Regarding the Seal of Confession

[OneSmallFlower]

Hi! So quick question to any of you priests or policemen out there; I’m trying to write a murder-mystery, and one of the key plot points hinges on another priest finding the diary of a deceased priest, who had written down something he learned in confession. To clarify, this diary was well-hidden, and the deceased priest clearly never thought anyone else would ever read it.

So, three questions:

1.) Would any priest ever actually do this? Or would this be considered breaking the seal, even if they never thought anyone would actually read it?

2.) Would the second priest who found the diary (or any other Catholic) be put under the seal by proxy upon reading what was in the diary?

3.) Would the police be able to confiscate the diary? (Or would this fall under priest-penitent privilege?)

Thanks!
-1SF

 

[PJM]

Hi! So quick question to any of you priests or policemen out there; I’m trying to write a murder-mystery, and one of the key plot points hinges on another priest finding the diary of a deceased priest, who had written down something he learned in confession. To clarify, this diary was well-hidden, and the deceased priest clearly never thought anyone else would ever read it.

So, three questions:

1.) Would any priest ever actually do this? Or would this be considered breaking the seal, even if they never thought anyone would actually read it?

NO

This SEAL is so powerful that the priest MUST be willing to DIE protecting it if called too

2.) Would the second priest who found the diary (or any other Catholic) be put under the seal by proxy upon reading what was in the diary?

The Diary would HAVE TO BE IMMEDIATELY destroyed

3.) Would the police be able to confiscate the diary? (Or would this fall under priest-penitent privilege?)

Thanks!
-1SF

NO! see #2

 

[Vico]

Hi! So quick question to any of you priests or policemen out there; I’m trying to write a murder-mystery, and one of the key plot points hinges on another priest finding the diary of a deceased priest, who had written down something he learned in confession. To clarify, this diary was well-hidden, and the deceased priest clearly never thought anyone else would ever read it.

So, three questions:

1.) Would any priest ever actually do this? Or would this be considered breaking the seal, even if they never thought anyone would actually read it?

2.) Would the second priest who found the diary (or any other Catholic) be put under the seal by proxy upon reading what was in the diary?

3.) Would the police be able to confiscate the diary? (Or would this fall under priest-penitent privilege?)

Thanks!
-1SF

I am not a priest or officer of the law, but here is some canon law CIC

Can. 983 §1. The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason.

§2. The interpreter, if there is one, and all others who in any way have knowledge of sins from confession are also obliged to observe secrecy.

Can. 984 §1. A confessor is prohibited completely from using knowledge acquired from confession to the detriment of the penitent even when any danger of revelation is excluded.

§2. A person who has been placed in authority cannot use in any manner for external governance the knowledge about sins which he has received in confession at any time.

Also link to Canon Law Made Easy:

canonlawmadeeasy.com/2008/12/04/can-a-priest-ever-reveal-what-is-said-in-confession/

 

[OneSmallFlower]

NO

This SEAL is so powerful that the priest MUST be willing to DIE protecting it if called too

The Diary would HAVE TO BE IMMEDIATELY destroyed

NO! see #2

I’m not saying that the deceased priest would have willingly broken the seal; in fact that’s another important plot point in the story. The diary was never meant to be read by anyone, thus, it was well-hidden.

You also didn’t answer my second question; if I overhear a confession in Church, I’m placed under the seal by proxy even though I’m a laywoman. Would the same apply to any Catholic who read this diary?

My focus is really on the legal question; since they didn’t actually receive the information inside the confessional, would the police be able to admit the diary as evidence? (Obviously against the priest’s wishes, but the officer isn’t really concerned about whether or not he upsets the priest.) Whether or not the diary SHOULD be destroyed is a bit of a moot point once it’s inside an evidence room.

 

[buc_fan33]

I hate to throw water on your plot, but such a scenario would never happen. I can’t ever envision any priest recording or writing down sins told to him in confession AND linking them to the penitent. The notebook would never exist. I just can’t imagine any reason why any priest would ever do this. Sorry!

I hope you can adjust your plot, as this has the potential of causing scandal, in that it could lead potential readers to assume such a practice happens with any degree of regularity, when, in fact, it does not.

Blessings!

 

[OneSmallFlower]

I hate to throw water on your plot, but such a scenario would never happen. I can’t ever envision any priest recording or writing down sins told to him in confession AND linking them to the penitent. The notebook would never exist. I just can’t imagine any reason why any priest would ever do this. Sorry!

I hope you can adjust your plot, as this has the potential of causing scandal, in that it could lead potential readers to assume such a practice happens with any degree of regularity, when, in fact, it does not.

Blessings!

That’s what I was looking for; thank you. I should be able to revise the plot. Blessings to you as well!

 

[Fuerza]

This likely would not happen, though you’re writing the story so technically you can do whatever you want. I would echo one of the above concerns that this might cause scandal to those unfamiliar with reality, so tread carefully. As a police officer, personally, if i were to find such evidence I would never use it and would probably destroy it. Let them try to fire me.

 

[OneSmallFlower]

This likely would not happen, though you’re writing the story so technically you can do whatever you want. I would echo one of the above concerns that this might cause scandal to those unfamiliar with reality, so tread carefully. As a police officer, personally, if i were to find such evidence I would never use it and would probably destroy it. Let them try to fire me.

Haha, well, glad to see we have such a moral policeman in the force! Thanks for your help, Officer.

 

[Lion_IRC]

I hate to throw water on your plot, but such a scenario would never happen. I can’t ever envision any priest recording or writing down sins told to him in confession AND linking them to the penitent. The notebook would never exist. I just can’t imagine any reason why any priest would ever do this. Sorry!

I hope you can adjust your plot, as this has the potential of causing scandal, in that it could lead potential readers to assume such a practice happens with any degree of regularity, when, in fact, it does not.

Blessings!

A scandal indeed. A bit like a Dan Brown novel/movie?
Perhaps the storyline could reflect that no real priest would ever do something like that.
A fake priest perhaps?
Oh, no. Wait. That could be an even bigger scandal.

 

[Crusaderbear]

The penitant gives his diary to the priest during his confession, (maybe hides it in the confessional?)its found after priest dies - then explore if a diary given to a priest is protected by the seal of confession. The priest is fully protec ed because he didn’t say anything…

 

[Contarini]

The Dorothy Sayers mystery Unnatural Death uses a similar but less improbable and scandalous plot device. Lord Peter’s sidekick Miss Climpson (a devout Anglo-Catholic–i.e., an Anglican whose religious practices are essentially the same as those of Catholics) finds a list of sins that a penitent has written down, and one of the sins turns out to be telling a lie which gives the murderer a false alibi. Miss Climpson has a struggle of conscience but reads the list and uses it to help Lord Peter solve the mystery. In this case the priest, of course, never violated the seal at all.

Edwin

 

[FrDavid96]

Hi! So quick question to any of you priests or policemen out there; I’m trying to write a murder-mystery, and one of the key plot points hinges on another priest finding the diary of a deceased priest, who had written down something he learned in confession. To clarify, this diary was well-hidden, and the deceased priest clearly never thought anyone else would ever read it.

So, three questions:

1.) Would any priest ever actually do this? Or would this be considered breaking the seal, even if they never thought anyone would actually read it?

No. No faithful priest would ever do such a thing. Of course, it’s always possible for anyone to break a law. However, this is the sort of thing that a faithful priest would never even consider doing.

I cannot stress that enough. This is the sort of thing that a priest would absolutely never do; not even consider it.

2.) Would the second priest who found the diary (or any other Catholic) be put under the seal by proxy upon reading what was in the diary?

Absolutely yes. Anyone (repeat, anyone) who reads it would be absolutely bound by the Seal of Confession.

As far as the second priest goes, from his point of view, it would be exactly the same obligations that would apply if he heard the confession himself. He would be absolutely obligated to destroy it the moment he realized what he was reading.

3.) Would the police be able to confiscate the diary? (Or would this fall under priest-penitent privilege?)

Would they be able to confiscate it? That depends of course. Maybe they obtain a warrant for the book. However if they did it would still be privileged communication and absolutely protected by the Seal of Confession and all the legal protections that stem from it. So ultimately it would not be admissible in court.

Thanks!
-1SF

 

[Tomyris]

What if due to acoustics, someone accidentally overheard the confession? Would they also be under the seal?

And I have seen several movies in which someone entered the confessional and someone else was in the priest’s side, and they THOUGHT they were confessing their sins to a priest. In one case it was a woman who confessed betraying Germany to the allies to a Nazi officer, in the second a woman confessed her lusting after Zorro to Zorro, who was hiding in the confessional at the time. I don’t know if that sort of thing ever happens?

 

[FrDavid96]

What if due to acoustics, someone accidentally overheard the confession? Would they also be under the seal?

Yes.

And I have seen several movies in which someone entered the confessional and someone else was in the priest’s side, and they THOUGHT they were confessing their sins to a priest. In one case it was a woman who confessed betraying Germany to the allies to a Nazi officer, in the second a woman confessed her lusting after Zorro to Zorro, who was hiding in the confessional at the time. I don’t know if that sort of thing ever happens?

Even if the confession is simulated, the Seal applies. So even an imposter priest is still bound by the Seal.

(Simulated is not the same as theatrical acting or practice for religious ed purposes).

 

[Tomyris]

Yes.

I know of a train station that I toured that has a famous acoustic spot. You can hear a conversation 200’ away. So if someone stepped aside with a priest into the wrong spot, you might hear it. What would be the proper course of action? To merely step out of hearing, and possibly someone else with nefarious intent might stand in the “sweet spot” seeing that someone was talking to a priest at the other end, or make a beeline to the two, interrupt and tell them of the acoustics and please move? Or listen and accept that as the best course, because you wouldn’t tell but someone else would, and then go tell the priest about the acoustics? There might be problems with the last course, like they are confessing anger at you for eavesdropping all the time.

 

[PJM]

I’m not saying that the deceased priest would have willingly broken the seal; in fact that’s another important plot point in the story. The diary was never meant to be read by anyone, thus, it was well-hidden.

You also didn’t answer my second question; if I overhear a confession in Church, I’m placed under the seal by proxy even though I’m a laywoman. Would the same apply to any Catholic who read this diary?

My focus is really on the legal question; since they didn’t actually receive the information inside the confessional, would the police be able to admit the diary as evidence? (Obviously against the priest’s wishes, but the officer isn’t really concerned about whether or not he upsets the priest.) Whether or not the diary SHOULD be destroyed is a bit of a moot point once it’s inside an evidence room.

WILLINGLY or unwillingly does NOT matter; the result affects the essential and ONLY possible outcome.

 

[poche]

I’m not saying that the deceased priest would have willingly broken the seal; in fact that’s another important plot point in the story. The diary was never meant to be read by anyone, thus, it was well-hidden.

You also didn’t answer my second question; if I overhear a confession in Church, I’m placed under the seal by proxy even though I’m a laywoman. Would the same apply to any Catholic who read this diary?

My focus is really on the legal question; since they didn’t actually receive the information inside the confessional, would the police be able to admit the diary as evidence? (Obviously against the priest’s wishes, but the officer isn’t really concerned about whether or not he upsets the priest.) Whether or not the diary SHOULD be destroyed is a bit of a moot point once it’s inside an evidence room.

It doesn’t matter if the diary was or was not meant to be read by anybody or not. Writing someone’s sins in a dairy in this way is a violation of the secret of confession. Putting it in writing means that it could be read and this is the violation.
It is conceivable that a court could admit such evidence in a proceedings but it would be over the rigorous objections of the Catholic Church.

 

[tafan]

OP, you should really change your storyline. . It could imply that a priest would actually do thus and cause scandal.

 

[Brassring]

What if due to acoustics, someone accidentally overheard the confession? Would they also be under the seal?

And I have seen several movies in which someone entered the confessional and someone else was in the priest’s side, and they THOUGHT they were confessing their sins to a priest. In one case it was a woman who confessed betraying Germany to the allies to a Nazi officer, in the second a woman confessed her lusting after Zorro to Zorro, who was hiding in the confessional at the time. I don’t know if that sort of thing ever happens?

I have occasionally (and inadvertently) overheard some people who, ahem, don’t use their inside voice during confession. My practice is to plug my ears and pray as soon as I realize I can hear.

 

[Bill1940]

Now here is something else in regard to the Seal of Confession. One tells a sin to a Priest in the Confessional. He is bound to secrecy even if his life is threatened. Are you, the penitent, free to tell another of your sin? I would not. Read Psalm 102: 12. “As far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our offenses from us.”