Confession- paedophile priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter starshiner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

starshiner

Guest
Hello

I’ve asked a question re the validity of a confession before but this is far more serious:

Several weeks ago I met a retired priest and asked if he would hear my confession. He was very friendly and agreed. He heard my confession and gave me penance and absolution, and some advice which I thought was a bit like something out of Joyce’s Portrait but quite sound.

after the confession he asked me to pray for him and I asked him his name and a bit about his ministry as a priest. Something about what he said didn’t quite add up and his name seemed to ring a bell. I looked on the website of his diocese (which is not my own or the diocese where this priest is living) and saw no mention of him on its clergy directory.

This played on my mind for a while and I then duly forgot about it. However, my misgivings about this priest somehow resurfaced this morning, causing me to put his name into Google.

It transpires that this priest is on parole after being jailed for many years for indecent acts on young boys over four decades. I feel very ill-at-ease about having confessed my sins to this man without being cognisant of his past history.

My most practical questions are; Was my confession valid? Was this man authorised to hear my confession? If not, does ecclesia supplet apply?

God Bless**
 
If he was excommunicated or no longer a priest, then no it was not a valid confession.

If he is still under holy orders, then yes, irregardless of his sinfulness, your confession was valid.

At least, that’s my understanding of things
 
Hello!

Sacraments are operative by virtue of Holy Orders (ex opere operato), regardless of the priest’s state of grace as long as the priest intended what the church intended and uses the proper form. He’s a “priest forever…”

In response to the previous poster, I believe that a confession is valid even if a priest is excommunicated, though it may not be “licit”. I may be wrong on this point, so perhaps someone can either confirm or disconfirm it.

I would think that if this priest served his time and sincerely repented, he’d be back in the fold.

Thanks!
 
Joseph said:
Hello!

Sacraments are operative by virtue of Holy Orders, regardless of the priest’s state of grace as long as the priest intended what the church intended and uses the proper form. He’s a “priest forever…”

In response to the previous poster, I believe that a confession is valid even if a priest is excommunicated, though it may not be “licit”. I may be wrong on this point, so perhaps someone can either confirm or disconfirm it.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Thanks Joseph:

A priest is a priest for life. Human beings can never reverse Holy Orders. However, authority from the diocesan bishop is required for the haering of confessions; hence my question still hasn’t been answered.

Actually, I feel quite yucky about having confessed my sins to a man on parole, even if I know that good and bad is in all of us, and every priest has received enormous grace from God.
 
Hi Starshiner,

I can understand the yucky feeling, for sure. On the other hand, we don’t know the current state of his heart, which is ultimately between him and God.

If he has not received authority from the bishop to hear confessions, then the confession was illicit (illegal), but it is still valid by virtue of his priesthood, meaning that your sins were forgiven.

I’ve heard it said that in an emergency, e.g. imminent death, it may be better to receive a sacrament that is valid though illicit, then not to receive it at all. I’d be interested in other people’s comments on that.
starshiner said:
Thanks Joseph:

A priest is a priest for life. Human beings can never reverse Holy Orders. However, authority from the diocesan bishop is required for the haering of confessions; hence my question still hasn’t been answered.

Actually, I feel quite yucky about having confessed my sins to a man on parole, even if I know that good and bad is in all of us, and every priest has received enormous grace from God.
Click to expand...
 
In danger of death, any priest is granted the faculty to hear a confession, even if they have been laicized. Also, even if another priest is present, the person requesting the confession has the choice.
 
As has been noted, Holy Orders is permanent, so the confession was valid.

As to whether or not it was “licit,” that depends on whether or not he has been granted faculties by the local bishop. As a retired (and paroled) priest, perhaps he has been. If not, he should not have heard your confession, but I’m thinking the absolution was still valid.
 
Based on just what you have said, your absolution may not be valid, based on Canon Law:Can. 966 §1. The valid absolution of sins requires that the minister have, in addition to the power of orders, the faculty of exercising it for the faithful to whom he imparts absolution.
§2. A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself or by a grant made by the competent authority according to the norm of can. 969
Not only does he need to have valid Holy Orders, but in order to grant absolution he must have permission from the Bishop or Religious Order Superior (this btw, is the reason I understand for stating that schismatic group absolutions are invalid). If this priest has been convicted of criminal acts against children, he may very well have had that faculty (to absolve) removed by his Bishop or Superior.

I would humbly suggest that you mention this episode and your sins at your next confession so that there is no doubt.

As to the “danger of death” exemption, that is covered under
Canon 976:Can. 976 Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present.
Since you were not in “danger of death” (thank God), this does not apply.
 
revelations said:
If he was excommunicated or no longer a priest, then no it was not a valid confession.

If he is still under holy orders, then yes, irregardless of his sinfulness, your confession was valid.

At least, that’s my understanding of things
Click to expand...
And if he was laicized, I think he is excommunicated for impersonating a priest. A laicized priest may hear confessions only if the penitent is in serious and imminent danger of death and no other priest can be found. Pray for the man- he will have to answer for what he has done.
 
Lovemyfaith said:
How did you know he was a priest?
Click to expand...
Well, he said he was. And, indeed, once I couldn’t find him on his diocese’s clergy directory I suspected that he might have been an impostor.

Really I can’t express how shocked I was to find the truth.

Anyway, thanks all for your replies, and God bless you.
 
  1. Don’t cast the first stone. 2. Leave judgement to the Rightful One. and 3. “pray, pray, pray” for him as he requested. “Pray enlarges the heart until it is capable of containing God’s gift of himself” !!!
 
Brian_Reeves said:
  1. Don’t cast the first stone. 2. Leave judgement to the Rightful One. and 3. “pray, pray, pray” for him as he requested. “Pray enlarges the heart until it is capable of containing God’s gift of himself” !!!
Click to expand...
I certainly shall! And, by the way, nothing that I have said about the horror I felt ought to be taken as a judgement of this man; on the contrary, I pray that he finds peace with God.
 
If you want to know if he had faculties to hear a confession, call your diocese and see if they have any way of finding out. Perhaps they have some methods that we do not? That could put your mind at ease.

Also, I forget who the Saint was, but some people asked him to confront a priest who was living with a mistress. When he went up to the priest, everyone expected him to correct the priest. Instead, he kissed the hands of the priest and said something to the effect of “all I know is these are the hands that bring me Jesus.” The priest repented.

Once a priest, always a priest. But I agree with the praying for him. Hopefully he repented (or will before death).
 
Most of the posters here are wrong.

In the Latin Church priests can only ordinarily hear confessions if they have been granted the faculty to do so by their local bishop ( Can. 969 §1). If I were to go to a laicised Latin-rite priest for confession, whilst being aware that he had no faculty from his bishop, my confession would not only be illicit, but the absolution woud be invalid. The same law applies to marriages.

However canon law specifies that the principle of ecclesia supplet (where the Church supplies extraordinary jurisdiction) applies in cases of error or positive doubt:
Can. 144
§1. In factual or legal common error and in positive and probable doubt of law or of fact, the Church supplies executive power of governance for both the external and internal forum.
Click to expand...
You clearly had no reason to believe the priest was not in good canonical standing with his local ordinary and consequently your confession was valid and your sins need not be repeated. However your priest was wrong to absolve you, and I hope you consider reporting him to his bishop.
 
I am sorry, but I doubt that the confession was valid. It wasn’t your fault, you didn’t know. Now if that was the person who committede indecent acts on children then he I’m sure was excommunicated from the priesthood. When the bishop of the diocese he belongs to excommunicates (“kicks out”) of the priesthood, he makes it very clear that he may not present himself as a priest or carry out any public function as a catholic priest. It is very terrible when a brother priest was an offender. This happened to one of the priests in my diocese. He sexually assualted a child. Like I said, it is very terrible when something like that happens especially between a priest and a child.

God Bless! +
 
Brian_Reeves said:
  1. Don’t cast the first stone. 2. Leave judgement to the Rightful One. and 3. “pray, pray, pray” for him as he requested. “Pray enlarges the heart until it is capable of containing God’s gift of himself” !!!
Click to expand...
Ummm…if you have direct knowledge of a priest acting in a priestly capacity in your diocese whom you have any reason to think does not have permission to do so, your bishop should know that.

We have at least one case in our diocese of a priest agreeing to refrain from ministry, and then not keeping up his end of the agreement. If this priest is hearing confessions, he might also be agreeing to step in and “help out” on Sundays, too. Imagine the victim who shows up at that Mass, having been assured by the chancery office that the abuser who stole his or her innocence was no longer in any active ministries. If nothing else, you would not want another person to have your “yucky” experience without the bishop having had any chance to address the problem, would you?

I would not make the report as an accusation, but as a concern. Nevertheless, on behalf of his victims and your bishop, I do urge you to make a report. If you let the chancery office you notify know the diocese where the priest heard your confession, the diocese where he lives, and the diocese he retired from, they should take care of notifying anyone else who has a need to know.

Besides, there is also a long shot chance that you’re dealing with two priests with the same name. Wouldn’t that be a relief?
 
EasterJoy said:
Ummm…if you have direct knowledge of a priest acting in a priestly capacity in your diocese whom you have any reason to think does not have permission to do so, your bishop should know that.

We have at least one case in our diocese of a priest agreeing to refrain from ministry, and then not keeping up his end of the agreement. If this priest is hearing confessions, he might also be agreeing to step in and “help out” on Sundays, too. Imagine the victim who shows up at that Mass, having been assured by the chancery office that the abuser who stole his or her innocence was no longer in any active ministries. If nothing else, you would not want another person to have your “yucky” experience without the bishop having had any chance to address the problem, would you?

I would not make the report as an accusation, but as a concern. Nevertheless, on behalf of his victims and your bishop, I do urge you to make a report. If you let the chancery office you notify know the diocese where the priest heard your confession, the diocese where he lives, and the diocese he retired from, they should take care of notifying anyone else who has a need to know.

Besides, there is also a long shot chance that you’re dealing with two priests with the same name. Wouldn’t that be a relief?
Click to expand...
Thanks EasterJoy: the matter is under active consideration. By no means, should this man be exercising Christ’s priestly office in a visible capacity.

I’m afraid it is him who’s on parole: the media coverage I found of his court appearances fitted like a glove.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top