St. Theresa Catholic Church, Sugar Land, TX.
I wrote this hymn for the Eucharistic Revival Hymn Competition. I did not win the competition, so I am posting my hymn here. Ms. Kathleen Pluth from Arizona won the competition, so congratulations to her! For this hymn entry, I was contacted by someone in the USCCB who informed me that I was among the top three finalists, so there is that consolation. To date, I have never won a poetry or hymn competition, but I am still trying!
Hymn: O Source and Summit of Our Life
Commentary
After receiving a criticism of the mention of the word "Confession" in the text (along with the recommendation that I change that word to "repentance"), I consulted a priest, who had this to say:
I think both “repentance” and “Confession” are okay. I think “Confession” is altogether better, more accurate, and better for the souls who will hear the hymn. I think “repentance” is accurate, but not as specific as it could be, and opens the possibility of misleading souls since it is much more general and vague than “Confession”.
The current code of Canon Law says:
Can. 916 Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.
First, an act of perfect contrition is pretty hard and I don’t think we should easily judge ourselves as having made one. Even if we have, this includes the resolve to Confess ASAP. I don’t have it in front of me, but there was a condemned proposition that held “asap” basically meant at the next convenient time. The pope condemned that idea, meaning that it couldn’t just be when convenient, but had to be asap, even if that meant going to a different priest or one you would rather not go to.
Looking online, it seems the 1983 code changed some language. All previous mentions had said if there was “necessity”, which the new code changed to “grave reason”. I don’t see a big difference between the two and the examples given could all fall under both “grave reason” and “necessity”. Whichever it is, it will be much more likely to occur for a priest than a lay person. The only examples I found online for a lay person were someone who remembers an unconfessed mortal sin on the point of receiving Holy Communion or to save the Eucharist from profanation.
And Session XIII of the Council of Trent made the following declarations:
If it is unbeseeming for any one to approach to any of the sacred functions, unless he approach holily; assuredly, the more the holiness and divinity of this heavenly sacrament are understood by a Christian, the more diligently ought he to give heed that he approach not to receive it but with great reverence and holiness, especially as we read in the Apostle those words full of terror: He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself. Wherefore, he who would communicate, ought to recall to mind the precept of the Apostle: Let a man prove himself. Now ecclesiastical usage declares that necessary proof to be, that no one, conscious to himself of mortal sin, how contrite soever he may seem to himself, ought to approach to the sacred Eucharist without previous sacramental confession. This the holy Synod hath decreed is to be invariably observed by all Christians, even by those priests on whom it may be incumbent by their office to celebrate, provided the opportunity of a confessor do not fail them; but if, in an urgent necessity, a priest should celebrate without previous confession, let him confess as soon as possible. (Session XIII, Chapter 7).
CANON XI. lf any one saith that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated. (Session XIII, Canon 11).
And in the Summa Theologiae (Supplementum Tertiae Partis, Chapter Six) Saint Thomas Aquinas made these assertions:
As the purpose of confessing is united to contrition, a man is bound to have this purpose when he is bound to have contrition, viz. when he calls his sins to mind, and chiefly when he is in danger of death, or when he is so circumstanced that unless his sin be forgiven, he must fall into another sin: for instance, if a priest be bound to say Mass, and a confessor is at hand, he is bound to confess or, if there be no confessor, he is bound at least to contrition and to have the purpose of confessing.
But to actual confession a man is bound in two ways. First, accidentally, viz. when he is bound to do something which he cannot do without committing a mortal sin, unless he go to confession first: for then he is bound to confess; for instance, if he has to receive the Eucharist, to which no one can approach, after committing a mortal sin, without confessing first, if a priest be at hand, and there be no urgent necessity. Hence it is that the Church obliges all to confess once a year; because she commands all to receive Holy Communion once a year, viz. at Easter, wherefore all must go to confession before that time. (Article 5, Response).
