Blackmail of a priest after confessing abuse?

[laylow]

As all will know in a Catholic forum, a priest is not allowed to report abuse claims that were discussed in the confessional, as part of an official confession. In this thread, I will not be discussing my opinion on this.

Instead, I am wondering if this gives the accused party some control over the priest. For example, if the accused thinks he may be outed to the priest by someone else, they could confess it first in an official confession. Then if the priest hears about the accusation outside of the confessional, could the accused sort of blackmail him with the confession part?

In other words, if the priest is told about it outside of the confessional by another party about the abuse, does his obligation to keep the confession quiet end, or could he be handcuffed by knowing information that he is not supposed to disclose?

 

[neophyte]

A priest is absolutely forbidden from ever disclosing what was told him in the confessional, including that there even was a confession, as is anyone who might happen to overhear it. Nothing shared in confession can be used in any way to the detriment of the penitent.

This doesn’t extend to things that he learns outside of the confessional.

I don’t see how someone could blackmail a priest in the manner you suggest. “If you report this allegation made against me, then I’ll get you in trouble by publicly confirming that it’s something I confessed to you under the seal” doesn’t sound like a good way to avoid legal troubles.

 

[BartholomewB]

Then if the priest hears about the accusation outside of the confessional, could the accused sort of blackmail him with the confession part?

I think you have the answer to your question right there. The secret of the confessional does not apply, and never did apply, to information that the priest obtained from sources other than the confessional.

 

[laylow]

I think you have the answer to your question right there. The secret of the confessional does not apply, and never did apply, to information that the priest obtained from sources other than the confessional.

Yes, but what if he forgets and confuses something that was told in the confessional, with something that was said outside? I just think it puts him in a very tough situation.

 

[BartholomewB]

Yes, but what if he forgets and confuses something that was told in the confessional, with something that was said outside? I just think it puts him in a very tough situation.

Now you’re asking a different question.

 

[laylow]

Now you’re asking a different question.

Yes, I guess I am.

 

[TheMortenBay]

what if he forgets and confuses something that was told in the confessional

I’d say, confusion would imply that he didn’t mean to break the seal of the confession. That’s not full consent, so I don’t think he’d be held responsible nor would he be excommunicated.

 

[laylow]

Doesn’t seem like it would be fair for him to be punished, so I would guess you are right.

 

[po18guy]

Too many qualifiers.

 

[Hoosier-Daddy]

In the us legal system this would be an ineffective form of blackmail because the diocese can simply testify the priest did not reveal something from a confession. That they did not find d out about it from a protected confession…

 

[laylow]

In the us legal system this would be an ineffective form of blackmail because the diocese can simply testify the priest did not reveal something from a confession. That they did not find d out about it from a protected confession…

I’m thinking the accuser might blackmail within the church. For example, if the accuser was a fellow priest, he could threaten to accuse the confessional priest of spreading information that was told in the confessional. If the accuser was more popular amongst the people, his word may be trusted over the confessional priest.

 

[Weserthy]

The priest could still contact authorities to report the abuse, since he heard about it from another source, but, he would NOT be able to testify that the accused confessed to him that he did it, since that occurred during the sacrament of reconciliation. He would have to limit the information he gave to what he learned from the other party.

 

[jrgmercado]

The better questions is: can a priest use information told to him in a confession to start looking into a crime? So if someone confesses that they are stealing from the collection, can the priest “suggest” that an audit be done or that Ms Jones not be allowed to count the collection? Where’s that line?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yes, but what if he forgets and confuses something that was told in the confessional, with something that was said outside? I just think it puts him in a very tough situation.

It’s highly unlikely, as priests right on here have told us that they forget what was said in the confessional pretty quickly after the confession. A priest who hears dozens of confessions is not going to remember one in particular.

 

[laylow]

Wouldn’t that make it likely? Or am I reading it wrong?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The better questions is: can a priest use information told to him in a confession to start looking into a crime? So if someone confesses that they are stealing from the collection, can the priest “suggest” that an audit be done or that Ms Jones not be allowed to count the collection? Where’s that line?

We’ve been over this. If the priest looking into a crime would reveal in any way that he heard a confession about it, he can’t do anything.

If someone confesses stealing from the collection, and the priest usually oversees the collections, he might be able to keep a closer eye on the amounts, because it’s his normal task anyway, but he can’t reveal why.

If someone confesses that he killed the neighbor lady, the priest might watch to see if the neighbor lady comes out of her house that day or go knock on her door, but only if this would be a normal thing for priest to do, like maybe he talks to the neighbor lady several times a week anyway.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Someone with blackmail in his/her heart is not likely to be disposed to go to Confession (except in a good fiction story).

 

[laylow]

Someone with blackmail in his/her heart is not likely to be disposed to go to Confession (except in a good fiction story).

Under my evil story, he went to confession solely for the benefit of being able to use it for blackmail. And he was also an abuser, so I made him quite ‘bad.’ I think it is a realistic scenario that could play out.

 

[TheLittleLady]

As for the “gotcha”, those who abuse feel that rules don’t apply for them. I still very much doubt they would sit foot in a confessional.

 

[laylow]

As for the “gotcha”, those who abuse feel that rules don’t apply for them. I still very much doubt they would sit foot in a confessional.

People wishing to avoid jail time will do lots of things they may not ordinarily do. Again, under my hypothetical, we are talking about another priest, who probably wouldn’t have an issue with it.