Examine the labels you use.

It may have been one of those watersheds we are always hearing about, although for U.S. Catholics this one might be characterized as a mini-watershed.

There was a time, you see, when the term examination of conscience meant something different for Catholics than it does today. Older Catholics will remember when Catholics were given a laundry list of sins based on the Ten Commandments and then were instructed to tote up any transgressions they might have been guilty of before going to Confession.

It surely made penitents aware that there were no-no's that were out of bounds for those about to approach what in those days was the Communion rail. But sometimes the net effect of this procedure left something to be desired.

One 6-year-old, for example, having studiously memorized the potential sins listed, emerged from his first encounter with a confessor refreshed and elated. When asked, "How did you do?" he replied, "Fine. I told him that I had committed all of the sins on the list--twice!" One could imagine the wide eyes of the confessor when he heard this 6-year-old announce that he had twice committed adultery. It is not unreasonable to assume that he cut his penitent short before he confessed that he had twice coveted his neighbor's wife.

I fervently hope that the old laundry list of sins has been consigned to the dustbin.

Granted that old devil Council of Trent mandated that sins, when confessed, must be detailed and enumerated. And that post-Tridentine moral theologians spent endless hours splitting hairs determining, for example, how many kinds of sins are subscribed under the precept, "Thou shalt not kill." Not to mention the rollicking scholarship that was expended to elucidate, "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

The resulting confetti that eventually comprised an examination of conscience may well have squeezed all sense of guilt and, more important, contrition out of what should basically be a cleansing of one's soul and a preparation for the reception of the Eucharistic. Consider on the other hand that Jesus gave us only two commandments: that we must love God and love our neighbors as ourselves.

So a pastoral letter issued last Lent by Bishop Alexander Brunett of Helena, Montana was a welcome and significantly enlightened contribution to our understanding of an often perplexing question.

"The longing for sincere reconciliation is one of the chief driving forces in our society," the bishop writes as he offers an examination of conscience related to many contemporary concerns: human life, family, human rights, a just society, women, the counterculture of life, homosexuality, labeling people, the political agenda, and religious vocations. In each area, Brunett poses questions to challenge reflection by those seeking reconciliation and hoping to heal a shattered world.

"Clearly," he writes, "reconciliation today is a complex reality. However, it begins unmistakably with the individual person who looks at herself or himself in the light of the Word made flesh, present in our midst. Do I see in the mirror of self the image of the Crucified Lord, the supreme witness of patient love and of humble meekness? If I see anything else, I must set about to change my heart, to find the image and likeness of God in which I have been created, and to seek the forgiveness of God and those who have been harmed in any way."

Brunett quotes early church theologian Tertullian in saying, "Christians are made, not born," and offers the wise advice that "simply to check ourselves against the Commandments easily leads to a legalistic outlook, which in turn breeds minimalism. The Christian, conscious of personal essence and the realities of life, cannot be content with the minimum. True reconciliation demands that one give up whatever forces God away so that we can be at peace and at one."

Brunett does not hesitate to spell out how our conscience can be impinged by some particular maladies in our time. The bishop writes: "We live in a society that likes to make divisions and put labels on people: you are conservative, I am liberal; this one is pro-something, that is anti-something; this one is on one side of the fence, that one is on the other. It should work nicely--if we put everyone in their respective categories, we would know how to deal with them, and then we do not have to face the reality that they do not fit there exclusively.

"When we strive to be the mirror of the image of the Crucified Lord, we seek fidelity to Christ and respect for all people in the church. Our tendency to put people in categories points out our need for conversion . . . to accept the fact that Jesus treated everyone in the same way. Put away your sin, and believe the good news."

Brunett has eloquently taught the people of his diocese what an examination of conscience should truly be. Would that his wisdom will be shared in the wider church.