J
journey00
Guest
Great! That’s what I was searching. Thanks!
- Status
T
thistle
Guest
The priest will not reveal in court what is said in Confession. He would be found guilty of contempt no doubt for refusing to answer and may be jailed. He will still not reveal anything.
S
salusanimarum17
Guest
I’m not a priest but somebody earlier quoted some canon laws on this, I think the numbers were 983-984. I don’t see how your statement squares with what the law says and the distinctions it makes between 1. violating the seal by “betraying” the person and 2. making use of information gained in confession when it is “detrimental” to the person.
Besides, if all person does is comes into the confessional and says “I am going to kill somebody.” how is that confession?
U
Usagi
Guest
A prosecutor might issue the subpoena, but the priest would be obliged not to cooperate, even if it led to his imprisonment for contempt.
On that one, though, the priest probably has professional confidentiality protection similar to a lawyer’s. It’s the (hopefully rare) “intent of future crime” or “crime that hasn’t ‘gone off’ yet” situation that is the sticky one. The correct response by canon law is still clear, but civil law may not respect that.
Usagi
U
Usagi
Guest
That would accomplish only one thing: people guilty of serious crimes would avoid the sacrament. Thus they would neither turn themselves in to the police nor get back into friendship with God. That is worse than not turning themselves in but still getting the sin cleared up. The priest is an agent of God, not an officer of the court.
Usagi
A
asd72
Guest
Yes that it is good point. I just worry that in cases especially when children are involved. Not that I will ever be a Priest and face them myself.
T
thistle
Guest
How many times do we have to say this. It does not matter what is said during Confession, be it murder, rape or intention to commit such the priest is forbidden to reveal that to anybody.
End of story.
S
salusanimarum17
Guest
“We” can say it ad infinitum. I’m just looking for some resources to back up the claims being made, pointing to distinctions made in the law, and claiming that “confession” requires the confession of at least one venial sin. I have no resources for that claim by the way…just by definition, that would seem to be a requirement.
One thing is for sure, I’ve heard many priests talk about what is said in confession. Nobody has said they were breaking the seal.
T
thistle
Guest
The laws passed the Government are not relevant to this. Canon law prevails with regard to the priest. It makes no difference if a priest is hauled over burning coals into a court of law the priest will not reveal ANYTHING that is said during Confession.
What don’t you understand about this?
Canon Law:
Can. 983 §1 The sacramental seal is inviolable. Accordingly, it is absolutely wrong for a confessor in any way to betray the penitent, for any reason whatsoever, whether by word or in any other fashion.
P
PRmerger
Guest
That is ree-DAHNK-ulous. I am 100% certain that you have never heard a priest “talk about what is said in confession” in the context of the OP.
Now, of course we’ve all heard priests say the generic, "I once heard a lady tell me in confession that she " but as it applies to this discussion…that is irrelevant.
A
anp1215
Guest
I don’t understand this and I’m kind of scared to ask because you seem angry about it, but how is saying “I am going to kill someone tomorrow” Confession? They aren’t Confessing anything because they have not done anything, they are planning it. Other posters have said that does not constitute Confession.
T
thistle
Guest
The Sacrament of Reconciliation (i.e. Confession) starts when the penitent goes into the Confessional and either through the screen or face to face with the priest and crosses himself/herself saying “Bless me Father for I have sinned…” and it ends when the penitent leaves after being absolved (or not absolved).
EVERYTHING that is said (no matter what it is about) during that time comes under the Seal of Confession. If a person says they intend to kill someone that is something said during Confession and comes under the seal.
You seem to be confusing what the penitent has confessed during Confession and everything that is said during Confession. The Seal covers everything that is said during Confession and not just any specific confession of sins made by the penitent. Priest and penitent usually have a conversation.
A
anp1215
Guest
ok thanks for answering that makes more sense
S
salusanimarum17
Guest
I don’t know what the first remark is about. I think I understand c. 983. It does not mean what you have previously said is required of priests. I say that because what you say seems to take no recognition of c. 984.
Thanks.
S
salusanimarum17
Guest
I don’t think it has anything to do with the OP. It has something to do with what “Thistle” has said.
S
salusanimarum17
Guest
This sounds good. Do you have any references to any authoritative document or author that can back this up?
T
thistle
Guest
Sorry if I was a bit abrasive in my previous posts. I’m simply a grumpy old Scotsman!
T
thistle
Guest
I already quoted the relevant canon law:
Can. 983 §1 The sacramental seal is inviolable. Accordingly, it is absolutely wrong for a confessor in any way to betray the penitent, for any reason whatsoever, whether by word or in any other fashion.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Yes, I gathered that. And in the context of the OP, and the conversation that has segued, it’s irrelevant that any of us have heard a priest “talk about what is said in confession”. Nothing was disclosed that in any way could be remotely construed as breaking the seal of confession.
A
anp1215
Guest
ha it’s ok!
- Status