Confession and Secular Law

[TheDoctor]

It might help to look at what the Church teaches. Canon Law is a good place to start.

First, what must the penitent do to be worthy of absolution?
Can. 987 To receive the salvific remedy of the sacrament of penance, a member of the Christian faithful must be disposed in such a way that, rejecting sins committed and having a purpose of amendment, the person is turned back to God.

The penitent must be truly sorry for their sins and must, at the time of the confession, intend never to to it again (“purpose of amendment”). There is nothing specific about what these terms mean - this is up to the confessor.

Second, absolution is dependent only on the norms of Canon 987:
Can. 980 If the confessor has no doubt about the disposition of the penitent, and the penitent seeks absolution, absolution is to be neither refused nor deferred.

To withhold absolution until the completion of a penance or to condition absolution on an act would be a violation of Canon 980.

And third, to require the penitent to reveal anything confessed in any manner, verbal or otherwise, breaks the seal:
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.
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.

It is not a manner of “the Priest did not do it, the penitent did”; but for the Priest requiring the penitent to reveal their sins they would not do it, so to do so breaks the seal.

To a non-Catholic, this seems like is a hard teaching or worse, that the Church allows someone a “free pass” to never have to pay for their crimes yet be right with God. The Catholic knows that this is a short-sighted view that does not understand the nature of God. No one escapes justice. God is Love, God is Mercy, but God is also just and God meets out that justice along with His mercy.

It is more important to leave this world in a right state with God. Justice will be done at judgement day.

 

[Jozefo]

What if the priest gives absolution, but makes it part of the pennance? If I stole a bag of lemons from my neighbor’s tree, he could make restitution part of the pennance, right?

Also, aren’t our penitential prayers counted as restitution toward God?

So I agree, absolution ought not to be witheld from the sincere person, but if told that is part of the pennance, then doesn’t it render the absolution void unless proper pennance and restitution is made?

 

[Rau]

To withhold absolution until the completion of a penance or to condition absolution on an act would be a violation of Canon 980…

Doc, I have no disagreement with your post. I think the key, comforting issues however are raised in various other posts and include:

1). The penitent’s preparedness to surrender to civil authorities may be a factor which influences the priest’s assessment of the level of contrition;

2). By not surrendering to the authorities, the penitent may well be committing further sins, eg. By extending the anguish of the original victim or their family; by causing a misuse of police resources, by causing a risk to future potential victims, etc, etc. One hopes that the priest would counsel the penitent accordingly, regardless of whether absolution is granted.

The discussion has been interesting and informative, if a little academic - I suspect not too many rapists, paedophiles and murderers (on the run from the law) go to confession!

 

[Roger12345]

As a penance during confession can a priest make you publically disclose your sin? For example, confess and apologies to the person you offended? If you confess to a crime can he make you turn yourself in?

 

[bzkoss236]

As a penance during confession can a priest make you publically disclose your sin? For example, confess and apologies to the person you offended? If you confess to a crime can he make you turn yourself in?

Technically he can’t make you do anything, even a simple penance of prayer. However, you are encouraged to do the penance as a means of making amends in this life for your actions. So, if you have wronged someone, part of the penance might be to make reparations with the one you wronged. I see this as beneficial to both penitent and the party that is hurt.

Say you stole something, the priest might suggest that you return the stolen item. It only makes sense right?

 

[DavidFilmer]

There is no canonical “restriction” upon what a priest may impose as a penance. A priest may impose any terms he deems fit.

The penitent is never required to accept the penance. Anyone may refuse the penance, with the understanding that the Confession has not been completed. The penitent is free to “shop around” to find a priest who imposes a less objectionable penance.

 

[JerryZ]

As a penance during confession can a priest make you publically disclose your sin? For example, confess and apologies to the person you offended? If you confess to a crime can he make you turn yourself in?

Square what you are asking with what the Cathechism teaches about confession:

CCC 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.

Also:

Satisfaction

1459 Many sins wrong our neighbor. One must do what is possible in order to repair the harm (e.g., return stolen goods, restore the reputation of someone slandered, pay compensation for injuries). Simple justice requires as much. But sin also injures and weakens the sinner himself, as well as his relationships with God and neighbor. Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused.62 Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin: he must “make satisfaction for” or “expiate” his sins. This satisfaction is also called “penance.”

1460 The penance the confessor imposes must take into account the penitent’s personal situation and must seek his spiritual good. It must correspond as far as possible with the gravity and nature of the sins committed. It can consist of prayer, an offering, works of mercy, service of neighbor, voluntary self-denial, sacrifices, and above all the patient acceptance of the cross we must bear. Such penances help configure us to Christ, who alone expiated our sins once for all. They allow us to become co-heirs with the risen Christ, "provided we suffer with him."63

The satisfaction that we make for our sins, however, is not so much ours as though it were not done through Jesus Christ. We who can do nothing ourselves, as if just by ourselves, can do all things with the cooperation of “him who strengthens” us. Thus man has nothing of which to boast, but all our boasting is in Christ . . . in whom we make satisfaction by bringing forth “fruits that befit repentance.” These fruits have their efficacy from him, by him they are offered to the Father, and through him they are accepted by the Father.64

Hope this helps.

Peace

 

[Bergon]

What if the priest gives absolution, but makes it part of the pennance?

If by ‘it’ you refer to requiring the penitent to confess his crimes to the civil authorities, the answer is no.

If someone has committed a heinous crime that they confess to a confessor the following can happen. The confessor can make a judgement of their disposition. If the confessor is not satisfied the penitent is sufficiently contrite he may withhold absolution. If he’s satisfied of the pentitent’s sufficient contrition the confessor must grant absolution.

If the sin confessed is also a criminal offence, no matter how serious or heinous, the confessor cannot do any of the following. He cannot make absolution conditional on the penitent handing themselves in to the civil authorities. The confessor cannot withhold absolution because the penitent will not confess her or his crimes to the civil authorities. Reporting one’s own crimes to the civil authorities cannot be given as a penance.

 

[Jozefo]

If by ‘it’ you refer to requiring the penitent to confess his crimes to the civil authorities, the answer is no.

If someone has committed a heinous crime that they confess to a confessor the following can happen. The confessor can make a judgement of their disposition. If the confessor is not satisfied the penitent is sufficiently contrite he may withhold absolution. If he’s satisfied of the pentitent’s sufficient contrition the confessor must grant absolution.

If the sin confessed is also a criminal offence, no matter how serious or heinous, the confessor cannot do any of the following. He cannot make absolution conditional on the penitent handing themselves in to the civil authorities. The confessor cannot withhold absolution because the penitent will not confess her or his crimes to the civil authorities. Reporting one’s own crimes to the civil authorities cannot be given as a penance./QUOTE

We have the very same understanding, up until your very last line. And there I’m a bit confused. Can we clear it up right now? Can he require someone to make restitution as part of their pennance?

 

[nodito]

The priest may absolutely never require a penitent to reveal his sins to anyone outside the confessional as a condition of his absolution. Forcing the penitent to do so is a violation of the sacramental seal of confession.

This is important for people to understand. The priest cannot force an adulterer to confess to his wife. He cannot require a student to tell her teacher she cheated on a test. He cannot require a murderer to turn himself in to the police.

jimmyakin.com/2005/11/can_a_priest_fo.html

catholic.com/quickquestions/can-absolution-be-withheld-from-a-murderer-until-he-agrees-to-give-himself-up-to-auth

 

[Gorgias]

There is no canonical “restriction” upon what a priest may impose as a penance. A priest may impose any terms he deems fit.

Well, not quite. He cannot require that a penitent publicly implicate his guilt. On the other hand, in addition to imposing penance (which, as you note, is negotiated between confessor and penitent), he might recommend that a person make amends…

(I’m also not certain that ‘shopping around’ is the right way to put it. If a person refuses his penance, he shouldn’t tell the priest that he accepts it (or implicitly accept it, by saying nothing). That being the case, it would seem that the priest should not offer absolution. Therefore, by virtue of having been ‘bound’ and not ‘loosed’ from their sin, the person would be obligated to return to the priest, so that he might be ‘loosed’, no?

 

[Gorgias]

Bergon;11127903:

Can he require someone to make restitution as part of their pennance?

Not if that restitution implies that he must publicly ‘out’ himself as the perpetrator. The confessor might say, “for your penance, can you make restitution in some way that won’t implicate you? perhaps, by performing an act of charity toward someone who’s been a victim of a crime similar to the one you committed?”

However, the confessor cannot say, “walk up to the person you stole that money from and hand it back to them.”

 

[Jozefo]

Jozefo;11128117:

Not if that restitution implies that he must publicly ‘out’ himself as the perpetrator. The confessor might say, “for your penance, can you make restitution in some way that won’t implicate you? perhaps, by performing an act of charity toward someone who’s been a victim of a crime similar to the one you committed?”

However, the confessor cannot say, “walk up to the person you stole that money from and hand it back to them.”

Really. Ok, I’ll accept that for now, in the absence of any formal cite of Church teaching.

 

[Gorgias]

There’s a very simple answer - acceptance of responsibility through handing oneself over to the authorities would likely form part of the penance given.

No. This cannot ever be part of the penance. The confessor might recommend that the penitent consider doing so, but he cannot impose it upon the penitent.

the sin may be absolved but the priest is only human and so can’t forget completely what he’s heard.

Actually, it’s not that “he can’t forget what he’s heard”; it’s that he has an obligation to perform certain duties, and being bound by the seal of the confessional would hinder him in his ability to do so.

So, for example, while the rector of my seminary isn’t prohibited from hearing my confession if I freely approach him, he wouldn’t because of these risks.

It’s not because of ‘risks’, but because he has a responsibility for your formation, as well as the formation of your brother seminarians (and the responsibility for their safety). If he heard your confession – let’s suppose that you confessed that you harmed another seminarian – he would not be able to act on that knowledge in any way, or direct someone else to act on it.

Canon 630, §4. Superiors are not to hear the confessions of subjects unless the members request it on their own initiative.

This leaves it open to the superior to say ‘yes’, but short of the penitent being in danger of death, I can’t see where he would do so.

(This, btw, is likely to be the reason for the assertion upthread by the OP, who said that he had read that some cardinal would not hear the confession of a priest who wanted to confess sexual abuse. It’s likely that cardinal has some responsibility for these cases, and wishes to be unhindered in his ability to fulfill his obligations…)

 

[Irish_Cabbie]

The priest may absolutely never require a penitent to reveal his sins to anyone outside the confessional as a condition of his absolution. Forcing the penitent to do so is a violation of the sacramental seal of confession.

This is important for people to understand. The priest cannot force an adulterer to confess to his wife. He cannot require a student to tell her teacher she cheated on a test. He cannot require a murderer to turn himself in to the police.

jimmyakin.com/2005/11/can_a_priest_fo.html

catholic.com/quickquestions/can-absolution-be-withheld-from-a-murderer-until-he-agrees-to-give-himself-up-to-auth

Goodbye, Mister Spalding! Nodito has homered again.

youtube.com/watch?v=4FMYcJqYSBg

 

[Gorgias]

InThePew, I forgot to add this canon:

Can. 984 §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.

Again, it’s not about ‘risks’, it’s about ability to perform ‘external governance’, as the Code puts it. If your rector knows about your sins, through your sacramental confession, he can never act on them.

 

[Bergon]

Bergon;11124842:

Can he require someone to make restitution as part of their pennance?

Not if that restitution implies that he must publicly ‘out’ himself as the perpetrator. The confessor might say, “for your penance, can you make restitution in some way that won’t implicate you? perhaps, by performing an act of charity toward someone who’s been a victim of a crime similar to the one you committed?”

However, the confessor cannot say, “walk up to the person you stole that money from and hand it back to them.”

I know not why you have done this. You must have done it deliberately because I never wrote the words your quote attributes to me; therefore, you can’t simply have clicked on ‘Quote’.

 

[Bergon]

Bergon;11127903:

If by ‘it’ you refer to requiring the penitent to confess his crimes to the civil authorities, the answer is no.

If someone has committed a heinous crime that they confess to a confessor the following can happen. The confessor can make a judgement of their disposition. If the confessor is not satisfied the penitent is sufficiently contrite he may withhold absolution. If he’s satisfied of the pentitent’s sufficient contrition the confessor must grant absolution.

If the sin confessed is also a criminal offence, no matter how serious or heinous, the confessor cannot do any of the following. He cannot make absolution conditional on the penitent handing themselves in to the civil authorities. The confessor cannot withhold absolution because the penitent will not confess her or his crimes to the civil authorities. Reporting one’s own crimes to the civil authorities cannot be given as a penance.

I’ve no need to write another reply. Post #30 provides the answer.

 

[nodito]

By not surrendering to the authorities, the penitent may well be committing further sins, eg. By extending the anguish of the original victim or their family; by causing a misuse of police resources, by causing a risk to future potential victims, etc, etc. One hopes that the priest would counsel the penitent accordingly, regardless of whether absolution is granted.

This may be true, but if these sins weren’t confessed, they shouldn’t factor into the priest’s decision to offer absolution for the crime confessed. Confessors are advised to avoid inquiring about other potential sins, lest the penitent be caught off guard and not express remorse.

 

[nodito]

I do ask the question - just how contrite is the person who does not allow closure to their victims and families?

All sin affects the Body of Christ. Just how contrite are you when you confess if you’re also unwilling to confess your sins to anyone you may have hurt?