Confession hypotheticals and TV

  • Thread starter Thread starter amoiesu
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

amoiesu

Guest
in real life, this is none of my business anyway, but since popular TV shows are often bringing up controversies like this now – i feel like i have to ask these questions for the sake of non-Catholic viewers who ask me about these situations because they know i’m Catholic. i’d like to be able to set the record straight and not seem like a dummy when it comes to my faith.

for example: in an episode of a police-themed show i just saw, a priest confides to a cop he’s friends with that he knows the location of a kidnapped boy from his parish because he took the kidnapper’s confession but cannot tell what that location is because of the seal of confession. (nevermind he’s already broken the seal simply by saying he’s taken a confession and knows something)

first question: i read from another forum that a priest cannot tell ANYTHING said in the confessional even to save someone’s life. i’m guessing that “anything” would include the location even though confessing to the sin of kidnapping is kind of different than geographic details irrelevant to the spiritual side of his situation, but what should the priest do with that information? could he theoretically look for the child himself and set him free secretly as long as he didn’t tell anyone and kept his involvement in the situation a secret also so no one knows he knew? does the Church have any guidelines for something time sensitive like that?

second question: let’s say the kidnapper wasn’t even really sorry but wants to taunt the priest with information he can’t share. the priest can tell he’s not sorry but just bragging and denies him absolution. since it was an insincere confession, does the seal still apply or can he report that information on the basis of it being not a real confession? and if the kidnapper was unbaptized or not even Catholic, that would definitely not count right? i for one can’t think of why he would tell the priest a location anyway unless he wanted to anonymously tip someone as a means of making things right (in which case the priest can just tell him to leave a note somewhere it’ll be found), or else he really is just sadistically bragging. those are the only two reasons i can think of why that situation would happen in real life.

any other insights about this sort of thing i can share with those who ask about this are welcome.
 
amoiesu said:
for example: in an episode of a police-themed show i just saw, a priest confides to a cop he’s friends with that he knows the location of a kidnapped boy from his parish because he took the kidnapper’s confession but cannot tell what that location is because of the seal of confession. (nevermind he’s already broken the seal simply by saying he’s taken a confession and knows something)
Click to expand...
As you mention, the priest cannot even say he heard someone’s confession, so this episode has already left the realm of reality and the priest would be in big trouble. I would just stop watching at that point.
first question: i read from another forum that a priest cannot tell ANYTHING said in the confessional even to save someone’s life. i’m guessing that “anything” would include the location even though confessing to the sin of kidnapping is kind of different than geographic details irrelevant to the spiritual side of his situation, but what should the priest do with that information? could he theoretically look for the child himself and set him free secretly as long as he didn’t tell anyone and kept his involvement in the situation a secret also so no one knows he knew? does the Church have any guidelines for something time sensitive like that?
Click to expand...
I would think that the priest himself could try to go look for the person who was kidnapped as long as he didn’t reveal anything that was said in confession or even that he had heard a confession. I mean, if someone came into the confessional and confessed he had just bludgeoned the neighbor lady, a rational priest would probably at least find some excuse to stop by the neighbor lady’s house (perhaps for just a neighborly social call) and knock on the door, peek through the window and if he saw blood or some reason to call the police he could do so then. But he couldn’t just call the police based on hearing a confession.
second question: let’s say the kidnapper wasn’t even really sorry but wants to taunt the priest with information he can’t share. the priest can tell he’s not sorry but just bragging and denies him absolution. since it was an insincere confession, does the seal still apply or can he report that information on the basis of it being not a real confession?
Click to expand...
The seal still applies. I would suggest you watch Hitchcock’s movie “I Confess” as it deals with just this type of situation.
and if the kidnapper was unbaptized or not even Catholic, that would definitely not count right?
Click to expand...
Huh? The seal still applies. The priest is not going to know for sure in the vast majority of cases if somebody is or is not baptized or Catholic, and he doesn’t get a free pass to break the seal in any event.
 
That’s what I was thinking too. I can totally see Tom Bosley as Fr. Dowling going out to look for a kidnap victim, or peeking in the window of the neighbor lady’s house to see if she’s bludgeoned, or whatever.
 
Last edited:
Couldn’t a priest not absolve the penitent unless he was reasonably sure that the person they harmed would not be harmed anymore?
 
If the priest felt that the person was not repentant of his sin and/or that he was not sincerely promising to not sin again, then he could indeed withhold absolution.
In order to be absolved you need to be truly repentant and intend to “go and sin no more”. If you are intending to go and commit the same sin the minute you leave, then no absolution for you.
 
so even fake confessions where a person is just mocking the use of the sacraments, are protected too?
 
Tis_Bearself said:
e seal still applies. I would suggest you watch Hitchcock’s movie “I Confess” as it deals with just this type of situation.
Click to expand...
Not to get off track, but I believe Otto was sorry for the murder, when he made his confession. He just wasn’t willing to turn himself into the police.

I remember a scene in a movie called The Rosary Murders. The book was written by a former priest. I don’t remember the plot of the movie, but Fr. Koesler, the main character, had a confession dilemma. The scene I remember is Fr. Koesler asking another priest, “What if you knew someone poisoned the communion wine, could he accidently knock over the chalice?”

Keeping in mind that it has been years since I saw the movie, all I remember is the other priest, basically saying he didn’t want to discuss it and walked away.
 
Last edited:
sweetcharity said:
The scene I remember is Fr. Koesler asking another priest, “What if you knew someone poisoned the communion wine, could he accidently knock over the chalice?”

Keeping in mind that it has been years since I saw the movie, all I remember is the other priest, basically saying he didn’t want to discuss it and walked away.
Click to expand...
Great movie. Fr. Koesler asked if there was any way that he could warn the congregation, and the other priest says no. When he pushes again, the second priest says that you can’t reveal any information you’ve heard even if it kills everyone in the congregation, so “you better find a way to ‘accidentally’ spill that wine” and then walks away.
 
amoiesu said:
so even fake confessions where a person is just mocking the use of the sacraments, are protected too?
Click to expand...
This is something I’ve struggled with as well. In these sorts of hypotheticals, where the terrorist enters the confessional booth and says “haha, Father, I just planted a bomb in this very church and in a few minutes you and everyone else here will be dead…and there is nothing you can do because this is my confession! muhahahahahahahahah!”

I don’t see how the seal could apply in such a scenario. How is that in any form the sacrament of penance (other than the fact that the terrorist entered the physical confessional)?
 
That isn t really a Confession, it is letting somebody know sth in a Confessional .Reconciliation, much less!
If the person really had a contrite heart., the penance could always be “ Run right now to deactivate it!”
 
Last edited:
There was a semi-popular bumper sticker for cars back in the late 70s/early 80s. It said, simply:

“Kill your TV”

It seemed extreme, but maybe not so much.
 
The seal applies no matter what the circumstances. The priest good go look himself,but not tell anyone.
 
I think GKC actually covered that in one of his Father Brown mysteries.
 
This is the trailer for I Confess by Alfred Hitchcock:


True trivia tidbit to impress your friends: Hitchcock was Catholic. 😉
 
No priest can ever reveal under pain of automatic excommunication latae sententiae, whether by word, deed or even gestures (e.g. pointing at someone). That also applies to anyone who hears anything said in confession. This is from the Code of Canon Law (Codex Iuris Canonici) on the Vatican website:

Can. 1388 §1. A confessor who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; one who does so only indirectly is to be punished according to the gravity of the delict.

§2. An interpreter and the others mentioned in ⇒ can. 983, §2 who violate the secret are to be punished with a just penalty, not excluding excommunication.

Whatever is said in the confessional is protected by the sacramental seal. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued this too:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...th_doc_19880923_scomunica-confessioni_en.html

I hope this helps you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top