Justice & Confession

[zimmypimmy]

if one is accused of a crime, confesses under cohersion, and then goes to ones priest, and tell them they are innocent, and were cohersed into confessing, is a priest morally obligated, in the name of justice, to offer his testimony on the innocent persons behalf, to see that justice is done?

 

[AndyF]

if one is accused of a crime, confesses under cohersion, and then goes to ones priest, and tell them they are innocent, and were cohersed into confessing, is a priest morally obligated, in the name of justice, to offer his testimony on the innocent persons behalf, to see that justice is done?

If he were asked to put in a good word he probably would, but no, he may or may not offer to assist in this case depending on the circumstances. If he does he may offer that in his pious and professional opinion it would seem that the person is sincere and is in fact telling the truth. References are common for other situations as well, such as for employment,etc.

[Appropriate time to use that instrument of justice eagerly used against a probable offender, the lie detector. Bet if you suggest it it will probably be refused. But the gesture would speak volumes in your behalf nonetheless. Caveat: To eliminate conflict of interest, ensure another police force does the test.]

AndyF

 

[vern_humphrey]

If it was told under the seal of the confessional, the priest cannot reveal it for any reason. In fact, even the penetent cannot reveal what he confessed.

So if you’re ever in that situation, make sure you aren’t making a sacremental confession when you tell the priest you’re innocent.

 

[BlestOne]

If it was told under the seal of the confessional, the priest cannot reveal it for any reason. In fact, even the penetent cannot reveal what he confessed.

So if you’re ever in that situation, make sure you aren’t making a sacremental confession when you tell the priest you’re innocent.

I smell a Hollywood exclusive here… The Evil Catholic Church can’t confirm the innocence of a man… What a story!!!

 

[AndyF]

I smell a Hollywood exclusive here… The Evil Catholic Church can’t confirm the innocence of a man… What a story!!!

Well there is one last condition that could arise, and that is prior to the suspect going to the priest for confession, the priest learns of what occured at the station. In this case the priest can make use of the information since it’s source is outside of the confessional.

I don’t know if the priest would be obliged to inform the confessee of his prior knowledge.

AndyF

 

[Spirithound]

If it was told under the seal of the confessional, the priest cannot reveal it for any reason. In fact, even the penetent cannot reveal what he confessed.

So if you’re ever in that situation, make sure you aren’t making a sacremental confession when you tell the priest you’re innocent.

The penitent is under no such prohibition.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The penitent is under no such prohibition.

Do you have a cite for that?

The penitent is under the same seal – he cannot recount his confession to another party.

 

[Spirithound]

Do you have a cite for that?

No, I don’t, at least nothing authoritative, for the simple reason that the Church is not in the habit of legislating negatives. However, check out CCC 1467 and 2490. They speak of the seal on the priest, but not the penitent.

 

[vern_humphrey]

No, I don’t, at least nothing authoritative, for the simple reason that the Church is not in the habit of legislating negatives. However, check out CCC 1467 and 2490. They speak of the seal on the priest, but not the penitent.

The paragraphs do not preclude the seal extending to the penitent. And I have been told by a priest I respect that it does.

The occasion was a debate on a person confessing a serious crime. I held the priest could require him to turn himself in as part of his penance, and was told that is not the case. The priest went on to explain that while the penitent can turn himself into authorities, he cannot be compelled to as a penance, and he cannot tell the authorities what he said to the priest, or what the priest said to him.

This doesn’t preclude him confessing to the police the same information, but what he says to them cannot touch on the confessional.

 

[Spirithound]

The paragraphs do not preclude the seal extending to the penitent. And I have been told by a priest I respect that it does.

True, those paragraphs do not preclude the penitent being included in the seal of confession, however the absence of the penitent from those sections is quite poignant.
Here is a link to a thread here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=164096&highlight=seal+of+confession
A few members more senior than I weigh in on the issue. Now I ask you to find a Church document putting the penitent under the seal of confession.

 

[vern_humphrey]

True, those paragraphs do not preclude the penitent being included in the seal of confession, however the absence of the penitent from those sections is quite poignant.
Here is a link to a thread here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=164096&highlight=seal+of+confession
A few members more senior than I weigh in on the issue. Now I ask you to find a Church document putting the penitent under the seal of confession.

Thanks – as I said, I don’t have a cite – just a rather intense discussion with a priest on the subject.

 

[quiet52]

The only time a lay person is bound by the Seal of Confession is when he/she is translating for someone, or when he/she accidentally overhears a confession.

 

[CatholicNick]

The only time a lay person is bound by the Seal of Confession is when he/she is translating for someone, or when he/she accidentally overhears a confession.

Indeed.

The Penitent is not bound by the seal.

 

[LilyM]

The paragraphs do not preclude the seal extending to the penitent. And I have been told by a priest I respect that it does.

The occasion was a debate on a person confessing a serious crime. I held the priest could require him to turn himself in as part of his penance, and was told that is not the case. The priest went on to explain that while the penitent can turn himself into authorities, he cannot be compelled to as a penance, and he cannot tell the authorities what he said to the priest, or what the priest said to him.

This doesn’t preclude him confessing to the police the same information, but what he says to them cannot touch on the confessional.

That doesn’t sound quite right. Certainly it’s true that a priest can’t require a penitent to turn themselves in to police or anything, but there’s nothing preventing the penitent from divulging the content of their confession.

 

[Cristiano]

A penitent may not divulge the content of the confession if for any reason it is going to create a scandal. The sin is about scandal and about not breaking the seal of confession.

 

[InLight247]

The only time a lay person is bound by the Seal of Confession is when he/she is translating for someone, or when he/she accidentally overhears a confession.

That is right!!
And St. Augustine can write “Confession” for the whole world to read.

 

[Altesse]

If he were asked to put in a good word he probably would, but no, he may or may not offer to assist in this case depending on the circumstances. If he does he may offer that in his pious and professional opinion it would seem that the person is sincere and is in fact telling the truth. References are common for other situations as well, such as for employment,etc.

[Appropriate time to use that instrument of justice eagerly used against a probable offender, the lie detector. Bet if you suggest it it will probably be refused. But the gesture would speak volumes in your behalf nonetheless. Caveat: To eliminate conflict of interest, ensure another police force does the test.]

AndyF

A full investigation would be required. This is a common event. The person confesses, then recants. Depending on the circumstances of the persons life, they may be trying to avoid the “snitch” label by getting a priest to speak for him.

A person cannot be convicted based on a confession alone, there must be independent physical/forensic evidence to substantiate the confession and the defendant’s involvement in the crime.

Many people have confessed to crimes they did not commit in order to protect a loved one or under duress by the true perpetrator.

Many states have implemented laws requiring a custodial interrogation to be recorded on video/audio. This in addition to the right to counsel prevents coerced confessions by law enforcement. No self respecting LEO wants to risk having a case dismissed because they didn’t protect the suspect’s constitutional rights.

 

[lak611]

The only time a lay person is bound by the Seal of Confession is when he/she is translating for someone, or when he/she accidentally overhears a confession.

From the Code of Canon Law:

Can. 983 ß1 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.

ß2 An interpreter, if there is one, is also obliged to observe this secret, as are all others who in any way whatever have come to a knowledge of sins from a confession.

Can. 990 No one is forbidden to confess through an interpreter, provided however that abuse and scandal are avoided, and without prejudice to the provision of can. 983 ß2.

 

[prv]

If it was told under the seal of the confessional, the priest cannot reveal it for any reason. In fact, even the penetent cannot reveal what he confessed.

So if you’re ever in that situation, make sure you aren’t making a sacremental confession when you tell the priest you’re innocent.

The seal binds only the confessor. The penitent can tell whatever he/she wants as long as its true.

 

[LilyM]

That is right!!
And St. Augustine can write “Confession” for the whole world to read.

So can St Patrick.