I don't get it

[AngryOldDem]

I lurk on another Internet Catholic board and a question was raised about confession. The discussion has taken a rather (from where I sit) disturbing turn.

Someone raised the scenario to the resident priests about a penitent who confesses to just assaulting and leaving another person for dead. Would the priest anonymously alert the authorities? No. Because that would be breaking the seal. Could the priest tell the penitent (as a condition of his absolution, I suppose) to inform the authorities as soon as he left the confessional? Again, no, because that would be breaking the seal.

Granted, the above situation is far-fetched. But what if a priest knows that a third person is in proximate, physical danger? Or that harm has already come to the person? What should take priority -- dogma, or coming to the immediate assistance of another human being?

I guess I'm most disturbed by the attitudes of many on the board who cannot make the distinction, and say that if they were the ones bleeding in an alley, they would rather die than have the confessor violate the seal. Nothing has been said about the definite sin of omission of not coming to the aid of another human being, which I would think would be in the back of any priest's mind if he would come up against such a situation.

And I guess it troubles me because at the height of the sex scandal, some bishops passed the word that priests could confess to abuse and then not be held responsible for it because everything would be under the seal.

I can see the reasons for keeping inviolate the priest/penitent relationship. But when another life is at stake (physical or otherwise) I think a line needs to be drawn. That is putting the institution above human welfare, and I just cannot get my mind around that.

Psychiatrists and other social-work professionals deal with such situations constantly, and laws are in place that guide what they have to do in such situations. Why should clergy be exempt?

[rug]

1. Do you want to confess to a priest who could be subpoenaed?

[hedgehog]

2. I think your second statement is incorrect.

Absolution is given only when there is true penitence. Confession is not a get out of jail free card.The priest would rightly demand that the person make reparation for the sin, beginning with getting help for the victim.

[AngryOldDem]

3. That's not what was said on the other board

And I was surprised by that. I would think what you suggested would be the least the priest could do, but no.

I'm wondering how far the protection of the seal should go, if another person is in imminent danger. What is the responsibility/moral duty toward that third person?

[hedgehog]

4. Some of the Catholic boards aren't as Catholic as they would have you believe.

I notice that many who denounce "cafeteria Catholics" are pretty picky about which Church teachings to follow themselves. Oftentimes someone will present something they think they heard back in fifth grade on class as the gospel truth.

As for your original question, I'm wondering if it is a Catholic version of "do we torture the guy if he knows where the nuclear bomb is planted in the city?" question. Generally speaking, the seal of the confessional applies to a true penitent. The situation of someone showing up asking for absolution while the victim lies dying is highly unlikely. Thinking it over, I'm wondering if the seal of the confessional would apply in a case in which someone is not sorry enough for the sin to provide aid to the victim. In other words, without true penitence, does it qualify as a true sacrament with all the rights and privileges attached?


It all goes back to the notion that Sacraments are not magic rituals but an encounter with God. Going through the motions does not a sacrament make.

[AngryOldDem]

6. Good answer, thanks.

That makes a lot of sense. As I said, the situation is pretty far-fetched, but it just got me to thinking that there may be other cases (child abuse, spouse abuse) that are serious, and could result in imminent harm if something is not done.

In other discussions about this, the parable of the good Samaritan was brought up. While the circumstances aren't identical, the premise, I think, stays the same. Do you follow the letter of the law, or do you do what you know is right (and what other professionals without the protection of the seal would be legally bound to do)?

And as for your other question, as near as I can tell the priests on this board are diocesan. One claims to be a canon lawyer. I take what is said on the board with a huge grain of salt, but for some reason this question struck a nerve.

[DemBones DemBones]

8. They certainly aren't! I found a board that was supposed to be for

progressive Catholics and was excited about finding it. Then I read the first post, in which someone claimed she was a Catholic AND a Wiccan. Others were supportive of her position so I knew their grasp of Catholicism was very limited.

[AngryOldDem]

9. Hi, DemBones!

Good to hear from you!

:-) :hi:

[DemBones DemBones]

11. Back at ya!

:hi:

[Matilda]

10. Welcome back, DemBones.

Nice to see you again.

:hi:

[DemBones DemBones]

12. Thanks!

:hi:

[Matilda]

7. That's what I was taught too.

If someone commits a sin that is also a civil crime, absolution can't
be given until restitution for the crime has been made.

So if you steal money, you've got to own up and return it; if you kill
somebody you must confess to the police as well as to the priest.
Otherwise, you remain in a state of sin.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. Right, I'm an Episcopalian, but I remember a case from the 1970s

in which a Yale student murdered his girlfriend and then ran off into the night. He ended up sitting on the steps of a Catholic church (he was Catholic), and when the priest found him the next morning, he confessed to the murder. However, the priest would not grant him absolution until he promised to turn himself in, and as I recall, the priest even accompanied him to the police station to make sure he went through with it (and, I'm sure, to be a supportive presence during the humiliating process).

Also, do you recall the confessional dilemma in the movie Priest? The younger priest knows that a child is being sexually abused by her father but can't do anything about it. He tries various indirect ways to alert people to the problem, but in the end, he can do nothing but pray for deliverance for the child, and sure enough, it happens.

[hedgehog]

5. I just reread your original post.

It sounds like a priest gave the answer that disturbs you. All I can say is that even priests can be wrong. Was the priest who answered a member of a particular order? I bet a Jesuit priest would have given a different answer!