Online confessions via phone/app

[phil19034]

HomeschoolDad:

I can’t see any real theological objection to confession and/or absolution at a distance if it is truly a grave emergency and there is no alternative.

There is always an alternative, it is called an “act of perfect contrition”.

God is not a tyrant. He understands if a priest is not available, and you say the act of contrition instead, if it’s an emergency. You may even receive the Eucharist after, if you had sinned mortally, but you have to resolve to seek out sacramental confession as soon as possible if the treat passes.

there are two problems here

1. does the person truly know they have perfect contrition?
2. what is an emergency? It really should be fear of death, not: “It’s an emergency because I’m going to attend my daughter’s wedding”

 

[HomeschoolDad]

For 2000 years, the Church has said that you cannot confess via a letter. When the telephone was invented, that was applied to the telephone too.

Not questioning the veracity of this, but do you have a source?

It’s my understanding that, if a penitent is impaired from speaking (i.e., medically), they can simply make some outward sign of contrition and willingness to confess if they could (e.g., striking the breast). Or they could write down their sins and hand it to the priest, but they do not have to.

As an aside, I have made confession in a country where I had a limited understanding of the language and the priests did not speak English. I confessed as best I could in the native language, and the priests were fine with this. I was able to decipher their assignment of penance.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

That was a good thing to do. I would note that at least one priest physically there did the same as well.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

For 2000 years, the Church has said that you cannot confess via a letter. When the telephone was invented, that was applied to the telephone too.

Not questioning the veracity of this, but do you have a source?

It’s my understanding that, if a penitent is impaired from speaking (i.e., medically), they can simply make some outward sign of contrition and willingness to confess if they could (e.g., striking the breast). Or they could write down their sins and hand it to the priest, but they do not have to.

As an aside, I have made confession in a country where I had a limited understanding of the language and the priests did not speak English. I confessed as best I could in the native language, and the priests were fine with this. I was able to decipher their assignment of penance.

My source was The Patrick Madrid Show on Relevant Radio.

When a person is speaking impaired and uses a letter or in a country where the priest doesn’t seek the same language; they are both still together.

It’s still in person. The priest may read the letter or not understand what the confessee said, but the absolution must be in person.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

There is a past CAF thread about why you can’t confess by phone, but it has unreliable Ron Conte in it, so here’s Father Mike instead.

 

[acanonlawyer]

I’m sure some would think it heretical, but why not?

Nobody in his right mind should think it is heretical. Ever since the invention of the telephone (if not even before then), this question has been pondered and opinions have legitimately varied.

Confession/absolution when the priest and penitent are not even morally present to each other is certainly not allowed at present. The law states that the proper place for confession is a sacred place and that, without a just cause suggesting otherwise, confessions are to be heard in a confessional (canon 963). This sacrament is a liturgical action (Catechism, n. 1480) and it is obviously fitting for sacraments to take place in a church or other sacred place. Further, as a liturgical action, those who are taking part in it “work together” and, to work together, we should be together.

Nevertheless, is confession over the phone (or whatever the technology is, whereby the parties are interacting with each other “live”–via letter is a different question since the participants are not “live”) certainly invalid? As far as I know, the Church has never said so. The closest remark I know of came from the Apostolic Penitentiary (not the organ for doctrinal statements, but…), which said that the “physical immediacy of the subject” is a constitutive element of this Sacrament (circular letter dated Oct. 23, 2002).

Dan

 

[acanonlawyer]

There is a past CAF thread about why you can’t confess by phone, but it has unreliable Ron Conte in it, so here’s Father Mike instead.

You should find the one with the always-reliable “dans0622”'s comment. He was always on target.

Dan

 

[OraLabora]

False. One must have sacramental confession before receiving the Eucharist. The requirememt to have an intent to sacramentally confess asap refers to the act of contrition being perfect. It does not allow the person in mortal sin to receive the Eucharist.

I am sorry but you are incorrect. From the 1983 Code of Canon Law:

Can. 916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

“Grave reason” is not defined, but for the sake of this discussion, let’s call it “danger of death”.

That’s true if one really does have perfect contrition. Just saying the act of contrition is not on its own sufficient to obtain perfect contrition.

If there is not perfect contrition, then it’s not an act of perfect contrition, it’s just a bunch of words strung together

One cannot fool God. In any event, my answer was not about examining whether someone’s contrition is imperfect (fear of of hell) or perfect (love of God). It’s about the availability of saying act of perfect contrition. Whether it’s truly perfect contrition or not is between God and the penitent.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

In emergencies that might not apply.

 

[acanonlawyer]

The requirememt to have an intent to sacramentally confess asap refers to the act of contrition being perfect.

Could you explain what you mean here?

It does not allow the person in mortal sin to receive the Eucharist.

This is certainly true: the law does not allow anyone to receive Holy Communion while in a state of mortal sin.

Dan

 

[TheLittleLady]

actually one can be married by proxy!

 

[GospelOfMatthew]

If I could do confession over the phone I’d do it all the time haha. I think it would definitely help people who struggle with stress and nervousness in confession

 

[OraLabora]

actually one can be married by proxy!

Interesting, I didn’t know that!

Marriage is a bit different, as the ministers of the sacrament are the couple themselves, unlike baptism, confirmation, confession, the Eucharist, anointing, and holy orders, in which the minister is a priest or bishop.

 

[Socrates92]

Socrates92:

The requirememt to have an intent to sacramentally confess asap refers to the act of contrition being perfect.

Contrition cannot be perfect without the intent to confess asap. I had also meant that intent to confess + perfect contrition was insufficient to receive communion (one also needs sacramental forgiveness), but apparently that’s in contradiction to Canon 916, as @Oralabora pointed out. So, I stand corrected on that point. I’m still unsure of what practical application that canon would have though… (Who can actually ever be sufficiently sure that they’ve made a perfect act of contrition so that they’re not committing sacrilege?) Maybe you have some thoughts on that?

 

[Socrates92]

I am sorry but you are incorrect. From the 1983 Code of Canon Law:

Can. 916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

Hm… interesting. I wonder why I was always taught the opposite.

 

[Socrates92]

So I’ve been informed… I stand corrected on that.

 

[lilypadrees]

I love going to Confession in person. However, that isn’t always possible. So yes, during those times, if Confession over the phone was available and the Absolution valid, I would avail myself of it.

 

[Flopfoot]

As a millennial I’d probably prefer to have reconciliation over MSN Messenger

 

[Sbee0]

Sort of related- I wasn’t aware of this (iOS) app nor that it seemed to be developed in collaboration with and sanctioned by a couple of priests and a Diocese in Indiana…

Confession: A Roman Catholic App by Little i Apps, LLC

Obviously not a substitute for confession but seems like a useful tool to help with it and your examination of conscience.

 

[acanonlawyer]

I’m still unsure of what practical application that canon would have though…

I would say that the primary, practical application is for the priest who is obliged to celebrate Mass for the people, considers himself to be in mortal sin, but can’t confess prior to Mass. For the laity…I think situations that meet the terms of the canon are few and far between.

Dan