Online confessions via phone/app

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lifeisbeautiful3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lifeisbeautiful3

Guest
If a priest is ‘behind the curtain’, does it matter if he’s three feet away or 30 miles away?

Is there value in offering online confessions via video conference, app, etc?

I’m sure some would think it heretical, but why not?
 
Someone will be along with the Canon Law in a bit, the answer is that the priest must be there physically present. The most that can separate is a wall with a screen.

Heavens, nothing that goes over the internet is truly private (especially the level of security a parish could afford). Would you want to find YOUR confession posted on YouTube because someone hacked in?
 
I’m not sure of the canon law, myself, but if I’m apologizing to a friend, I’ll make every effort to do it it person rather than via phone, text, letter, etc

The same applies when apologizing to God
 
I know Canon Law (as it is presently constituted) doesn’t allow for this, however, 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. Father Damien made his confession from a distance, shouting out his sins to a priest who was some distance away. Would it have made a difference if a telephone link to the priest had been available? (Keep in mind that there are sometimes telephone receivers in the confessional for the hard of hearing.) In cases where general absolution is needed, how close to the priest does the penitent need to be? Within the walls of the church? Out in the churchyard if the congregation has spilled out of the church due to crowding? What if the absolution takes place over 50,000 people in a football stadium?

While confession within close physical proximity and earshot is the “normal” method of confession, as long as there is some connection in time and space between priest and penitent — even if it is online — I have to think that the sacrament could be confected. This could even extend to writing down one’s sins, much as a penitent who cannot speak could slip a note to the priest inside the confessional.

As far as security and privacy is concerned, keep in mind that even “normal” confessions can be heard by close bystanders. In those circumstances, both priest and penitent should speak in hushed, low tones. (I really wish the priest would speak more softly and quietly. In a silent church, murmurs and audible speech can very often be heard and I find this quite off-putting.)
 
The only exception, AFAIK, is if you commit a “reserved” sin (i.e. one that can only be absolved by a bishop or the Pope). A seminarian told me that in such a case, the priest would give a conditional absolution and write a letter to the bishop or appropriate authority about the sin. The authority would write back saying “I forgive that sin”.
 
I’m sure many of us comfortable with using the Internet would be happy to do confession online, but it ain’t happening afaik.

I can understand why as the Internet is neither a rich medium (even if you Skype with video), nor is it secure (the government would wiretap it).

Let’s not mess with confession.
 
In certain cases they have to actually contact the Vatican.
His_helpmeet said:
The only exception, AFAIK, is if you commit a “reserved” sin (i.e. one that can only be absolved by a bishop or the Pope). A seminarian told me that in such a case, the priest would give a conditional absolution and write a letter to the bishop or appropriate authority about the sin. The authority would write back saying “I forgive that sin”.
Click to expand...
 
For those still saying they can not understand why confession can not be done through some technological intermediary please do watch the video clip posted by @(name removed by moderator).
 
Phone conversations are monitored - constantly. You can buy a scanner and listen to cell calls all day. Accidental conference calls are made. Whatever goes on the web, even via an app, is discoverable. A good part of the truth and beauty of the Sacrament is that it is a conversation between you and God - via His representative on earth (2 Cor 5). You can be face-to-face or behind the screen, but the cleansing of your soul must be up close and personal.

As with all Sacraments, try imagining them on-line or via some app.

Baptism? Can’t be done at a distance.
Matrimony? AYKM? Maybe in Vegas, with the expected life span.
The Anointing? Nope - it’s hands-on.
Confirmation? Also hands-on.
Holy Orders? Who, for certain, is being ordained?
And the Eucharist? Gotta eat it.

Confession (and all Sacraments) was set up as one-on-one, face-to-face, for an eternally valid reason. Grace flows through the Sacraments and while God’s grace transcends time and space, He specifically arranged the Sacraments to be personal, touching both our bodies and our souls.
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
The privacy argument isn’t particularly strong (Someone could put a microphone in a confessional, too, but it doesn’t mean we don’t confess).

We talk to lawyers and doctors with attorney-client privilege and HIPPA via highly secure communication channels. Debatably more secure than someone overhearing via a confessional.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
I’m sure many of us comfortable with using the Internet would be happy to do confession online, but it ain’t happening afaik.

I can understand why as the Internet is neither a rich medium (even if you Skype with video), nor is it secure (the government would wiretap it).

Let’s not mess with confession.
Click to expand...
Such a medium would also make it relatively easy for an imposter to hear confession online, who is not authorized to do so nor to forgive sins. Puts souls at risk IMO.
 
OraLabora said:
40.png
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
I knew a priest who told me that during the tragic events of 9/11, he administered general absolution to the victims from his home in North Carolina, 600 miles away. I have to think this was not useless in God’s eyes. The worst thing that could happen is that the absolution was invalid, but it was better than not doing anything at all.
 
I get a strong impression of someone holding a glass to the confessional to hear every word. I wonder if phone confession would provoke a form of blackmail.
 
The faithful should always be in the habit of making all of their acts of contrition perfect acts. It is more virtuous and you never know when you might have that and nothing else.
 
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.
 
The telephone and video conference are consider communication media, just like a letter written on paper.

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.

Now there is video conferencing, however, it’s really no different that the telephone (other than you can the person)

Because letters were available in the time of Jesus and letters were not valid for confession in Jesus’s time, that’s why more modern forms of communication media are not valid.

NOTE: I do not think this is dogma. So if the Church one day feels that video conferencing is valid, then it will be valid. But right now, the Church views telephone and video conferences both as communication media, just like a letter.

I hope this helps.

God bless
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top