Seal of confession for Penitent

[OutinChgoburbs]

You’re putting us on, right? No one is foolish enough to ask this question, are they?

Not just in Texas. Somebody got their videocam yanked out of their hand as their child confessed out in “face to face” format by the altar this year (there were 8 priests and not enough confessionals or reconciliation rooms). I mean, come on!

 

[MusicMan]

I’ve given this some thought. Let 'em videotape their child’s first confession. The person taping is bound by the seal of the confessional under Canon 983.2 (please see above) because by video taping, they have “come to a knowledge of sins from a confession.” The moment they show the video tape, they are automatically ex communicated from the Church for breaking the seal of the confession.

There. That’s why it’s wrong, people!

 

[dulcissima]

Even if the seal of confession does not apply to the penitent, I think it is still wise to extend some courtesy to your confessor and not make a practice of telling everyone what he advised you. He is not able to clarify if you misrepresent him. He can’t discuss it period. I think it is one thing to discuss your confession here, but quite another to discuss it among people who know you, your parish, or your confessor.

 

[puzzleannie]

you have never seen videotaping a child’s first confession allowed, because it is not allowed, you have seen parents breaking the rules and getting away with it.

now do you see why DREs get this way?

 

[CuriousInIL]

you have never seen videotaping a child’s first confession allowed, because it is not allowed, you have seen parents breaking the rules and getting away with it.

now do you see why DREs get this way?

OK. A question and a statement.

Question, why is it not allowed?

Statement, when I have seen it, the video being obtained is no more or less than what can be seen/heard by the folks that are in the church at the time. In this parish, there is an about-30 minute group service and then the children individually confess to one of 4 or 5 priests. One uses the reconciliation room and the other 3 or 4 set up at various “corners” of the Worship Space (it is hard to have corners in a circle) for face-to-face. Others waiting stand in lines, perhaps 20-30 feet away so that nothing is overheard (this is aided by fairly loud background music). Once all have confessed (also including parents for the most part) there is a short, 5minute or so, closing.

The video that I have seen was shot from far back in the Worship Space, perhaps 150-200 feet from the closest priest so that it had an “overview” of all that was going on throughout and, as I said, displays less than what can be perceived visually during the ceremony.

So, again my question, why is the video such an issue and not allowed?

Also, can you cite Canon Law or a GIRM section (or other authoritative document) that I could share with DRE or other PTB to stop this if it is banned? (I know that just telling them puzzleannie said this is not enough.)

 

[CuriousInIL]

Also, while I do not know for sure, my guess is that the video was “allowed” because this parish “allows” many things such as immodestly dressed liturgical dancers, kazoos used by the youth choir during mass, first communion two years before reconciliation, etc.

 

[Marilena]

ok,hypothetical question: let me ask a different question, but related to this thread.

a man commits a bank robbery. he has a guilty conscience. he goes to the priest for confession.he tells father everything he did. he gets absolved.

the police know he is a suspect in the robbery. someone at church who has seen the robber enter the confessional tells the police. the police get a warrant to talk with the priest.

the priest refuses to do so. the man gets arrested for the crime. the district attorney subpeonas the priest and wants him to testify against the defendent.

question is, does the priest end up going to jail for not testifying? can they force the priest to testify? does he have to divulge the confession on the stand if he is subpeonied?
what happens to the priest if he refuses to answer the lawyers?

 

[CuriousInIL]

ok,hypothetical question: let me ask a different question, but related to this thread.

a man commits a bank robbery. he has a guilty conscience. he goes to the priest for confession.he tells father everything he did. he gets absolved.

the police know he is a suspect in the robbery. someone at church who has seen the robber enter the confessional tells the police. the police get a warrant to talk with the priest.

the priest refuses to do so. the man gets arrested for the crime. the district attorney subpeonas the priest and wants him to testify against the defendent.

question is, does the priest end up going to jail for not testifying? can they force the priest to testify? does he have to divulge the confession on the stand if he is subpeonied?
what happens to the priest if he refuses to answer the lawyers?

In the United States, no, no, no, and nothing. The priest-penitent privilege protects the communication. Often, however, there are serious questions about whether there was a priest-penitent relationship or whether it was only a non-privileged advisor-advisee relationship. It is the nature of what was sought that is usually critical. Also, in some states, it is not entirely clear who holds the privilege and whether it survives the death of the penitent.

 

[puzzleannie]

might I suggest, since the thread has been effectively hijacked by my side comment, that those with questions about the theology of the sacrament of penance, particularly its confidential and private nature between penitent and priest, find links to that teaching, so you will understand why interfering with the child’s first experience of the sacrament by something so intrusive and disruptive of privacy is bad theologically, pedagogically and spiritually.

A child’s sacramental initiation is not staged as a photo op for proud parents.

 

[CuriousInIL]

might I suggest, since the thread has been effectively hijacked by my side comment, that those with questions about the theology of the sacrament of penance, particularly its confidential and private nature between penitent and priest, find links to that teaching, so you will understand why interfering with the child’s first experience of the sacrament by something so intrusive and disruptive of privacy is bad theologically, pedagogically and spiritually.

A child’s sacramental initiation is not staged as a photo op for proud parents.

No, you may not suggest that. Oh, OK, if you are going to go and make sense and all.

 

[Marilena]

In the United States, no, no, no, and nothing. The priest-penitent privilege protects the communication. Often, however, there are serious questions about whether there was a priest-penitent relationship or whether it was only a non-privileged advisor-advisee relationship. It is the nature of what was sought that is usually critical. Also, in some states, it is not entirely clear who holds the privilege and whether it survives the death of the penitent.

my question remains unanswered. i was referring to what extent can the law go to make the priest testify against the robber?

 

[CuriousInIL]

my question remains unanswered. i was referring to what extent can the law go to make the priest testify against the robber?

Sorry if I didn’t cover that before, there is NO ability to make the priest testify in the US if the disclosure was during priest-penitent communications.

 

[Marilena]

Sorry if I didn’t cover that before, there is NO ability to make the priest testify in the US if the disclosure was during priest-penitent communications.

if the priest is subpeonead he has to testify correct? its against the law for anyone to not answer the summons right?

 

[CuriousInIL]

if the priest is subpeonead he has to testify correct? its against the law for anyone to not answer the summons right?

Counsel for the priest and/or the penitent/hypothetical defendant would ask the court to “quash” (or as we like to say informally, squash) the subpoena. If the court agreed, then no testimony would be needed. But, it is true that no one should just ignore a summons or subpoena. That’s a very bad idea.

 

[thistle]

Counsel for the priest and/or the penitent/hypothetical defendant would ask the court to “quash” (or as we like to say informally, squash) the subpoena. If the court agreed, then no testimony would be needed. But, it is true that no one should just ignore a summons or subpoena. That’s a very bad idea.

Even if the summons is not quashed and a priest has to appear in court he will never testify. The Seal of Confession does not allow it and the priest will go to jail rather than break it.

 

[CuriousInIL]

Even if the summons is not quashed and a priest has to appear in court he will never testify. The Seal of Confession does not allow it and the priest will go to jail rather than break it.

But there is no need for the priest to go to jail as the law respects the priest-penitent privilege if invoked properly.

 

[Evan]

This last week I was told about the Seal of Confession.

Many people think the Church requires the children to go to confession before first communion.

Not true. The Church requires that they be given instruction on confession, and that they be afforded every oppertunity to recieve the sacrament before first communion.

The reason the Church cannot require confession is because the priest cannot even say whether or not someone came to him for confession! To admit someone came, would break the Seal of Confession!

So the church does not record that you have ever gone to confession. And if they do not/can not record it they can not require it!

The Seal CANNOT be broken!

 

[thistle]

This last week I was told about the Seal of Confession.

Many people think the Church requires the children to go to confession before first communion.

Not true. The Church requires that they be given instruction on confession, and that they be afforded every oppertunity to recieve the sacrament before first communion.

The reason the Church cannot require confession is because the priest cannot even say whether or not someone came to him for confession! To admit someone came, would break the Seal of Confession!
**
So the church does not record that you have ever gone to confession**. And if they do not/can not record it they can not require it!

The Seal CANNOT be broken!

That is not quite correct. I was a convert from the Methodist Church going through the RCIA program. All of us who became Catholic received certificates showing that we made our first Confession.

 

[porthos11]

But there is no need for the priest to go to jail as the law respects the priest-penitent privilege if invoked properly.

Yes, but if the law decides not to, then the priest would rather go to jail. Heck, priests have died protecting the seal of the confessional.

No priest may break the seal, even to save a life or prevent a death.

 

[valient_Lucy]

Parents have no right to give kids the 3rd degree about their confession, and no, because it comes up every year, you may not videotape your child’s first confession.

Are there really parents who are sick enough to do that?