Talk:Penance

Conflation

There is a conflation in this article between Catholicism and Roman Catholicism, which are not entirely synonymous terms. There are many Anglicans who would resent being cast into a section called "Protestantism." Surely "Anglicanism" or "Other Christian enominations" would be more exact. Hence I have edited accordingly. Fishhead64 04:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

I have done some editing of this article, to take it out of its 1911 mode, hopefully. It could really do with some expansion on the topic of penance in non-Christian faith traditions, though. I'm not qualified to do this, but hopefully someone is. Fishhead64 05:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Openning paragraph

I will admit I'm an outsider on this article, but the openning paragraph strikes me as being rather clunky. The first sentance is split up by a long bracketed definition that should probably have its own sentance nearby and it isn't easy to understand. I can see that there has been some debate about sacrament that has probably muddied the waters but I don't really know enough about the topic to improve the openning. So I thought I'd just point it out. Morgrim 14:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~hi, i'm just in my online course, and I'm bored, so I thought I'd drop by and say HI!~~

external link

For neutrality and balance. I am going to add this: http://www.carm.org/catholic/penance.htm regarding Protestant views on Penance. I found no proof of spamming on this website with its hyperlinks. What do you think? - 219.73.11.127 07:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No you won't. Stop spamming that website into articles. IrishGuy ^talk 19:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what spamming? This single web-article by CARM obviously focus on the topic of Penance. Instances exist on wiki when CARM articles are widely used as external sources:

Don't make me laugh.--219.73.11.127 04:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One last time, adding links to the same website in numerous articles is spamming. Stop. IrishGuy ^talk 07:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click and read the URL above which only has hyperlinks to the mother page only, not "articles"(plural form). It is simply on-topic Penance article. Stop making false accusation.219.73.11.127 08:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that you have been reverted by other editors and blocked for spamming, I hardly think there are any false accusations on my part. IrishGuy ^talk 22:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources for the term dharmic religions?

Where are the reliable sources that use the term dharmic religions in the context of this article? Dharmic religions is a now deleted obscure neologism and should not be used throughout Wikipedia. Andries 15:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to use the alternative phrase Indian religions. The number of google scholar results for "Indian religions"+"Indian religion" is (45.600 + 84.200) while it is only (492+475) for "dharmic religions" +"dharmic religion". See Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_September_8. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andries (talk • contribs) 19:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lutheran view of penance

Please note that the reference provided in the article supports the statement that Lutherans reject "those who teach that forgiveness of sin is not obtained through faith but through the satisfactions made by man."

See, the reference (the page linked above) is actually an encyclopedia entry describing penance, and most of the entry refers to Roman Catholic beliefs. The entire page should not be confused with a statement of what Lutherans believe regarding penance. The last paragraph of the entry, however, is taken directly from the Augsburg Confession, and thus, it is a statement of what Lutherans believe regarding penance. --Hamitr (talk) 00:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I removed the sentence:

A term used among Lutherans says that absolution, without penance, is meaningless.[1]

Although the link is now dead, I did find an archived version, and here is the exact quote:

Lutherans sometimes say that the absolution (without which "penance" is meaningless) is simply the preaching of the gospel: "God, for Jesus' sake, has forgiven your sins."

The mis-quoted reference implied almost the exact opposite meaning. Furthermore, the quote referenced deals with absolution rather than penance, so it is not really applicable here. --Hamitr (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic penance

This section is a mess. It should start by explaining how RC penance differs from that of other religions. Instead, it lists its parts—contritio, confessio and satisfactio. It then explains what contritio is and for some reason gives some history, then explains attritio, which wasn't listed. Then it defines itself by itself ("In [penance], the penitent ... accuses himself of his sins.... The priest ... imposes a particular penance to be performed.") This is like defining "golf" as "going to a golf course and golfing." Then, altho it defines RC penance as a sacrament presumably RECEIVED by a penitent, it describes "penitential acts" presumably PERFORMED by the penitent, but this is not explained. It never defines confessio or satisfactio. The main article is even worse. It's much longer and explains much less.

... The main issue is penance is not a required action. Just like going to mass/church is not a requirement; it is not the "love" of God that drives you to ask for fogiveness this is something we humans call a conscience. Or if you will the holy spirit moving through you. Yoshua ben Yosef (Jesus to the masses) died so that we might live I state it this way because when we pass we are judged by the almighty for our specific actions and judgements. You will be held accountable for everything you did and everyone you judged this goes the same for Catholics/Christians ect. who have spent thier lives in the persecution of others. And regardless of what a mortal priest may do or say they are not prophets with direct lines nor can they trace their own religion past 313 AD when Constantine's Edict of Milan was approved making the Catholic faith a reality. In short no priest can grant you a pass and no father can tell you that you are safe from what you have done for the act of forgiveness is not theirs but the almighty itself. My suggestion is stop acting pure because you have to and start being pure because you are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.3.49.68 (talk) 18:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they can indeed. --217.251.94.158 (talk) 10:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since when has "going to mass/church" "not a requirement" been true for Roman Catholics? You don't even know your own religion so stop trying to teach us about ours! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.60.33 (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have revised this particular section reflecting the RC's somewhat broader use of the term. Material particular to the sacrament itself has been moved to that page as there is already a link here to it. Mannanan51 (talk) 04:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific method

I have no idea how the concept of doing penance has anything to do with the scientific method or with science in general. I have removed the term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.217.152.190 (talk) 19:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

What are people given as penance other than prayers and apologies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claire Anemone

Penance - Penitence - Repentence

Could the article please go into a little semantic differentiiation of these terms, for us foreigners. Penitence is a redirect and appears nowhere. Penance is the header for the Lutheran section, but "repentence" is used in it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]