Does the Council of Trent anathemize the authors of the Catechism of the Catholic Church?


#1

From the Council of Trent

CANON VI.-If any one denieth, either that sacramental confession was instituted, or is necessary to salvation, of divine right; or saith, that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Church hath ever observed from the beginning, and doth observe, is alien from the institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention; let him be anathema.

history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/trentall.html

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

1447 Over the centuries the concrete form in which the Church has exercised this power received from the Lord has varied considerably. During the first centuries the reconciliation of Christians who had committed particularly grave sins after their Baptism (for example, idolatry, murder, or adultery) was tied to a very rigorous discipline, according to which penitents had to do public penance for their sins, often for years, before receiving reconciliation. To this “order of penitents” (which concerned only certain grave sins), one was only rarely admitted and in certain regions only once in a lifetime. During the seventh century Irish missionaries, inspired by the Eastern monastic tradition, 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 allowed the forgiveness of grave sins and venial sins to be integrated into one sacramental celebration. In its main lines this is the form of penance that the Church has practiced down to our day.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4C.HTM


#2

No…By priest alone they mean to a priest.

There’s nothing there that even gets close to contradicting Trent.

What were you thinking that the problem was?


#3

Well Trent says that the Church always followed the practice of private confession to a priest alone. It denies that such manner of confession differs from the one Christ instituted.

The Catechism states that the private confession to a priest alone was started in the 7th century. Before that it was public. This seems to me to contradict Trent.


#4

Sycarl, are you reading more into this than it says.

The Bull says that individual confession has been practiced since the 1st century (although it is silent on whether it IS THE ONLY form of confession).

The same Bull says on page 99

For the rest, as to the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, although Christ has not forbidden that a person may,–in punishment of his sins, and for his own humi liation, as well for an example to others as for the edification of the Church that has been scandalized,–confess his sins publicly, nevertheless this is not commanded by a divine precept; neither would it very prudent to enjoin by any human law, that sins, especially such as are secret, should be made known by a public confession.

The key to the Catechism is in the part that you neglected to highlight in blue:

During the seventh century Irish missionaries, inspired by the Eastern monastic tradition, 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.
The “Eastern Monastic Tradition” very well could, and probably does, mean that it’s been practiced since the first century.

So, in conclusion, “Where’s your beef”?


#5

I think you’re misreading that statement.

The anathema applies to those who would deny that they must confess TO a priest, not whether or not it was private or public.


#6

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.