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

[AlNg]

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.

Of course you are right. Jesus said: John 20: 23 [Douay-Rheims Bible]
Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.
I don’t see where He required that you have to be within 8 ft 6 in. of the priest in order for this to be valid.

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.

Exactly right.

And what about Father Damien’s confession to a priest on a boat some distance away from him? How was that valid?

Distance didn’t seem to be any kind of obstacle in that case as you point out.

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.

Can you show us where in the Bible or where in the Catechism it says that the penitent has to be within a certain specified distance from the priest in order for the absolution to be valid?

 

[Genesis315]

Ecumenicism…would be another.

It depends on the EO jurisdiction. Most participate in all the usual ecumenical and inter-religious events and conferecnes like everyone else. They participate in the Assisi events, etc. (they even have their “zealots” who thnk this makes “World Orthodoxy” heretical and a false church). In fact, some EO jurisdictions are even members of the World Council of Churches, whereas the Catholic Church never has been (on theological grounds) and instead has a different relationship with the WCC.

Other than liturgical texts and things explicit in the first seven councils, they can actually be more flexible in theology and in practice they tend to vary over time–sometimes back and forth–even on some big issues (like original sin, for example).

The Catholic Church acknowledges that if the Church in the past instituted or amended something (like a liturgical text), the Church today can too since it is the same Church (if the Church today had less authority than the Church in the past, it would mean something in the Church would have been lost, and that is impossible). But we cannot dispense from those things that come from God.

In the case of confession, physical proximity is deemed part of the substance of the sacrament that has come from God, not something invented by the Church.

 

[ReaderT]

I would be interested in hearing how they justify such a thing. I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.

In this way: the main idea is that one is humbling himself and confessing his sins. While this of course should properly take place in a Church, if for reasons beyond our control (we are quarantined, we are bedridden, etc.) we can’t make it there, we don’t believe God will say, “Well it’s great that you decided to open your soul to your Spiritual Father and admit your shortcomings, but you weren’t in the right building, so it doesn’t count.”

 

[Genesis315]

In this way: the main idea is that one is humbling himself and confessing his sins. While this of course should properly take place in a Church, if for reasons beyond our control (we are quarantined, we are bedridden, etc.) we can’t make it there, we don’t believe God will say, “Well it’s great that you decided to open your soul to your Spiritual Father and admit your shortcomings, but you weren’t in the right building, so it doesn’t count.”

This is not too different from us. We believe similar when one is impeded from actually receiving the sacrament, the desire for it suffices since when all the same dispositions are present. However, we distinguish this from the actual sacrament (a line has to be drawn somewhere as to what a sacrament is, otherwise nothing would be a sacrament) and if God makes it possible later for one to actually receive the sacrament that is desired, one still should.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The Catholic Church acknowledges that if the Church in the past instituted or amended something (like a liturgical text), the Church today can too since it is the same Church (if the Church today had less authority than the Church in the past, it would mean something in the Church would have been lost, and that is impossible). But we cannot dispense from those things that come from God.

This actually makes quite a bit of sense. I had never thought of this before. While I passionately defend the Traditional Latin Mass as the summit and pinnacle of Catholic liturgy (at least within the Roman Rite as opposed to the East), this is a very efficient argument in favor of liturgical reforms and changes.

HomeschoolDad:

I would be interested in hearing how they justify such a thing. I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.

In this way: the main idea is that one is humbling himself and confessing his sins. While this of course should properly take place in a Church, if for reasons beyond our control (we are quarantined, we are bedridden, etc.) we can’t make it there, we don’t believe God will say, “Well it’s great that you decided to open your soul to your Spiritual Father and admit your shortcomings, but you weren’t in the right building, so it doesn’t count.”

This pandemic, and needed quarantine and distancing protocols, may be with us for awhile. My region has already had a huge spike in cases, possibly due in part to so many people having their cap set to “get back out there” — a “maverick” mentality that you will find in various times and places. I would like to see Rome rule definitively on whether “distance confessions”, using electronic media in live time, are valid or not, and in either case, their reasoning would be interesting to see. I would also like to see some statement on using a common carrier telephone as a listening aid, even when priest and penitent are in close physical proximity (parish grounds, carpool lane, etc.). Apostolic teaching and tradition didn’t anticipate real-time electronic media.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

That is odd because I thought that the Roman Catholic Church did recognize the validity of the Sacraments of the Russian Orthodox church.

Yes, Roman Catholic Church did recognize validity of Russian Orthodox Sacraments universally, but I guess that changes now? Church can not ever recognize invalid Sacraments as valid, which is exactly what Church would do if they recognized this form of Confession.

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.

Yes, but they are in physical proximity. Do you think confession by letter would be sufficient?

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.

You are correct that we should see their position… but then again, Church of Sweden had 1500 years of tradition behind them and they still went Protestant. We must recognize that there is always ability for any group whatsoever to divert from their original teachings (only exception would be some institution protected by some sort of infallibility or something). Catholic Church in which Infallible Church of Christ fully subsists has ruled that such Confessions are invalid. We can’t circumvent it because some group outside the Church started doing so.

I don’t see where He required that you have to be within 8 ft 6 in. of the priest in order for this to be valid.

Church does that. Our Lord said those words, but where did he explicitly say that we need to have contrition to make valid Confession? Yet we do need it.

And what about Father Damien’s confession to a priest on a boat some distance away from him?

It is still physical presence.

“Well it’s great that you decided to open your soul to your Spiritual Father and admit your shortcomings, but you weren’t in the right building, so it doesn’t count.”

Why would Church not recognize Confessions by letter then?

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I would also like to point out that by this logic, it is not a stretch to believe that Priests can consecrate Eucharist in our homes via videochat, that marriage can be blessed by Priest through a letter (East) or consecrated by couple by videochat masturbating instead of actual physical intercourse. What stopped Bishops from consecrating Priests through phone (or by letter) in the times of great persecutions of the Church?

If there was such option for remote Sacraments ever in Orthodox or Catholic History, Patriarchs of Jerusalem wouldn’t travel half the known world to consecrate a Bishop in Ukraine… Popes would not need to send Bishop to Bulgaria to ordain local Clergy and Apostles would not need to come personally to people in Samaria who have received Baptism but not Holy Spirit. Would there be such an option Church would come with this solution before.

 

[twf]

We likewise believe that God can and does forgive people their sins outside of the sacrament under extraordinary circumstances (through an act of “perfect contrition”)…as the Catechism says, God has bound salvation to the sacraments, but He himself is not bound by the sacraments. That said, the sacramental act of absolution, like any sacrament, must be conferred in person… for the sacraments are incarnational in nature.

 

[ReaderT]

Why would Church not recognize Confessions by letter then?

There have been cases of that - Abbot Nikon Vorobiev mentions one in the book “Letters to Spiritual Children” - but again, it is not the norm and shouldn’t be done without a VERY good reason (e.g. Arctic explorer writing to his priest back in Petrograd, or something). In most situations, when you have several priests in every Russian village, confession by letter would be uncalled for.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

There have been cases of that - Abbot Nikon Vorobiev mentions one in the book “Letters to Spiritual Children” - but again, it is not the norm and shouldn’t be done without a VERY good reason

I see. Is the book account of real story or fiction? Anyhow, I can’t really think of a way this would reconcile with Sacramental Theology… perhaps there is a way but that would open many very weird possibilities and/or provide contradictions of Sacramental Theology.

 

[ReaderT]

Is the book account of real story or fiction? Anyhow, I can’t really think of a way this would reconcile with Sacramental Theology… perhaps there is a way but that would open many very weird possibilities and/or provide contradictions of Sacramental Theology.

It is real. The Abbot was a Spiritual Father (similar to the RC “Spiritual Director”) to many people around Russia, some of whom couldn’t always visit him in person. Still, this is by far the exception and not the rule.

 

[phil19034]

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.

No. The Catholic Church still would recognize the Sacrament of Confession as practiced by the Russian Orthodox Church.

However, the Church would simply view confessions over the phone to be invalid.

This would be more akin to marriage (performed by a Catholic priest) which is found to be invalid. It doesn’t mean that the Church thinks all Confessions by the Russian Orthodox are invalid.

 

[phil19034]

Thom18:

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.

That’s not the same thing. In those instances, the phone in the confessional is so the priest or penitent can hear better. They are for people (penitent or priest) who are hard of hearing.

The reason those confessions are valid is because the priest is still in close proximity when he raises his hand during the absolution.

One reason why telephone confessions (over vast distances) are not considered to be valid (by some) is because there are questions regarding whether a priest can validly bestow blessing and/or absolution over vast distances.

 

[phil19034]

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

I don’t think @twf meant “conservative” in a political way. I think twf simply meant conservative vs modern

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

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.

You are correct that we should see their position… but then again, Church of Sweden had 1500 years of tradition behind them and they still went Protestant. We must recognize that there is always ability for any group whatsoever to divert from their original teachings (only exception would be some institution protected by some sort of infallibility or something). Catholic Church in which Infallible Church of Christ fully subsists has ruled that such Confessions are invalid. We can’t circumvent it because some group outside the Church started doing so.

True, but the situation of the Orthodox is a bit different. They have maintained apostolic succession, valid sacraments, and virtually the entire totality of the Catholic Faith. The Church of Sweden has done none of these things. I view Orthodoxy not so much as a schism, as a prorupted part of the Catholic Church that is in a less-than-perfect communion. Orthodoxy does not even deny papal primacy in principle, just in its application by Rome.

HomeschoolDad:

And what about Father Damien’s confession to a priest on a boat some distance away from him?

It is still physical presence.

And a priest in a lawn chair on the churchyard and a penitent in their car in the pickup lane, using a dedicated telephone line, isn’t? You didn’t say this, but some might. Doesn’t make sense.

I would also like to point out that by this logic, it is not a stretch to believe that Priests can consecrate Eucharist in our homes via videochat, that marriage can be blessed by Priest through a letter (East)… What stopped Bishops from consecrating Priests through phone (or by letter) in the times of great persecutions of the Church?

To consecrate priests, you have to have a tactile laying on of hands. The sacrament of penance requires no physical contact.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I understand this, but is this “the final word”, binding for all time? Does it bind as Catholic doctrine? There’s been an evolution of thought in many things in the Catholic Church, possibly this could be another one?

If I had to guess, I would say that the Russian Orthodox are making use of an economia to justify this. It’s definitely not standard Orthodox practice (which is the same as ours is).

OrbisNonSufficit:

Why would Church not recognize Confessions by letter then?

There have been cases of that - Abbot Nikon Vorobiev mentions one in the book “Letters to Spiritual Children” - but again, it is not the norm and shouldn’t be done without a VERY good reason (e.g. Arctic explorer writing to his priest back in Petrograd, or something). In most situations, when you have several priests in every Russian village, confession by letter would be uncalled for.

Is it just confession of one’s sins, or is absolution part of it as well? If the latter, how would the priest do that? Face the direction of where the penitent is (sort of like Muslims praying in the direction of Mecca) and pronounce words of absolution while making the sign of the cross in midair? Seriously — I am not trying to be “cute” or “clever”, I am trying to imagine the way absolution would be conferred after having received a letter, with the penitent present neither in actual fact nor by a virtual live electronic medium.

 

[phil19034]

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

“physically present” can best be described as within “eyesight distance.” So, if the you are close enough to see the priest and/or he’s close enough to see you, then you are physically present. EVEN IF, the view is obstructed why a wall, pillar, screen, etc.

The one exception would be a lare Mass, when size of a mass (typically a Papal Mass) is so large that one cannot see the Pope, one would still be physically present as long as one was among the congregation.

 

[Gab123]

confession by phone or Skype

That’s like getting married over the phone or Skype. I think there are certain things that need to be done in person, especially a sacrament, which is a visible sign instituted by Christ to confer grace. How about you emailing your confession, then the priest can check his mailbox and get back to you with an absolution and an attached penance. Why is that not valid?

 

[Fuerza]

Actually, there are situations where a valid marriage can be contracted by distance, so it’s not quite the same. It is the only sacrament that can be conferred this way, though it is only done in very unusual situations. Code of Canon Law: Table of Contents (look at 1104 and 1105). This source only confirms that it is allowed. I lack the energy to do a search on the conditions under which it would actually happen.

 

[twf]

Yes but even in this case the marriage would not yet be consummated. That still obviously requires a physical presence… and until that happens, the marriage, even if valid, could still be dissolved.