Bože! A Grace Catholic Project

Bože!
The Power to Bind – Initial Thoughts On Absolution

I’m still very much in the initial stages of pulling my thoughts together on this.

It strikes me that in the rite of absolution the prayers and actions point to God, his love for us, his mercy, his compassion, and understanding, only once – and then only briefly is the “power to bind” mentioned – at the very end.

The theological and pastoral emphasis is NOT on the “power to bind” – quite the contrary it is on God’s overwhelming love & compassion. Again I am faced with the teaching that we must forgive as God forgives if we are to be confident in recieving forgiveness ourselves – the “power to bind” then, would seem to play a very different role than that presented by the theory proposed in another place.

26/07/2007 | Filed under Ask An Indie Theologian, OC/IC Theology - Mechanics of Forgiveness.

  • Chris T.

    Alexis, I confess I’m at a loss to understand what you’re trying to say in these last two posts. Sacramental theology doesn’t come down to just glancing at whatever rites happen to strike your fancy and drawing conclusions from that. There’s a long, long history here that you’re glossing over. (And certainly I think God’s love is critically important in all this — but that doesn’t mean I’m going to absolve an unrepentant murderer who comes to me.)

    Also, in answer to your previous post, the power to bind is mention in Scripture, far before sacramental reconciliation was ever developed. So you’re going to have to address that power in a broader context, not merely in the context of the sacrament. There is a power here that has been given to the apostolic priesthood which cannot be danced around. The understanding of forgiveness Jesus intends cannot possibly be reduced to “Forgive everybody, no matter what.” That’s not what Scripture or the tradition says.

  • Alexis Tančibok

    Hi Chris,

    First, let me once more stress something I’ve emphasised in both posts – these are MERELY preliminary thoughts. I’m playing with the ideas and looking at a broad range of resources.

    You do me a great disservice by suggesting that I am “glossing over” a long history of sacramental theology – I am acutely aware of this, and it is for this reason that I have chosen to take the time to play with ideas, and explore this rich history. Patience Fr. Chris is something that appears to be elusive for you at times.

    At the moment, I disagree with you that the “power to bind” pre-dates the sacrament. I would argue that the sacrament – embodied as it is in the teaching and example of Christ through the incarnation “pre-dates” the “power to bind”.

    You are correct however, that the “power to bind” must be seen in a broader context – which is precisely what I stated in the first post; and that realisation has lead me to take my time in exploring various aspects of the “whole” experience.

    I am not, as you suggest merely “glancing at whatever rites happen to strike [my] fancy and drawing conclusions from that” I am, as I have made very clear in both posts taking my time to explore the matter – and invite anyone who is patient and willing to join me in the exploration.

    You have asked the question – all I’m asking is that you are patient, and open to the process of exploring, and presenting a possible answer.

    All I have done in this, and the previous post is begin to collect ideas and lay the groundwork for further development.

  • HilbertAstronaut

    Here’s my 2c:

    Alexis wrote: “The theological and pastoral emphasis is NOT on the “power to bind” – quite the contrary it is on God’s overwhelming love & compassion.”

    The Rite assumes that the confessee has come to confess and repent. Power to bind may lie by title with the confessor, but by fact lies with the confessee, in particular with the confessee’s intentions. Unless the confessor gets a clear message from the confessee about his/her intentions, the only way to deduce them is in a longer-term confessor / spiritual director relationship.

    Maybe “pre-dating” is the wrong way to talk about “power to forgive” / “power to bind”? Rather, both should be seen as the same type of action, because the main purpose of binding is to call the bound person to true repentance.

  • Alexis Tančibok

    Sorry – I had to laugh when I read this – I have a note to myself to play with this very idea!

    I agree that the rite of absolution presumes a relationship – I would say not only between the priest and the confessee but also with the community as a whole.

    What grabbed me when I was thinking a bit about this yesterday was the fact that the priest – the “agent” of absolution, is not necessarily the confessor of the individual. An “adept” layman, monk, nun, “other” might serve as the confessor/spiritual director/advisor and when the time is right would send the individual to the priest for absolution. Here again there is a “web” of relationships involved that make the system work.

    What is more this system cultivates an ongoing process of awareness and self reflection. I’m not so sure that the “power to bind” is designed to “call” the person to repentance – I think it is best to say that there are other elements involved in that, if we are quick to say that this is the purpose of the power to bind I’m afraid that it brings us to a point of clerical-power that we OC folk rejected as aberrant almost two hundred years ago. The power to bind must not be seen as a personalised perrogative of the priest, it can only be properly exercised in the context of community – of that much I am certain.

  • Tim Cravens

    While I think that this theoretical discussion is interesting, in practice, I just don’t think that an IC/OC/ISM/EIEIO priest — particularly those of us on the “progressive” end of the spectrum — is ever going to encounter an unrepentant sinner trying to be absolved of sins for which they do not repent. The assumption on the part of the confessor must be, unless there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that the penitent is sincere in his/her repentance. And, I’m sorry, but I just really don’t believe that there will be overwhelming evidence to the contrary in any confession any IC/OC/ISM/EIEIO priest will ever hear.

  • Alexis Tančibok

    Yes, Tim, I agree with you – the assumption is that one approaching a priest for absolution is doing it because he or she is repentant. It’s implicit in the rite.

    In the context of the wider mecanics of forgiveness the “rite” of absolution is the terminus of a process.

Pages
 
February 2012
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829  
Recently Scrawled
Holy Tweet!