DID you know that the Sacrament of Penance (which we commonly refer to as "confession") was once a public affair? That seems rather shocking to our way of thinking, but it is nevertheless a fact. In the early centuries of the Church's history, people who wanted to have their sins forgiven went through an ordeal the very thought of which almost makes our hair stand on end. And though the things they had to do have now been discontinued, it is worth our while to learn something about them, because thereby we shall come to a better understanding of the Sacrament of Penance as we now have it.

Everybody knows, I think, that the Low Mass is only a simplification of High Mass and that therefore to understand Low Mass properly one has to study High Mass. Well, the confession we now have may be likened to a sort of "low confession" in comparison with the "high confession" they used to have, for it is a simplification - an extreme and radical simplification - of the former practice, even though fundamentally both are exactly the same sacrament.

THE SACRAMENT OF RECONCILIATION

It is queer how things often become known by names which indicate some point of lesser importance. The Mass is an instance. They say the word comes from the Ite missa est - the dismissal of the people, which is surely not the most important of its features! So with this sacrament - we call it "confession". Its more formal title is "penance". And, of course, it does involve both confession and penance. But the really important thing about it is that it brings reconciliation with God.

It seems rather a pity that we don't call it "absolution" or some such name, because that is what matters most. And that is what has remained basically unchanged throughout the centuries in spite of the changes which have come about in respect of the confessing and penitential parts of it.

In olden days this sacrament was used only for the forgiveness of mortal sins. In different times and places there were many variations of procedure and it would take a whole book to describe them all. Some points are still not quite clear and need further research by scholars. But in general it may be said that if the sins to be forgiven were secret sins they could be confessed in secret; whereas if they were public sins which the whole Christian community knew about, they were confessed or avowed, publicly.

Terribly stiff penances there were, too - no mere "three Hail Marys", but forty days of fasting and sitting in sack-cloth and ashes and wearing hair-shirts and making barefoot pilgrimages and all that sort of thing. Truly schauderhaft (or "shudder-worthy", to use a rather expressive German word)!

Let us look at a "solemn high confession" in about the sixth century. The customary (but not the only) date for this was the beginning of Lent. The entire Christian community assembled in the church, where the Bishop, in full pontificals, sat upon his throne; and his priests, deacons and subdeacons ranged themselves on each side of him. The sinners were led barefoot into the midst of the congregation and prostrated themselves on the ground.

All the clergy then sang the seven penitential psalms over them, and there followed the litanies of the saints in which all the people sang the responses. Then the penitents stood up; and those guilty of public sins which had scandalised the whole Christian community (such as murder, adultery, rape, sorcery, perjury, apostasy) then publicly avowed what they had done and asked for pardon and penance. The bishop - either in person or through his penitentiary - delivered judgment as to whether pardon would be granted and what penance was to be imposed on each.

But all were treated alike in one particular (which we would do well to ponder), namely, that they were all sentenced to be excluded from the body of the faithful. All were solemnly expelled from the church, and knelt down outside the door. The bishop, standing in the doorway, then exhorted them not to despair of God's mercy, but faithfully and humbly to perform the penitential exercises he had imposed on them until the day when they were to appear before him again for reconciliation and re-admission to the Christian community. This day was usually (though not invariably) Maundy Thursday.

After the bishop's exhortation the doors of the church were shut against the penitents, and they stayed outside listening wistfully to the strains of those within as they celebrated with psalm and song the Sacrifice of "God's holy people".

The ceremony on the day of reconciliation was even more solemn. Again the sinners, barefoot and in penitential garb, knelt outside the closed doors of the church while the faithful prayed and sang around their bishop within. At one point in the service two subdeacons with lighted candles were sent to open the doors and sing to the penitents the antiphon, "God wills not the death of the sinner, but rather that he be converted and live". Later on two other subdeacons were sent to sing that "The kingdom of God is at hand". Later still a deacon, arrayed in his most gorgeous vestments, sang to them "Lift up your heads, for the time of your forgiveness is at hand!"

The climax of all this came when the bishop himself, accompanied by all his clergy, went to the door. There the archdeacon sang to him a humble and noble petition saying that these penitents, and all the Christian brethren on their behalf, begged him to restore these members to the body of the faithful and re-admit them to participation in the communal Sacrifice. The bishop having returned in procession to his throne, ordered that the penitents should be brought before him.

They entered the church and prostrated themselves while a psalm was sung. After that they were bidden to stand up, and the bishop himself prayed over them, singing a lovely preface of thanksgiving, something in the style of the Holy Saturday Exsultet. He stretched out his hands over them, imparted to them absolution from their sins, and gave them a blessing. At the end of the service the reconciled sinners were welcomed by their brethren as being again fully privileged members of the community, able once more to offer and participate by Holy Communion in the Christian Sacrifice.

Now they could go home and change from their penitential garments, have a bath, cut their hair and trim their beards, and resume their ordinary clothes. And there was great joy among all the people.

What are we to learn from all this? Nowadays we make our confession in secret; we get a few prayers by way of penance; and we receive absolution, individually and at once. But we must ever remember that what has happened to us is fundamentally the same as what happened to the penitents of early centuries.

For, if we have been guilty of mortal sin, we too have been cut off from the community; we were no longer sharing the grace-life which was our common life in the Mystical Body of Christ. We could no longer participate fully (by the Eucharist) in community worship. Our offence was not only against God, but also against our brethren. He who offends the Head offends the members of the Mystical Body. Remember what St. Paul wrote: "There is no want of unity in the body; all the different parts of it make each other's welfare their common care. If one part is suffering, all the rest suffer with it" (I Cor. xii, 25).

If we have sinned grievously, then we have introduced sickness into the Mystical Body in that we ourselves have become dead members. If a man has leprosy in his hand, is he a healthy man? If he has gangrene in his foot, can he be said to be in full health? In leprosy, in gangrene - in fact in many diseases - there are cells of the body which die. And their death harms not merely the organ concerned but the body as a whole. So it is with the Body of Christ if we, its members, bring into it supernatural death by our sins.

Even if we now confess our sins privately, we must not imagine that they are private sins. There is no such thing as a purely private sin any more than there can be a private Christian. Both are social: a Christian is one who lives in the Mystical Body, and a sinner is one who has died in the Body. His sin not only damages himself - it damages the Body. His sin is not only an offence against Christ the Head, but also against the members.

Every sin, no matter how unknown it may be to others, is thus a social sin and not a merely individual sin. For it has the social consequence of harming the Mystical Body "which has many members". And "if one part is suffering, all the rest suffer with it".

The public and social manner in which this sacrament of reconciliation was once administered brought home to the early Christians a grasp of these truths much more vivid than we modern people have. We do well to think about the old ways, even if we cannot find in our hearts the generosity to wish that those ways were back again. We must not let the private manner in which the sacrament is now administered cause us to think that it is, in fact, our own private affair.

"What was visible in the life of Christ has passed over into the sacraments," wrote St. Leo (Sermon 72, 2). And Christ, in His visible life, said to the paralytic, "Son, thy sins are forgiven thee!" He said to the man who had been crippled thirty-eight years, "Go and sin no more"; to the adulteress He said, "Go, and do not sin again henceforward"; and to the Magdalen, "Thy sins are forgiven!"

The forgiveness of Christ, which heals sick members and even raises again to supernatural life the dead members of the Mystical Body, is still with us in the Sacrament of Penance; and a proper understanding and intelligent use of this Sacrament by the members is essential for the preservation of the general spiritual health of the whole Body.

If we think again of the health of the human body in order to find illustrations of what can happen in the Mystical Body, we shall be struck with another point. It is possible for a body to be free from disease, and yet to lack strength. Suppose a man has had an operation because of some disease: let us suppose further that the operation is perfectly successful so that, after it, he is free from the disease. Nevertheless he will need convalescence before his health is again perfect. For his disease has left an effect of weakness which natural forces will eliminate.

It is similar in the Mystical Body. Even after a diseased member is cured of sin by the Sacrament of Penance there remain some after-effects. There is what is called the "disposition to sin"; also there may well be a debt of punishment due after the guilt of the sin has been removed. The soul is not a perfect soul, even though it be free from the disease of sin and in possession of the life of grace. There is still weakness.

And just as the natural weakness of the body, after the actual cure of disease, needs to be eliminated by natural means such as rest, careful nursing, good food, plentiful sleep - so also supernatural weakness of the soul, after the cure from the guilt of sin, needs to be eliminated by the action of supernatural means before that soul can be considered a perfect soul.

ANOINTING UNTO GLORY

Now our souls have got to be perfect souls before we can enter, with Christ our Head, into the glory of heaven. It was through His physical death that He entered into glory; so also we, the members of His Body, will enter into our share of His glory only through our physical deaths. It is then that our souls must be made into perfect souls, free from all spiritual weakness.

And Christ has left us a supernatural means designed to cause this effect. It is, of course, another sacrament - the one we call "extreme unction" because it is the last of the Christian anointings. The first anointing we receive is in baptism; the second in confirmation; some of us receive a third anointing in holy orders; but for all of us the last we can receive is this anointing in extreme unction.

The sacrament is intended, because of its intrinsic purpose, to be given to us when we are in danger of death. It gives to the soul of the sick person perfect spiritual health. It does for a soul, cured by penance of the spiritual disease of sin, what convalescence does for the body cured of physical disease - namely it causes full health and strength. Thus it completes the effects of penance, just as convalescence completes the effects of a successful operation.

And though it is a grace intended for the welfare of the soul, it may, and often does, have an astonishing effect on the body. For the soul, now in perfect health and strength, may succeed in carrying on for some time longer its normal function of animating the body. The access of strength to the soul may, in other words, result in the recovery of the body from sickness.

Of course this does not always happen, for it is not the prime purpose for which Christ left us the sacrament. But it does sometimes happen; and the Church, in the prayers wherewith extreme unction is administered, explicitly prays that it may happen if such be the will of God.

What always happens in a man who receives the sacrament in good dispositions is the primary effect. His soul is freed from the after-effects of sin, given full spiritual health and strength, made into a perfect soul fit for its share in the glory of Christ Our Lord. So that if the soul then leaves the body, there is nothing standing in the way of its entrance into the glory of heaven.

To many readers this will be a very surprising statement. For it cuts right across the notions which most people seem to entertain about those who die. Yet it is not contrary to any explicit teaching of the Church, and is in accordance with the explicit teaching of some of the Church's most authoritative theologians. Though indeed the Church has never defined the doctrine I have just stated - namely, that the souls of those who die after receiving extreme unction with proper dispositions go straight to heaven - yet we have very sound reasons for believing it.

There is no warrant for the pessimism wherewith so many Catholics seem to regard death. Many speak and behave as if they thought that nobody but a great saint has any chance of going to heaven except through purgatory.

Any ordinary person who dies will be lucky, they think, if he manages to escape hell by scraping into purgatory. There, as the result of suffering for ages in the "cleansing flames", he will gradually attain that state of soul which will permit of his being at last transferred to heaven. This process can be assisted according to the number of Masses offered for him, and indulgences applied to him, by his sorrowing relatives and friends here below. And if he has not got any relatives or friends, or if they should forget him and have no Masses said, then he will be dependent on the "Holy Souls Box". But anyhow, provided he gets into purgatory, he will ultimately get to heaven. But that is the best that can reasonably be hoped for in the case of most of us.

Now this doctrine is sound enough except for the basic assumption which underlies it all and for which there is no proof - namely, that he goes to purgatory at all. . I am not in any way denying the doctrine of purgatory - God forbid! Undoubtedly there is a purgatory, and undoubtedly there must be souls who go through it. What I am doubting is the assumption (for it is no more) that these are the souls of Catholics who, before dying, receive the sacrament of extreme unction in really proper dispositions. It seems to me that we have ample reasons for disbelieving that such Catholics (and they are a goodly proportion of practising Catholics) ever go to purgatory at all. It seems equally probable that they leap, so to speak, out of their death-beds straight into their thrones in heaven!

This was the common opinion of theologians, almost without exception, from the scholastic age right down to the Council of Trent. From that time theologians seem rather reluctant to admit that extreme unction wipes out the debt of temporal punishment due to forgiven sin because they had to defend, against Protestant attacks, both the existence and the necessity of purgatory. They were so busy proving this that they "soft-pedalled" the traditional doctrine that the debt of punishment (to wipe out which is the purpose of purgatory) could be remitted by extreme unction before death.

Later theologians (though by no means all of them) have just copied them and each other. And though none of them go so far as to say that everybody who reaches heaven will do so by way of purgatory, that is the impression which has grown and gained practical acceptance in the popular mind.

There are weighty names in support of the alternative, older, and never abandoned teaching. St. Albert the Great says: "The substantial effect of this sacrament is the clearing away of whatever effects of sin there may be as impediment to immediate glory" . His still greater pupil, St. Thomas Aquinas calls this sacrament "unctio ad gloriam" ("anointing for glory") and says: "By extreme unction a man is prepared for immediate entry into glory". This would hardly be true if the anointed man were forthwith cast into the flames! Again St. Thomas says: "By this sacrament the spiritual healing of man is brought to completion, and the temporal punishments of sin are remitted, in order that nothing may remain in him which might hinder his soul from attaining glory when it leaves the body".

Both St. Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas were Dominicans. Many Jesuits could be quoted as agreeing with them. The most important is Suarez who writes, after giving his reasons: "It is quite obvious that this sacrament has been instituted for the purpose of making a man ready for glory". Or if you want a modern Jesuit, how about Father Capello? He says that the efficacy of extreme unction to wipe out the debt of temporal punishment is a manifest inference from the whole purpose of the sacrament. Its purpose is "perfect health of the soul for its immediate entrance into glory, unless bodily recovery of the dying man is even more advantageous" .

With Dominicans and Jesuits in agreement nobody could fairly say that this is dangerous doctrine!

Of course the contrary, post-Tridentine, view has never been condemned. Hence those who prefer to be pessimists and to consider that a direct passage from earth to heaven is extremely rare even for the anointed, are quite at liberty to do so. But the sacramental system left to us by Our Lord certainly looks more complete and adequate, and more perfectly expresses His honour as Our Saviour, if we follow the older and more generous tradition of the Church.

The sacrament of the last anointing is the rounding off or consummation of the Christian life. It is the consecration of the Christian's death in Christ. Our Lord said in His Own last moments: "Consummatum est - it is finished". The anointed Christian, as he dies in union with Christ, can make those words his own.

Death, for the natural man, is but a punishment for sin; but death, for the Christian, is the crown and completion of his mysterious life-long union with his Saviour. It partakes of the nature of the death of Christ Himself, becoming a kind of sacrificial oblation through which he, the member, is enabled to join Christ in eternal glory. Because for him "life is but changed, not taken away; and when his earthly dwelling place decays, an everlasting mansion stands prepared for him in heaven" (preface, Mass for the Dead).

He began to belong to Christ at baptism when there was infused in him the theological virtue of faith. And now he dies still united to Christ, still with faith in Him who said: "I am the resurrection and life; he who believes in me, though he be dead, will live on; and whoever has life and faith in me, to all eternity cannot die" (John xi, 25). Dying now in Christ, he lives on in that eternity wherein faith is superseded by the vision of God "face to face" (I Cor. xiii, 12).