or public talks—rarely will it be both possible and necessary to follow every step laid out here comprehensively, unless perhaps the reader is writing a commentary. However, it is helpful for all Catholics—laity, religious, or clergy—to have a vision for the process necessary for responsible interpretation of Scripture from the heart of the Church. I hope I have succeeded in laying out such a vision here.
By Rev. Greg Labus
In the earliest times of the Church, Baptism was viewed as the sacrament that forgave sin. Through the preaching and witness of the Church, individuals came to know how much God loves us in his Son, Jesus Christ. They came to understand that God sent his Word into the world by taking flesh through the Virgin Mary. God, in the Person of his Son, Jesus Christ freely suffered for us and sacrificed himself for us by dying on the cross. By his Passion and death on the cross, the forgiveness of sins was made available to all. Through his resurrection, Christ conquered sin and death and gave us the promise and hope of eternal life. This is the Good News that was proclaimed to the world by the Apostles and disciples.
Once evangelized, that is accepting salvation through Christ’s passion, death, and resurrection, individuals were then baptized. In the waters of Baptism, they died with Christ and rose to new life with all their sins forgiven. Baptism restored the Divine Life in the baptized that was lost by the sin of Adam and Eve. The baptized were restored to the right relationship with God. Incorporated into the Body of Christ, the Church, St. Paul says that we have “received a spirit of adoption, through which we cry, Abba, “Father!” (Romans 8:15)
However, it was not long before the Church realized that people still sinned after Baptism and severed their relationship with God and the Church. The Church found it necessary to help people be reconciled with God and the Church after Baptism. The Sacrament of Penance was described by the Fathers of the Church as “the second plank [of salvation] after the shipwreck which is the loss of grace.” (CCC #1446) For people who wished to be reconciled with God and the Church, there arose the practice of enrolling them in the Order of Penitents. Those that were admitted to the Order of Penitents were guilty of very grave sins. These grave sins included murder, adultery, idolatry, and apostasy. While these individuals confessed their sins to the bishop or one of his priests, their sins were also sometimes confessed before the community. As a penitent, they could not worship with the assembly but had a separate place in the church where they did penance. The penances they did included almsgiving or works of charity, prayer, and fasting. These practices were gleaned from chapter six in the Gospel of Matthew. Moreover, penitents were sometimes required to do penance for years before being reconciled. After completing their penance, their reconciliation with God and the Church often occurred on Holy Thursday.
Over the centuries, the Church came to understand that the public and communal practices of penance were too rigorous for most people. In the Middle Ages, Irish missionaries took to continental Europe the “private” practice of penance, which does not require public and prolonged completion of penitential works before reconciliation with the Church. From that time on, the sacrament has been performed in secret between penitent and priest. This new practice envisioned the possibility of repetition and so opened the way to a regular frequenting of this sacrament. It also allowed the forgiveness of grave
sins and venial sins to be integrated into one sacramental celebration. (CCC #1447)
Penance was officially recognized by the Church as one of the seven sacraments in 1439 in the Decree for the Armenians, at the Council of Florence. By this time, the seven sacraments were described as having “form” and “matter.” For the sacrament of Penance, the Church says that the “form” for Penance are the words of absolution pronounced by the priest acting in persona Christi capitis. The formula is:
God the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of his Son has
reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for
the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give
you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. (OP #46)
The Church recognizes contrition, the confession of sins, and satisfaction as the acts of the penitent. These constitute the “quasi-matter” of the Sacrament of Penance. The person who acknowledges their sin and is sorry for them, confesses them to the priest and makes satisfaction for them, experiences forgiveness of their sins by the absolution given by the priest.
The sacrament of Penance along with the other six sacraments was reformed by decree of the Second Vatican Council. The reconciliation of individual penitents continues to be the usual experience of Penance for members of the Church. However, the reform of Penance also envisions reconciliation of several penitents with individual confession and absolution. This form seeks to recapture the communal nature of the sacrament by hearing God’s Word and acknowledging our sinfulness as a community.
Jesus announces: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel.” (Mk 1;15) We are called by Christ every day to the conversion of heart. This is a process that continues our entire lives. Let us not be afraid to take advantage of this sacrament of God’s mercy.
By: Rev. Greg Labus
The reformed rite of the Sacrament of Penance was promulgated in 1975 by Pope Paul VI. Even though the reformed rite has been with us for nearly fifty years, many places still do not celebrate this Sacrament according to the revised rite. This is the case here in our parish as well. Last week we had a brief overview of the development of Penance. This short catechesis on the Sacrament of Penance should help us to appreciate the importance of this sacrament of spiritual healing and enable us to implement fully the reformed rite in our parish.
“Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance for all sinful members of his Church: above all for those who, since Baptism, have fallen into grave sin, and have thus lost their baptismal grace and wounded ecclesial communion.” (CCC #1446) Christ gave the power to forgive sins in his name and reconcile sinners when he told Peter: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you lose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mt. 16:19) In order for us to experience God’s love and mercy in the sacrament of Penance, let us examine what is necessary in order to make a good confession.
In preparing for a good confession, it is important that we confess all our mortal sins that we are conscious of. In chapter five of the First Letter of John, we hear: “There is such a thing as deadly sin, about which I do not say that you should pray. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that is not deadly.” (1 John 5: 16-17) This is the basis of the Church’s teaching on mortal and venial sins. In the earliest centuries of the Church, the sins that were considered deadly were Murder, Adultery, Apostasy, and Idolatry. Deadly or mortal sins sever our relationship with God completely. These sins must be repented of and confessed in the Sacrament of Penance to be absolved. While the Church encourages the confession of venial sins, it is not absolutely necessary. Venial sins can be forgiven outside of the sacrament of Penance by sincere repentance. Venial sins are also forgiven in the Penitential Act at the beginning of Mass if we are sincerely sorry for them.
On the part of the penitent, there are three dimensions of the Sacrament. They are known as the Acts of the Penitent. These three dimensions are contrition, confession, and an act of satisfaction or penance. One begins the process of making a good confession when one experiences metanoia or a change of heart. This change of direction in our lives indicates that we repent of our sins, are sorry for our sins, and desire to turn back to God. As we turn back to God in repentance, we make a thorough examination of conscience. This is done primarily by reviewing the Ten Commandments and by reflecting on the many sins that relate to each commandment. The Catechism of the Catholic Church gives excellent guidance in helping us understand the many ways it is possible to break each commandment.
After our conversion of heart or metanoia, the second step involves the confessing of our sins to the priest during the celebration of the sacrament of Penance. After examining our consciences in light of the commandments, we name our sins and should also tell the priest how many times we have committed each grave sin to the best of our recollection.
Having confessed our sins, the priest will give a penance. This can be prayer, works of charity, or fasting. The priest then, acting in the Person of Christ the Head, imparts absolution to the penitent. Afterward, the penitent carries out the penance the priest imposed. The penance we do after confession helps the penitent heal spiritually and mitigates the temporal punishment due to sin. As the catechism reminds us “absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused.” (CCC #1459)
The Church also reminds us that we are required to confess our grave or serious sins at least once a year. (CIC # 989; CCC # 1457) Advent and Lent are particularly good times to take advantage of the sacrament of Penance as we prepare for Christmas and Easter. However, the Church and many of the spiritual masters recommend celebrating the Sacrament of Penance about once a month especially if one is serious about growing in holiness.
By: Rev. Greg Labus
We have examined the development of the Sacrament of Penance and have also looked at the what a penitent must do to prepare to celebrate the sacrament efficaciously. Now let us turn to the actual revised Rite of Penance and see what the rite envisions.
The Rite begins with the Penitent saying and making the Sign of the Cross. It is noteworthy to mention that the Penitent does not say, “Bless me Father, for I have sinned.” The priest then says: “May God, who has enlightened every heart, help you to know your sins and trust in his mercy,” or he may choose from several other options in the ritual. The penitent answers: Amen.
Then there may follow a short scripture reading. The Second Vatican Council put a great stress on the Word of God in the celebration of all the sacraments. Article 24 from the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy says: “Sacred scripture is of the greatest importance in the celebration of the liturgy.” The reading of scripture, while optional, should be considered a very important element of the celebration of Penance. The rite gives a number of short options. One of these options is:
Listen to what the Lord says to us: “If you forgive men their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions.” (Mt 6:14-15)
Another short option is:
After John had been arrested, Jesus came to Galilee proclaiming the Gospel of God: “This is the time of fulfillment. The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel. (Mk 1:14-15)
The different options for the short readings will be rotated through the liturgical seasons.
The penitent then confesses his/her sins. It is important that the penitent understand that the celebration of this sacrament is not a time for extended counseling, but only for confessing and naming the sins they have committed. Afterward, the priest imposes a penance and asks the penitent to make an Act of Contrition. There are several options for the Prayer of the Penitent or Act of Contrition. We will be providing the two following options that the penitent may choose: The first choice is:
“My God, I am sorry for my sins with all my heart. In choosing to do wrong and failing to do good, I have sinned against you whom I should love above all things. I firmly intend, with your help, to do penance, to sin no more, and to avoid whatever leads me to sin. Our Savior Jesus Christ suffered and died for us. In his name, my God, have mercy.”
The second option is:
“Lord Jesus, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”
The priest then gives the absolution. The formula of absolution is:
God, the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, + and of the Holy Spirit.
The penitent responds to the words of absolution with Amen.
The celebration of the Sacrament concludes with the priest saying: “Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good.” The Penitent answers: “His mercy endures for ever.” The priest may dismiss the penitent with several options, but the first choice is: “The Lord has freed you from your sins. Go in peace.”
Let us be patient as we strive to implement the Rite of Penance given in the ritual book. The Rite of Penance will be posted in the confessional to help us participate with confidence.