Advice from priest during confession not to tell the truth

  • Thread starter Thread starter Polak
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
One thing said that I agree with is that every couple is different. What works for one couple doesn’t necessarily mean it’ll work for another.
  • Some couples just don’t want to know
  • Some couples would feel more betrayed if they found out on their own
  • The truth would help some couples work out their problems, make them stronger.
  • On the other hand, the truth would destroy some couples to badly to ever be repaired.
Me personally, I’d want to know. Not sure how I’d feel after hearing the truth but finding out later would be worse.

I would also have such a feeling of betrayal if I found out my priest knew, yet encouraged my husband no to tell me. I’m not saying my priest should have told me, but he should have encouraged my husband to tell me. Then bring us into counceling to work things out.

God say we are now one when we married, so I personally feel I have a right to know.
meltzerboy2 said:
I think the priest asked the man all the right questions…
Click to expand...
He forgot one… if you love your wife, why did you feel the need to cheat, how does that show you love her? What’s up with that, why, why did you do it?

Also why do people think by telling the truth will ease his burden? It does and it doesn’t… that also depends on the person and situation.

Maybe the husband feels guilty every time he sees his wife because of what he did. Maybe he feel so much guilty, bad, remorseful for what he did, he’ll want to do good by his wife for the rest of his life. Maybe he doesn’t. Maybe he feels fine about what he did because he can keep it to himself… a small part of him thinks ‘I got away with it’.

IMO… by not facing the consequences of his actions just makes him a coward.
 
Last edited:
There was another thread like this but it closed… not sure why, but I had a question…

The person who cheated, confessed and promised to never do it again, so the priest said it was okay not to tell… does anyone ever wonder what would the priest say if that same person came in a second, third or fourth time… would they still be okay with the spouse not telling?
 
I suppose the priest could have asked another question like " If your wife cheated on you, would you prefer that she be forthright with you ?" or “Would you be able to forgive her ?”
 
littlebird said:
I suppose the priest could have asked another question like " If your wife cheated on you, would you prefer that she be forthright with you ?" or “Would you be able to forgive her ?”
Click to expand...
That would be a good question to ask when the husband first asks his priest if he had to tell his wife… 🙂
 
It is easy to judge others. Their motives. But like in all things in life, there are two sides to every story.
There are so many people in this world who believe they are morally superior to others.
The just say no mentality. Much easier said than done.
We all are sinners. We all deserve forgiveness.
Thank God, God is our judge and jurist.
 
We don’t know the full story, I don’t condone adultery but maybe he committed adultery shortly after he was married but has only just gone to confession about it 14 years later. It might hurt her more after all that time rather than straight away. I would rather my wife tell me immediately or never, I wouldn’t want her telling me decades later out of guilt, it also would feel like an attack after all that time.
 
Also his wife might be dying of cancer; why tell her as she dies?
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
We all deserve forgiveness.
Click to expand...
The first step to forgiveness is confession. He’s denying his spouse the opportunity to be forgiven.
BigRon said:
I would rather my wife tell me immediately or never,
Click to expand...
Agreed, but if later I’d prefer to hear from them of their own violation than because a child has appeared, or a childs genetic info has become important, or they are being blackmailed, or as I’m going through their personal effects after their death.
 
I know – let’s make this part of Catholic marriage prep. “If your spouse ever cheats on you, would you want to know?”. And the choices could be:
  1. If it was just one time, and there are neither STIs, not pregnancy, then no.
  2. Always no.
  3. Always yes
  4. Maybe (explain in an essay).
I also think end of life planning should be included in marriage prep, because, Terri Schiavo.
 
Last edited:
Polak said:
Thoughts on this?
Click to expand...
A priest are to not disclose the content of a particular confession - so I´d say he is breaking the seal here. He could say that he´ve heard all sorts of things in general, but as far as I´m concerned he´s not supposed to treat it like that.

Here´s what the Catechism states:

(1467) Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons, the Church declares that every priest who hears confessions is bound under very severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him. He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents’ lives.72 This secret, which admits of no exceptions, is called the “sacramental seal,” because what the penitent has made known to the priest remains “sealed” by the sacrament.

Based on this, I think it´s fair to say that he has broken the seal.
 
My pastor says stuff like this in homilies quite a bit:
“Last week a man from a neighboring parish celebrated Reconciliation for the first time in thirty-five years. (Pause) Thanks be to God!”

That’s great – but the fact that he is talking about a confession that is 1) local 2) recent and 3) has a specific details makes me wonder if it’s breaking the seal as well.
 
Last edited:
That man may have given permission for Father to give his testimony.
 
TheLittleLady said:
That man may have given permission for Father to give his testimony.
Click to expand...
It’s happened more than once – and does it matter if the penitent gives permission to the priest? Wouldn’t it still be breaking the seal? Would the priest ask him (them)? “Awkward”
 
Last edited:
TheLittleLady said:
If the person gives permission, it is fine.
Click to expand...
The priest may not break the Seal even if the penitent says it’s okay.
On the other hand the penitent is not bound by the Seal and can talk about what is said in Confession.
 
I would have assumed the opposite, that the person the priest was talking about was not from the congregation; otherwise, he would not have told about it.
 
It’s not breaking the seal as long as there is no way to identify the penitent. It doesn’t mean he can never mention a word, otherwise when faced with a case where he has to go to the Bishop for permission to lift an excommunication he wouldn’t be able to say a woman has confessed to procuring an abortion.

This is what Canon Law says
Can. 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.

§2. The interpreter, if there is one, and all others who in any way have knowledge of sins from confession are also obliged to observe secrecy.

Can. 984 §1. A confessor is prohibited completely from using knowledge acquired from confession to the detriment of the penitent even when any danger of revelation is excluded.

§2. A person who has been placed in authority cannot use in any manner for external governance the knowledge about sins which he has received in confession at any time.
Click to expand...
In this case he hasn’t given any information that would betray the penitent.
 
A direct violation of the seal is when the penitent’s identity is revealed (or when enough information is revealed to enable people to work it out) along with the subject of their confession. An indirect violation of the seal, is basically when people may or may not work it out but it’s definitely likely that this could happen. A priest can only talk about a confession is a way that’s there’s no danger of the penitent’s identity being revealed. A penitent can only give the priest permission to talk to them about matters covered by the seal and even then only when they themselves request this.

In this case, it’s probably safe to say that there’s no violation of the seal - the details mentioned by the OP are vague enough that there’s no real way of working out who it is that the priest is talking about. That said, as I mentioned earlier there is still the risk of a chilling effect on those hearing this - particularly given the very sensitive nature of what’s being discussed. I don’t mean that as a criticism of the OP’s priest - I’m sure he gave careful consideration to the risk before making a prudent judgment - but rather just as a statement of general caution.
 
After confession a person says: “Father, the thing I dreaded most was confession after 35 years away. This was so simple and beautiful, I really want to reach out to others like me who have stayed away in shame and fear!”

Father replies “I believe your testimony would be wonderful. If you want me to share it, speak to me about this outside of the confessional.”

Pentitant “Can we go over to your office right now?”

Priest “Sure thing”!

They go and talk about using his testimony to witness to others, and Father sharing the story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top