Russian Orthodox Church allows confession by phone or Skype during covid-19 shutdown

[AlNg]

Russian Orthodox Church allows believers to offer confession by phone or Skype during Covid-19 shutdown.
Metropolitan Hilarion, the head of the Synodic Department for External Church Relations, told the faithful that they can use modern technology.

“I believe that, in some extraordinary situation, one can confess by phone or by Skype,” he said, adding that a worshipper has to make an arrangement with a priest first.
Does the Roman Catholic church recognize the validity of confession by phone?

Russian Orthodox Church allows believers to offer confession by phone or Skype during Covid-19 shutdown — RT Russia & Former Soviet Union

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Does the Roman Catholic church recognize the validity of confession by phone?

No. (We had a past thread on this.)

It also wasn’t necessary in my Archdiocese; confessions were offered at most churches every week during the shutdown/ suspension of public Mass.

I believe a number of other dioceses had confession available by appointment.

In the cases where there was absolutely no confession available, or one couldn’t get there due to health concerns or other problem during shutdown, the Pope provided penitents with guidelines on what to do.

 

[Thom18]

Canon law makes mention of the “church or oratory” being the proper place for confessions to be heard (Can. 964 §1), and this would suggest that both parties must be in the setting, and that they must be in the same setting (one could not confess over the phone, even if the priest were in church A and the penitent in church B).

In addition, it doesn’t allow for the possibility of the sacrament being the “outward sign of interior grace” that it is. It is not possible to baptize someone with water, nor can a person be baptized by someone over the phone or on the internet. The Eucharist also cannot be confected by these means. The sick cannot be anointed, marriages cannot be made, and men cannot receive holy orders. And how would we host a funeral this way?

As for penance, it, too, cannot be stripped of the physical element. A 2002 document from the Church called The Church and the Internet says, “Virtual reality is no substitute for the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the sacramental reality of the other sacraments, and shared worship in a flesh-and-blood human community. There are no sacraments on the Internet; and even the religious experiences possible there by the grace of God are insufficient apart from real-world interaction with other persons of faith.”

This is the long answer. The short answer is, no.

 

[AlNg]

The short answer is, no .

So the Roman Catholic Church does not recognize the Sacrament of Confession as practiced in such manner in the Russian Orthodox Church? That is odd because I thought that the Roman Catholic Church did recognize the validity of the Sacraments of the Russian Orthodox church.

 

[Thom18]

Thom18:

The short answer is, no .

So the Roman Catholic Church does not recognize the Sacrament of Confession as practiced in such manner in the Russian Orthodox Church? That is odd because I thought that the Roman Catholic Church did recognize the validity of the Sacraments of the Russian Orthodox church.

We believe the Orthodox to hold valid holy orders, and therefore the ability to confect the Eucharist, hear confessions, etc.

That being the case, we would view this case much the same as we would if one of our own presbyters attempted to hear a confession this way. It is invalid, for even though the priest may have said the right words and the penitent may have had true contrition, there weren’t two people celebrating the sacrament, but two people (essentially) trying to celebrate it alone (even though they are in communication).

If I have misspoken, @edward_george1 can probably offer correction.

 

[AlNg]

It is invalid,

I doubt it. I think you are wrong and the confession is valid. I have seen phones in confessional booths for the hard of hearing and when the penitent and the priest use the phone, the confession is still valid and does it not remain valid even if the penitent is six feet and 1/4 inch away from the priest.

 

[Thom18]

Thom18:

It is invalid,

I doubt it. I have seen phones in confessional booths for the hard of hearing and when the penitent and the priest use the phone, the confession is still valid even if the penitent is six feet and 1/4 inch away from the priest.

You’re not talking about those, though, are you? You’re talking about someone calling a priest from their home or elsewhere and confessing that way. These are two different scenarios.

 

[AlNg]

You’re not talking about those, though, are you? You’re talking about someone calling a priest from their home or elsewhere and confessing that way. These are two different scenarios.

Do you agree that if the penitent and the priest use a phone and are six feet and 1/4 inch away from each other, that the confession is valid? yes or no?

 

[dscath]

if the penitent and the priest use a phone and are six feet and 1/4 inch away from each other, that the confession is valid?

The most interesting question I’ve ever seen on CAF

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I have seen phones in confessional booths for the hard of hearing and when the penitent and the priest use the phone, the confession is still valid and does it not remain valid even if the penitent is six feet and 1/4 inch away from the priest.

Those are permitted as a hearing aid because the priest and penitent are still in physical proximity and the “phone” is a dedicated line between the priest and the penitent. As such, they are not “phones”.

If one were to use one’s mobile phone, land line, or Skype, where the signal is not being sent over a dedicated line, it raises serious issues of maintaining confidentiality. (As we have discussed already on previous threads; there have been several dealing with whether confession can be heard over the phone.)

 

[twf]

It’s interesting. Often we have the impression that the Catholic Church is more “progressive” or “liberal” than the Orthodox Churches. In many cases this is true. Liturgy would be a great example. Ecumenicism or inter-faith marriage would be another. Yet in other cases, the Catholic Church is decidedly more “conservative” than the Orthodox Churches… birth control and divorce come to mind… and then stuff like this. Interesting.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yet in other cases, the Catholic Church is decidedly more “conservative” than the Orthodox Churches… birth control and divorce come to mind… and then stuff like this. Interesting.

How is it more “conservative” to have a legitimate concern about one’s confession being overheard by a third party?

Can you just imagine if, say, Joe Biden went to confession using the phone and some undercover blogger type were to find a way to listen in on it?

And that’s not even reaching the issue of someone deciding to confess via a phone that has been wiretapped by law enforcement…

 

[twf]

Oh it’s not at all a criticism. I fully accept the Catholic Church’s position. The words “conservative” and “liberal” in this context are very much imperfect. I mean despite the general perception that the Catholic Church is more “progressive” than the Orthodox Churches, there are a number of issues where we as Catholics take a more conservative / traditional / restricted position.
In this case, my issue would be more theological. The sacraments have a physical dimension. They are an extension of the Church as the mystical continuation of the Incarnation. There needs to be a physical presence to receive a sacrament.

 

[AlNg]

There needs to be a physical presence to receive a sacrament.

What if the penitent and priest are 7 feet apart? Would that be physically present? And some phones are setup as transmitting encoded information which cannot be decoded by anyone else.

someone deciding to confess via a phone that has been wiretapped by law enforcement…

How do you know that a law enforcement officer is not in the church or has not bugged the church with highly sophisticated and undetectable equipment?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The legality of wiretapping a church is very questionable and would likely not be permitted by the court.

The legality of wiretapping a telephone is much more settled and is done all the time.

In addition, telephone lines have a high probability of a third party hearing some of the conversation even if they are not actively wiretapping or trying to eavesdrop. I make many calls and have many teleconferences as part of my job; crosstalk and having unexpected people pop into the conversation by mistake or technological glitch happens quite a bit just by accident.

Anyway, aside from the fact that you apparently favor the Russian Orthodox position, why are you so married to the idea of the Church having telephone confessions? As I explained above, it’s not necessary. I really don’t see any benefit to it at all to be honest.

 

[AlNg]

The legality of wiretapping a church is very questionable and would likely not be permitted by the court.

Many times things are done without the permission of the court.

The legality of wiretapping a telephone is much more settled and is done all the time.

Wiretapping of a phone with the proper encoding applications on both sides would not permit anyone else to understand the conversation.

There needs to be a physical presence to receive a sacrament.

What is meant by physically present. Is 8 feet apart and talking via an electronic device being physically present?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Wiretapping of a phone with the proper encoding applications on both sides would not permit anyone else to understand the conversation.

It is certainly not assured that every phone a person might use to go to confession would have “proper encoding”, nor that someone else might not come up with technology to defeat it.

Anyway, I get the impression that whatever reason or basis we give you, you will not accept, so it does not seem productive to continue the discussion/ argument with you. You have received the answer to your question, which you apparently don’t agree with, but the Church is not going to change because you or anyone else doesn’t agree. Good evening.

 

[twf]

I don’t think there’s a precise measurement. It’s a judgment call for the priest to make… what constitutes a moral physical presence?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

And how would we host a funeral this way?

It’s kind of farfetched, but I can’t see why there couldn’t be such a thing as a “virtual” or “online” funeral — not a Requiem Mass, but something non-sacramental, prayers for the departed, perhaps an online rosary (these are becoming very common, my parish does this, though not for funerals or wakes). I suppose it all depends on how you define “funeral”.

I really don’t have a way to justify this, other than to speculate that God is not bound by space or location, but I have to think that a telephone or online confession and absolution would be at least probably valid. If a priest, bishop, or Pope administers general absolution to a whole church full of people, is that not valid? What if it is 50,000 people in a football stadium — let’s say the Holy Father is celebrating an outdoor Mass and word has just come over the news that ICBMs are incoming in 15 minutes? People who are in an overflow area in the tailgate section of the stadium grounds, watching on a Jumbotron? People in the parking lot listening in their cars?

And as for issues of confidentiality being an obstacle to using a telephone (even if the priest and penitent are in fairly close proximity, such as some of the “parking lot confessions” that have been in the news recently where the priest has a dedicated cellphone number posted), I’ve mentioned this before, but even “regular” confessions in a church can be easily heard when the priest and/or penitent talk loudly. I’ve been in many situations where they were talking so loudly, that I had to find some way to “tune them out”. So much for confidentiality. And, God forbid, someone could plant a “bug” in a confessional as a prank — there are people who would do that. Lord have mercy on their souls, but there are people who would do that. The words I would use to describe them are not printable on CAF.

And what about Father Damien’s confession to a priest on a boat some distance away from him? How was that valid? Would using a cell phone, assuming one had existed, have cast any doubt on the validity of the sacrament, and why?

The Orthodox are not ones to do something “slapdash”. They have 2000 years of Christian tradition and sacramental theology behind them, just the same as we do. I would be interested in hearing how they justify such a thing. I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.

 

[Anesti33]

Sure, you can confess by phone. You can confess to your bartender or your mother, too, but you won’t get absolution from any of the three.

Let’s qualify that. If I am in prison and a priest comes to visit me, we are separated by a bulletproof window. We cannot hear each other, so we communicate by “phone”. The priest would be able to confer absolution in this case, because the phone is an aid to hearing and not a tool of remote presence. That’s the difference.

Deaf and mute people use various tools to assist in making their confessions and these are accepted by the Church. It would seem that the primary element required is physical and moral presence. A priest cannot bless something he cannot see with his unaided eye. He cannot confer absolution to someone over the medium of letters, a telegraph, the telephone, or the Interwebs. But if I am deaf, and I enter a confessional and hand a list of my sins to the priest, then he absolves me without question, because I am physically and morally present to him in the same room.