Did you mean: confession (in law), Confessions (St. Augustine), Confessions (Jean-Jacques Rousseau), Confessions (Usher album), Confessions (Dweezil Zappa album), Confessions (poem) More...
Dictionary:
confession(kən-fĕsh'ən) |
| Thesaurus: confession |
noun
| Antonyms: confession |
Definition: admittance of information
Antonyms: concealment, cover, denial, disavowal, refutation, secret
| Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: confession |
For more information on confession, visit Britannica.com.
| Encyclopedia of Judaism: Confession |
| Columbia Encyclopedia: confession, |
Bibliography
See P. Brooks, Troubling Confessions: Speaking Guilt in Law and Literature (2000).
| Law Encyclopedia: Confession |
A statement made by an individual that acknowledges his or her guilt in the commission of a crime.
One vital function of the U.S. judicial system is to determine the guilt or innocence of suspects accused of crimes. Confessions can play a key role in making this determination. U.S. courts have recognized the fallibility of inaccurate or involuntary confessions — such as confessions obtained as the result of threats or trickery — and have developed a body of law to prevent untrustworthy confessions from jeopardizing a criminal defendant's civil rights.
Confessions were always allowed as evidence in early English common-law trials, even when torture was used to compel them. Not until the mid-eighteenth century did judges in England start to admit only confessions they deemed trustworthy. To determine the trustworthiness of a confession, judges considered the circumstances surrounding it, whether a threat or promise coerced the suspect to confess, and whether the suspect confessed voluntarily.
The U.S. Supreme Court first addressed the issue of confessions in the 1884 case Hopt v. Utah, 110 U.S. 574, 4 S. Ct. 202, 28 L. Ed. 262. Following the English common-law standard, the Court looked at whether the suspect confessed voluntarily or as a result of a threat or promise. The Supreme Court first invoked the U.S. Constitution to support this voluntariness standard in the 1897 case Bram v. United States, 168 U.S. 532, 18 S. Ct. 183, 42 L. Ed. 568.
In Bram, the Court applied the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to confessions in federal courts, observing that any amount of influence exerted to obtain a confession would render the confession involuntary and thus inadmissible. The Bram holding initially created a harsh standard of confession admissibility. Later decisions interpreting Bram lowered the standard by requiring that a confession only be excluded from evidence if the amount of influence used to obtain it actually called into question the statement's reliability.
In 1936, the Supreme Court considered the issue of coerced confessions for actions in state court, rather than federal court, in Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 56 S. Ct. 461, 80 L. Ed. 682. Brown involved three African American defendants who confessed to the murder of a white man only after being beaten and tortured by state police. The Court this time invoked the Fourteenth Amendment due process guarantee in holding the confessions to be inadmissible because the police had obtained them in a way that violated basic liberty and justice principles. The Court in Brown announced a due process analysis to be employed by state courts on a case by case basis to determine whether, given the totality of the circumstances, a suspect confessed voluntarily. The analysis was to include an assessment of the suspect's character and status as well as of the methods used by the police.
Case by case determination of the kind required by Brown proved to be unwieldy for state courts because the method was so fact specific. Appellate courts had difficulty setting effective precedents because case outcomes depended solely on unique factual circumstances. As a result, the police were left with little guidance as to how to interrogate suspects properly and lawfully.
By the mid-1960s, the Supreme Court once again began to alter its approach to determining the admissibility of confessions. Starting with Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1, 84 S. Ct. 1489, 12 L. Ed. 2d 653 (1964), the Court held that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, which previously had applied only to federal actions, now applied to state actions as well. Thus, the Court held, suspects in state court were entitled to the same standards governing confessions — initially set forth in the Bram opinion — as suspects in federal court.
The Court continued to move away from the Fourteenth Amendment due process analysis employed by its previous decisions, in Massiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201, 84 S. Ct. 1199, 12 L. Ed. 2d 246 (1964). There, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment grants criminal defendants the right to counsel during postindictment interrogations, and when this right is violated, confessions obtained are inadmissible. The Supreme Court expanded this protection to preindictment confessions, holding that the right to counsel attaches when a police investigation becomes accusatory, in Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S. Ct. 1758, 12 L. Ed. 2d 977 (1964).
Two years later, the Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966). The Court in Miranda found that police custody is inherently coercive, and therefore criminal suspects in police custody must be informed expressly of their constitutional rights before interrogation begins. A suspect's Miranda rights include the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer present during questioning, and any statements made by the suspect may be used against her or him in a court of law. Miranda held that a suspect may waive any of these rights, but only if the waiver is made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.
But Miranda essentially left undefined the concepts of voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, which prompted a glut of litigation concerning the validity of Miranda waivers. The Supreme Court attempted to clarify its position in North Carolina v. Butler, 441 U.S. 369, 99 S. Ct. 1755, 60 L. Ed. 286 (1979). There, Willie Thomas Butler spoke with the police after they advised him of his Miranda rights, then later sought to have the court exclude his incriminating statements because he had declined to sign a waiver agreement. In ruling against Butler, the Supreme Court adopted the totality-of-the-circumstances approach for determining whether a waiver of Miranda rights is voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. Butler, the Court found, had implied a voluntary waiver through his words and actions, making an express written waiver unnecessary. Butler thus required courts to determine the voluntariness of a suspect's waiver case by case. Butler further instructed courts to invalidate seemingly voluntary waivers in instances of apparent coercion, police deceit, or trickery.
Another attempt at clarification came in Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412, 106 S. Ct. 1135, 89 L. Ed. 2d 410 (1986), in which the Supreme Court held that the suspect's confession was voluntary and valid even though the police, after reciting Miranda rights, failed to inform him that his attorney had been trying to contact him. The Court in Burbine found that although the police have a duty to convey Miranda rights, including the right to an attorney, there is no constitutional duty to inform a suspect when that suspect's attorney wants to confer. The Court further held that Miranda rights belong to the suspect, and it was therefore irrelevant that the police in Burbine deceived the suspect's attorney by falsely stating that they would not interrogate the suspect. Burbine invoked a two-pronged test for courts to employ in determining waiver validity: (1) whether the suspect's choice to waive Miranda rights was free and uncoerced and (2) whether the suspect fully understood the consequences of waiving those rights.
Nine months later, the Court refined Burbine's first prong in Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 107 S. Ct. 515, 93 L. Ed. 2d 473 (1986). Francis Barry Connelly, who was diagnosed as schizophrenic, made unsolicited murder confessions to the police while he was in a psychotic state. He continued to talk even after the police read him the Miranda rights. In attempting to exclude the confession at trial, Connelly's attorney argued that Connelly had no control over his psychotic delusions, and therefore the confession was involuntary.
Finding no police misconduct, the Supreme Court ruled against Connelly, stating that "Miranda protects defendants against government coercion leading them to surrender rights protected by the Fifth Amendment; it goes no further than that." Connelly suggests that the voluntariness of a waiver depends on the conduct of the police, not the mental state of the suspect. Yet the mental state of the suspect may still play a role in Burbine's second prong, which considers the suspect's awareness of Miranda rights and the consequences of waiving them.
Legal commentators have criticized Miranda and its subsequent line of decisions, stating that criminal suspects seldom truly understand the meaning or importance of the rights recited to them. Studies have indicated that the Miranda decision has had little effect on the numbers of confessions and requests for lawyers made by suspects in custody. What is more, critics of Miranda cite concerns that the police might fabricate waivers, since a suspect's waiver of Miranda rights need not be recorded or made to a neutral party. Proponents argue that Miranda protects criminal suspects and reduces needless litigation by providing the police with concrete guidelines for permissible interrogation.
Even though the idea behind Miranda rights is to protect suspects from police coercion, the Supreme Court in 1991 held that coerced confessions may nevertheless be used in court if their use is harmless — in other words, if a jury would probably convict even without them (Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 111 S. Ct. 1246, 113 L. Ed. 2d 302). The police suspected that Oreste Fulminante had killed his eleven-year-old stepdaughter, whose body was found in an Arizona desert two days after he reported her missing. Before he was charged with the murder, Fulminante received a prison sentence for an unrelated weapons possession charge. While in prison on that charge, he confessed the murder to a fellow inmate, who actually was a paid federal informant. This informant had offered to protect Fulminante from other inmates in exchange for hearing the truth about the murder. Fulminante was subsequently indicted for the killing, and his confession was used at trial despite his objection. A jury found him guilty of murder and sentenced him to death. The Supreme Court applied the harmful error test and found that the jurors most likely would not have convicted Fulminante had they not heard his coerced confession, thus its use at trial was harmful. The Court ordered the case back for a new trial, this time without use of the confession.
Legal scholars have criticized the Fulminante decision for failing to follow decades of legal precedent holding that coerced confessions violate the due process rights of criminal suspects and that their use at trial necessitates automatic reversal whether they are harmful or not. Fulminante, they argue, encourages the police to ignore the civil rights of suspects and improperly coerce confessions. Others argue that the decision is correct because it focuses on achieving an accurate determination of guilt or innocence regardless of whether constitutional rights are violated. Whatever its long-term effects, Fulminante will not be the final word in the progression of Supreme Court cases defining the law of confessions.
See: Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure; Custodial Interrogation.
| Word Tutor: confession |
The police officer wanted a full confession from the robber.
| Quotes About: Confession |
Quotes:
"Literary confessors are contemptible, like beggars who exhibit their sores for money, but not so contemptible as the public that buys their books."
- W. H. Auden
"The confession of evil works is the first beginning of good works."
- St. Augustine
"I don't deserve this award, but I have arthritis, and I don't deserve that, either."
- Jack Benny
"We have left undone those things which we ought to have done; and we have done those things which we ought not to have done."
- Book Of Common Prayer
"No blame should attach to telling the truth. But it does, it does."
- Anita Brookner
"In confession... we open our lives to healing, reconciling, restoring, uplifting grace of him who loves us in spite of what we are."
- Louis Cassels
See more famous quotes about Confession
| Wikipedia: Confession |
Confession of sins is part of the Christian faith and practice (James 5:16). The meaning is essentially the same as the criminal one – to admit one's guilt. Confession of one's sins, or at least of one's sinfulness, is seen by most churches as a pre-requisite for becoming a Christian.
In Roman Catholic teaching, the Roman Catholic sacrament of Penance (commonly called confession but more recently referred to as Reconciliation, or more fully the Sacrament of Reconciliation) is the method given by Christ to the Roman Catholic Church by which individual men and women may confess sins committed after baptism and have them absolved by a priest. This sacrament is known by many names, including penance, reconciliation and confession (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Sections 1423-1442). While official Church publications always refer to the sacrament as "Penance", "Reconciliation" or "Penance and Reconciliation", many lay Roman Catholics continue to use the term "confession" in reference to the sacrament.
Roman Catholics believe that priests have been given the authority by Jesus to exercise the forgiveness of sins here on earth, through His authority. This is to say that the priest during the Sacrament of Penance is a stand-in for Jesus whose authority it is to forgive sins. This power belongs to Jesus alone; however, God can and does exercise it through the Roman Catholic priesthood.
The basic form of confession has not changed for centuries, although at one time confessions were made publicly. Colloquially speaking, the role of the priest is of a judge and jury; in theological terms, he acts in persona Christi and receives from the Church the power of jurisdiction over the penitent. The penitent must confess mortal sins in order to restore his/her connection to God's grace and not to merit Hell. The sinner may confess venial sins. The intent of this sacrament is to provide healing for the soul as well as to regain the grace of God, lost by sin. The Council of Trent (Session Fourteen, Chapter I) quoted John 20:22-23 as the primary Scriptural proof for the doctrine concerning this sacrament, but Catholics also consider Matthew 9:2-8, 1 Corinthians 11:27, and Matthew 16:17-20 to be among the Scriptural bases for the sacrament.
Absolution in the Roman rite takes this form (with the essential words in bold):
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.
Before the Second Vatican Council, and still practiced in traditionalist parishes, the priest would always absolve the penitent in Latin, using the following words, followed by an additional prayer.
Absolution (with the essential words in bold), and post-absolution prayer:
Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat; et ego auctoritate ipsius te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunicationis (suspensionis) et interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges. [making the Sign of the Cross:] Deinde, ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.
Passio Domini nostri Jesu Christi, merita Beatæ Mariæ Virginis et omnium sanctorum, quidquid boni feceris vel Mali sustinueris sint tibi in remissionem peccatorum, augmentum gratiæ et præmium vitæ æternæ.
Translation: "May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you; and by His authority I absolve you from every bond of excommunication and interdict, so far as my power allows and your needs require. [making the Sign of the Cross:] Thereupon, I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Amen."
"May the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the saints obtain for you that whatever good you do or whatever evil you bear might merit for you the remission of your sins, the increase of grace and the reward of everlasting life."
The penitent must make an act of contrition, a prayer acknowledging his/her faults before God. It typically commences: O my God, I am heartily sorry... The reception of sacramental absolution is considered necessary before receiving the Eucharist if one has guilt for a mortal sin. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the Sacrament of Penance is the only ordinary way in which a person can receive forgiveness for mortal sins committed after baptism. However, perfect contrition (a sorrow motivated by love of God rather than of fear of punishment) is an extraordinary way of removing the guilt of mortal sin before or without confession (if there is no opportunity of confessing to a priest). Such contrition would include the intention of confessing and receiving sacramental absolution. For the absolution to be valid, contrition must be had. Imperfect contrition (sorrow arising from a less pure motive, such as fear of Hell), is sufficient for a valid confession, but is not, by itself, sufficient to remove the guilt of sin.
A mortal sin must be about a serious matter, have been committed with full consent, and be known to be wrong. Other sins would be classed as venial; confession of venial sins is strongly recommended but not obligatory, and is said to strengthen the penitent against temptation to mortal sin. Serious matters for a mortal sin, according to Roman Catholic teaching, include for example: murder, blasphemy, and adultery. It is a widely held belief of the faith that if a person guilty of mortal sin dies without either receiving the sacrament or experiencing perfect contrition with the intention of confessing to a priest, he will receive eternal damnation.
In order for the sacrament to be valid the penitent must do more than simply confess his known mortal sins to a priest. He must a) be truly sorry for each of the mortal sins he committed, b) have a firm intention never to commit them again, and c) perform the penance imposed by the priest. Also, in addition to confessing the types of mortal sins committed, the penitent must disclose how many times each sin was committed, to the best of his ability.
In 1215, after the Fourth Council of the Lateran, the Code of Canon Law required all Roman Catholics to confess at least once a year, although frequent reception of the sacrament is recommended such as reception weekly or monthly. In reality many Roman Catholics confess far less or more than is required; of all practices of the faith it is perhaps among the most common to be neglected.
For Catholic priests, the confidentiality of all statements made by penitents during the course of confession is absolute. This strict confidentiality is known as the Seal of the Confessional. According to the Code of Canon Law, 983 §1, "The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason." Priests may not reveal what they have learned during confession to anyone, even under the threat of their own death or that of others. (This is unique to the Seal of the Confessional. Many other forms of confidentiality, including in most states attorney-client privilege, allow ethical breaches of the confidence to save the life of another.) For a priest to break that confidentiality would lead to a latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication reserved to the Holy See (Code of Canon Law, 1388 §1). In a criminal matter, a priest may encourage the penitent to surrender to authorities. However, this is the extent of the leverage he wields; he may not directly or indirectly disclose the matter to civil authorities himself.
There are limited cases where portions of a confession may be revealed to others, but always with the penitent's permission and always without actually revealing the penitent's identity. This is the case, for example, with unusually serious offenses, as some excommunicable offenses are reserved to the bishop or even to the Holy See, and their permission to grant absolution would first have to be obtained.
Civil authorities in the United States are usually respectful of this confidentiality. However, several years ago an attorney in Portland, Oregon, secretly recorded a confession without the knowledge of the priest or the penitent involved. This led to official protests by then local Archbishop Francis George and the Vatican. The tape has since been sealed, and the Federal Court has since ruled that the taping was in violation of the 4th Amendment, and ordered an injunction against any further tapings.
Frequent confession is a spiritual practice of going to the sacrament of penance often and regularly in order to grow in holiness.
This practice "was introduced into the Church by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit," according to Pius XII. Confession of everyday faults is "strongly recommended by the Church." (CCC 1458) Paul VI said that frequent confession is "of great value."
John Paul II who went to confession weekly, enumerated these advantages:
Because of what he considered misinformation on this topic, he strongly recommended this practice and warned that those who discourage frequent confession "are lying."
In the Middle Ages, Adam the Great created the manuals of confession and constituted a literary genre. These manuals were guidebooks on how to obtain the maximum benefits from the sacrament. There were two kinds of manuals: those addressed to the faithful, so that they could prepare a good confession, and those addressed to the priests, who had to make sure that no sins were left unmentioned and the confession was as thorough as possible. The priest had to ask questions, being careful not to suggest sins that perhaps the faithful had not thought of and give them ideas. Manuals were written in Latin and in the vernacular. See Les manuels de confession en castillan dans l'Espagne médiévale (in French)[1] about manuals of confession in medieval Spain. Various guidebooks for confession also appear frequently in the Eastern Church.
Within the Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches, it is understood that the Mystery of confession and repentance has more to do with the spiritual development of the individual and much less to do with purification. Sin is not seen as a stain on the soul, but rather a mistake that needs correction.
In general, the Orthodox Christian chooses an individual to trust as his or her spiritual guide. In most cases this is the parish priest, but may be a starets (Elder, a monastic who is well-known for his or her advancement in the spiritual life) or any individual, male or female, who has received permission from a bishop to hear confession. This person is often referred to as one's "spiritual father" or "spiritual mother". Once chosen, the individual turns to his spiritual guide for advice on his or her spiritual development, confessing sins, and asking advice. Orthodox Christians tend to confess only to this individual and the intimacy created by this bond makes the spiritual guide the most qualified in dealing with the person, so much so that no one can override what a spiritual guide tells his or her charges. What is confessed to one's spiritual guide is protected by the same seal as would be any priest hearing a confession. While one does not have to be a priest to hear confession, only an ordained priest may pronounce the absolution.
Confession does not take place in a confessional, but normally in the main part of the church itself, usually before an analogion (lectern) set up near the iconostasion. On the analogion is placed a Gospel Book and a blessing cross. The confession often takes place before an icon of Jesus Christ (usually the Icon of Christ "Not Made by Hand"). Orthodox understand that the confession is not made to the priest, but to Christ, and the priest stands only as witness and guide. Before confessing, the penitent venerates the Gospel Book and cross, and places the thumb and first two fingers of his right hand on the feet of Christ as he is depicted on the cross. The confessor will often read an admonition warning the penitent to make a full confession, holding nothing back.
In cases of emergency, of course, confession may be heard anywhere. For this reason, especially in the Russian Orthodox Church, the pectoral cross that the priest wears at all times will often have the Icon of Christ "Not Made by Hands" inscribed on it.
In general practice, after one confesses to one's spiritual guide, the parish priest (who may or may not have heard the confession) covers the head of the person with his Epitrachelion (Stole) and reads the Prayer of Absolution, asking God to forgive the transgression of the individual (the specific prayer differs between Greek and Slavic use). It is not uncommon for a person to confesses his sins to his spiritual guide on a regular basis but only seek out the priest to read the prayer before receiving Holy Communion.
In the Eastern Churches, clergy often make their confession in the sanctuary. A bishop, priest, or deacon will confess at the Holy Table (Altar) where the Gospel Book and blessing cross are normally kept. He confesses in the same manner as a layman, except that when a priest hears a bishop's confession, the priest kneels.
It is required of all that they go to confession before receiving any of the Sacred Mysteries (Sacraments), including not just Holy Communion, but Unction, Marriage, and the rest. Orthodox Christians should go to confession at least four times a year; often during one of the four fasting periods (Great Lent, Nativity Fast, Apostles' Fast and Dormition Fast). Many pastors encourage frequent confession and communion. In some of the monasteries on Mount Athos, the monks will confess their sins daily.
Orthodox Christians will also practice a form of general confession, referred to as the rite of "Mutual Forgiveness". The rite involves an exchange between the priest and the congregation (or, in monasteries, between the superior and the brotherhood). The priest will make a prostration before all and ask their forgiveness for sins committed in act, word, deed, and thought. Those present ask that God may forgive him, and then they in turn all prostrate themselves and ask the priest's forgiveness. The priest then pronounces a blessing. The rite of Mutual Forgiveness does not replace the Mystery of Confession and Absolution, but is for the purpose of maintaining Christian charity and a humble and contrite spirit. This general confession is practiced in monasteries at the first service on arising (the Midnight Office) and the last service before retiring to sleep (Compline). Old Believers will perform the rite regularly before the beginning of the Divine Liturgy. The best-known asking of mutual forgiveness occurs at Vespers on the Sunday of Forgiveness, and it is with this act that Great Lent begins.
Protestant churches believe that no intermediary is necessary between the Christian and God in order to be absolved from sins. Protestants, however, confess their sins in private prayer before God, believing this suffices to gain God's pardon. However confession to another is often encouraged when a wrong has been done to a person as well as to God. Confession is then made to the person wronged, and is part of the reconciliation process. In cases where sin has resulted in the exclusion of a person from church membership due to unrepentance, public confession is often a pre-requisite to readmission. The sinner confesses to the church his or her repentance and is received back into fellowship. In neither case is there any required format to the confessions, except for the steps taken in Matthew 18:15-20.
Lutheran churches practice "confession and absolution" with the emphasis on the absolution, which is God's word of forgiveness. Confession and absolution may be either private to the pastor, called the "confessor" with the person confessing known as the "penitent," or corporate with the assembled congregation making a general confession to the pastor in the Divine Service. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries private confession and absolution largely fell into disuse; and, even at the present time, it is generally only used when specifically requested by the penitent or suggested by the confessor.
In his 1529 catechisms, Martin Luther praised private confession (before a pastor or a fellow Christian) "for the sake of absolution," the forgiveness of sins bestowed in an audible, concrete way (see John 20:23; Matthew 16:19; 18:18). The Lutheran reformers held that a complete enumeration of sins is impossible (Augsburg Confession XI with reference to Psalm 19:12) and that one's confidence of forgiveness is not to be based on the sincerity of one's contrition nor on one's doing works of satisfaction imposed by the confessor. The medieval church held confession to be composed of three parts: contritio cordis ("contrition of the heart"), confessio oris ("confession of the mouth"), and satisfactio operis ("satisfaction of deeds"). The Lutheran reformers abolished the "satisfaction of deeds," holding that confession and absolution consist of only two parts (Large Catechism VI, 15): the confession of the penitent and the absolution spoken by the confessor. Faith or trust in Jesus' complete active and passive satisfaction is what receives the forgiveness and salvation won by him and imparted to the penitent by the word of absolution.
The Church of Sweden (Lutheran) emphasizes the teaching of the Book of Concord that "confession and absolution" is a sacrament (Apology of the Augsburg Confession XIII, 4): sacramental confession to a Lutheran priest is contained in the Swedish massbook.
The Anglican sacrament of confession and absolution is usually a component part of corporate worship, particularly at services of the Holy Eucharist. The form involves an exhortation to repentance by the priest, a period of silent prayer during which believers may inwardly confess their sins, a form of general confession said together by all present, and the pronouncement of absolution by the priest, often accompanied by the sign of the cross.
Private or auricular confession is also practiced by Anglicans, either through the venue of the traditional confessional, or more frequently in a private meeting with the priest. This practice permits a period of counselling and suggestions of acts of penance. Following the confession of sins and the discussion of remedies, the priest makes the pronouncement of absolution. The seal of the confessional, as with Roman Catholicism, is absolute and any confessor who divulges information revealed in confession is subject to deposition and removal from office. Historically, the practice of auricular confession was originally a highly controversial one within Anglicanism when priests of the Oxford Movement in the ninteenth century began to hear confessions, but they responded to criticisms by pointing to the fact that such is explicitly sanctioned in The Order for the Visitation of the Sick in the Book of Common Prayer, which contains the following direction:
Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special Confession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter. After which Confession, the Priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and heartily desire it)
Though still not widely practiced, auricular confession within mainstream Anglicanism became accepted in the second half of the 20th century; the 1979 Book of Common Prayer for the Episcopal Church in the USA provides two forms for it in the section "The Reconciliation of a Penitent."
Private confession is also envisaged by the Canon Law of the Church of England, which contains the following, intended to safeguard the Seal of the Confessional:
if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the minister, for the unburdening of his conscience, and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him; we...do straitly charge and admonish him, that he do not at any time reveal and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy[2]
There is no requirement for private confession, but a common understanding that it may be desirable depending on individual circumstances. The classic Anglican aphorism regarding the practice is "All may; none must; some should".[3] Compare James 5:16: "Confess your sins to one another".
Confession is also used by many churches in the sense of a statement of faith. The word is used in many Bible translations to mean admit one's faith publicly (e.g. Epistle to the Romans 10:9).
The Confession of a church may therefore be used to mean its public statement of faith or doctrine. A church or group that belongs to a Confessing Movement strives to adhere to its public confessions strictly.
The term confessio (from Latin) is sometimes used to describe a public defense of one's faith or life, e.g. the Confessio of St. Patrick, written around 450.
The Latin term, confessio was originally used to designate the burial-place of a Saint -confessor or martyr- (known also as a memoria or martyrion), this term gradually came to have a variety of applications: the altar erected over the grave; the underground cubiculum which contained the tomb; the high altar of the basilica erected over the confession; later on in the Middle Ages the basilica itself (Joan. Bar., De invent. s. Sabini); and finally the new resting-place to which the remains of a martyr had been transferred (Thierry Ruinart, II, 35).
In case of translation the relics of a martyr
were deposited in a
Among the most famous subterranean confessions of Rome are those in the churches of S. Martino al Monti; S. Lorenzo fuori le Mure, containing the bodies of St. Laurence and St. Stephen; S. Prassede containing the bodies of the two sisters Saints Praxedes and Pudentiana. The most celebrated confession is that of St. Peter. Over the tomb of the Apostle Pope St. Anacletus built a memoria, which Constantine when building his basilica replaced with the Confession of St. Peter. Behind the brass statues of Sts. Peter and Paul is the niche over the grated floor which covers the tomb. In this niche is the gold coffer, the work of Benvenuto Cellini, which contains the palliums, generally to be sent to Metropolitan archbishops. All through the Middle Ages the palliums after being blessed were let down through the grating on to the tomb of the Apostle, where they remained for a whole night (Phillips, Kirchenrecht, V, 624, n. 61). During the restoration of the present basilica in 1594 the floor gave way, revealing the tomb of St. Peter and on it the golden cross weighing 150 pounds placed there by Emperor Constantine I, and inscribed with his own and his mother St.Helen's names.
In Buddhism, confessing one's faults to a superior is an important part of Buddhist practice. In the various sutras, followers of the Buddha confessed their wrongdoing to Buddha [1].
In Judaism, confession is an important part of attaining forgiveness for both sins against God and another man. However, confession of sins is made to God and not man (except in asking for forgiveness of the victim of the sin). In addition, confession in Judaism is done communally in plural. Unlike the Christian "I have sinned," Jews confess that "We have sinned."
In Islam, confession of faith is one of the five pillars of Islam (see Shahadah). The act of seeking forgiveness from God is called Istighfar.
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| Translations: Translations for: Confession |
Dansk (Danish)
n. - tilståelse, skrifte, skriftemål, trosbekendelse, konfession
Nederlands (Dutch)
biecht, bekentenis, (schuld)belijdenis, kerkgenootschap
Français (French)
n. - (gén) aveu, (Relig) confession
Deutsch (German)
n. - Konfession, Geständnis, Beichte
Ελληνική (Greek)
n. - ομολογία, αναγνώριση, παραδοχή, εξομολόγηση, εκμυστήρευση, διατράνωση, διακήρυξη (πεποιθήσεων κ.λπ.)
Italiano (Italian)
confessione, riconoscimento, ammissione
Português (Portuguese)
n. - confissão (f), confissão (f) (Rel.)
Русский (Russian)
вероисповедание, исповедь, признание
Español (Spanish)
n. - credo, profesión de la fe, reconocimiento, confesión
Svenska (Swedish)
n. - bekännelse, bikt
中文（简体） (Chinese (Simplified))
自认, 招供, 自白
中文（繁體） (Chinese (Traditional))
n. - 自認, 招供, 自白
한국어 (Korean)
n. - 고백 , 참회, 고백서
日本語 (Japanese)
n. - 自白, 告白, 自認, 告解, 懺悔
العربيه (Arabic)
(الاسم) اعتراف, مذهب
עברית (Hebrew)
n. - התוודות, הודאה
If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.
To select your translation preferences click here.
| Best of the Web: Confessions |
Some good "confession" pages on the web:
 American Sign Language commtechlab.msu.edu |
| Shopping: Confessions |
| confessions cd | confessions of a video vixen |
| madonna confessions |
Did you mean: confession (in law), Confessions (St. Augustine), Confessions (Jean-Jacques Rousseau), Confessions (Usher album), Confessions (Dweezil Zappa album), Confessions (poem) More...
Join the WikiAnswers Q&A community. Post a question or answer questions about "Confessions" at WikiAnswers.
Copyrights:
 |
 | Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2007. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Thesaurus. Roget's II: The New Thesaurus, Third Edition by the Editors of the American Heritage® Dictionary Copyright © 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Antonyms. © 1999-2008 by Answers Corporation. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. © 2006 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Encyclopedia of Judaism. The New Encyclopedia of Judaism. Copyright © 1989, 2002 by G.G. The Jerusalem Publishing House, Ltd. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Columbia Encyclopedia. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/ Read more |
 |
| Law Encyclopedia. West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Copyright © 1998 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Word Tutor. Copyright © 2004-present by eSpindle Learning, a 501(c) nonprofit organization. All rights reserved. eSpindle provides personalized spelling and vocabulary tutoring online; free trial. Read more |
 |
| Quotes About. Copyright © 2005 QuotationsBook.com. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Confession". Read more |
 |
| Translations. Copyright © 2007, WizCom Technologies Ltd. All rights reserved. Read more |
