Did this priest break the Seal of Confession?

[g_ncl]

Hi Qwestions. Maybe it’s a difference in the use of language. Here, in England “to confront” means “to face in hostility or defiance; oppose” and “confrontation” is used in the sense of “an open conflict of opposing ideas, forces”. Because of this “confrontational” is a negative term here, this is why I was shocked at your use of the word in connection with confession. Maybe I should not have assumed that the word is used in the same sense all over the English-speaking world, but I still find it strange on the part of your monsignor…

I agree though that we lack a proper term. I use face-to-face, but as someone on this thread has pointed out, in some places the church confessional also offers this option, and what I really mean when I say I confess face-to-face is sitting down with the priest somewhere other than the church (usually in his sitting room, but I’ve done it in his garden and in his kitchen a few times, too ).

 

[Qwestions]

Hi, g_ncl. I believe that “confrontational” here in the U.S. generally means what it does in England–“having to do with conflict and hostility.” When I said that I’d always understood “confrontation” to mean “a meeting,” I was referring only to the meaning as used in the term “confrontational confession.” In most any other circumstance I, too, would describe “confrontational” as having to do with conflict.

In the U.S. it was once an unmistakable expression of contempt to refer to a policeman or law officer as being a “cop.” News anchors didn’t utter the word except when quoting someone. Policemen and other law enforcement officers began referring to themselves as cops and the word lost its zing. I think that’s when the rowdies and renegades who used to spit out “cop” as an epithet started calling cops “pigs.” That’s an example of how a word can get a 180 degree switch in meaning, but I have no idea how “confrontation” has two meanings that seem to be 180 degrees apart.

The online dictionary provided by Merriam-Webster at merriam-webster.com/dictionary/confrontation states that there are two meanings: “a: face-to-face meeting,” and “b: the clashing of forces or ideas.”

There is the angle, of course, that the petitioner has confronted evil in his examination of conscience prior to confessing, and that he and the priest are further confronting evil when the petitioner enumerates his sins and the confessor grants absolution.

This is purely conjecture on my part, but maybe not too farfetched with all things considered: that there is another angle that possibly Monsignor (and his peers?) may have preferred “confrontational confession” to “face-to-face confession” because of unofficial lyrics to “Zombie Jamboree,” an extremely popular folk song by the Kingston Trio during the years in which face-to-face confession replaced the standard confessional booth/box format in the U.S.

The actual lyrics almost shouted: “Well . . . Now . . . Back-to-back and belly-to-belly, Well, I don’t give a d=== 'cause I done that already . . .” Also very popular were the unofficial lyrics which involved most parts of the body from head to toe, as in “head-to-head,” “knee-to-knee,” etc., with unquestionably sexual connotations. The tune was short, repetitive, and didn’t require much singing ability, so it easily lodged in the mind after hearing it. (At a recent 50th high school reunion, the gym was roaring with both the song and laughter.)

Monsignor was a good and holy man, one of the best priests ever! He may have been unaware of the underground version. However, he likely would have found even the original lyrics offensive, and since he was very concerned about people providing others with the temptation of sin, I think that he would have actively tried to avoid any possible linking of the song lyrics to a sacrament of the Church, so maybe the idea isn’t too farfetched.

Actually, I don’t recall how long it’s been since I’ve heard “confrontatioinal confession,” but a long time, because it’s rarely discussed. It was used constantly at the time of the decimation of the confessionals, but only because it was continually being compared and contrasted with the former confession format. “Regular confession” also referred to receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation in the booth, whereas “new confession” identified the “face-to-face” format.

I, um, confess: that’s all I know–or speculate–about the derivation of the term.

 

[Qwestions]

Hi, again, g_ncl. I’m curious. When you stated that you sometimes receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation in the priest’s garden or even his kitchen, did you mean that he planned to conduct the Sacrament in those places? Or did he simply acquiesce when you unexpectedly stopped by?

 

[tafan]

Most of the time I do - and do so intentionally. Not “mixing” as in “intermingling” (most of the time), but using the same occasion. However, even when I only go for confession, I prefer to confess face to face.
.

I have been told by priests that this is not a good practise. Many priests will allow it, to a point, in order to be pastorally sensitive. But confession is about sin. I think one should state one’s sins, only ask questions about the sinfulness of certain actions, and then listen to the priest and just answer his questions.

There are both practical and spiritual reasons for this.

1. good spiritual direction takes time. And more importantly context, ie know and remember who he is talking to and where they left off last time, this might require him to keep notes, a reall no-no in the confessional. The priest/director has to both get feedback on previous instructions, and have time to determine next set of instructions to give a person. This all takes dialog. Most of the time, it is not about sin, it is about a prayer life, a mediation life, an apostolate life.
2. THere are often others in line for confession. A 10, 20 or even 30 minut confession is not a considerate towards others who may have great need of the sacrament.
3. Again, one should stay focused on one’s sins and being penitent during confession. One wants the priest to do the same. Advice given in the confessional should be focused towards help one avoid committing the sins again. Asking a priest which book of meditation to start next is out of place.

All of this points to the wisdom of confessionals for confession. Offices for spiritual direction.

 

[g_ncl]

Hi Qwestions and thanks for the references to music in your previous post. I knew nothing about that.

When you stated that you sometimes receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation in the priest’s garden or even his kitchen, did you mean that he planned to conduct the Sacrament in those places? Or did he simply acquiesce when you unexpectedly stopped by?

I never stop by unexpectedly, I always phone and make an appointment. Both the kitchen and the garden happened through Fr. just asking “shall we sit down here/go out to the garden?”. I have no idea whether he planned it or just got the idea - probably the latter. It’s just nice to sit in the garden where the weather is good (does not happen so often in our England ) For me it does not affect the sanctity of the occasion at all. I usually stay about an hour, we talk about things and then I get round to confession at one point. In other words we do not do what you mentioned in an earlier post of yours, that people chat with the priest for an hour and confession just “happens” intermingled with whatever. We discuss whatever I need direction on, and when that’s done either I say “I would like to confess” or he asks whether I would like to, we both cross ourselves and then I start. Compared to the “emergency” confessions I have made in confessionals in the past 25 years I have found that you gain many more graces when you do it face to face.

THere are often others in line for confession. A 10, 20 or even 30 minut confession is not a considerate towards others

Which is why I always make an appointment, tafan. There is nobody in line.

 

[PaulinVA]

To reduce this to the facts:

The OP was having confession in an office.

Someone walked in and heard the priest talking about sin and hell.

Well, of course he was talking about sin. It was a confession. Even if the worker knew it was a confession, nothing is revealed that they were talking about sin. Of course they were.

.Nobody goes to confession to say they have no sin.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

To reduce this to the facts:

The OP was having confession in an office.

Someone walked in and heard the priest talking about sin and hell.

Well, of course he was talking about sin. It was a confession. Even if the worker knew it was a confession, nothing is revealed that they were talking about sin. Of course they were.

.Nobody goes to confession to say they have no sin.

I am even questioning if the custodian would have realized it was a Confession. It sounds like the moment that this person walked in, it could have appeared to simply be spiritual guidance/an intellectual discussion.

Whatever the case, you’re right that what was being discussed at the time was so generic, that the custodian would really have know idea as to why it was being discussed.