Seal of the Confessional. Are there exceptions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zaccheus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I cant imagine seeing a movie subject and not having the self control to stop reading. I just dont understand the phenomenon. But it gets in the way of discussion.
 
Cruciferi said:
Honestly, I look up the movie synopsis before I watch it. Apparently, I’m a rare kind of person.
Click to expand...
I do the exact same thing, ever since I discovered themoviespoiler.com website.
Nothing annoys me more than to sit through an entire 2 hour or longer movie and hate the ending.
Also, if there’s going to be some grisly death of an animal or the lead actor’s best buddy, I want to know about it in advance so I can decide whether I still want to see the film.
 
Somewhat in this same vein … can a priest make the penance conditional on a person taking responsibility for their transgression civilly?

Joe Public goes to confession and confesses that he killed someone, can the priest make his absolution and penance dependant upon him taking civil responsibility for his actions?
 
We must both be rare birds. Spoilers really don’t bother me. If it is a good movie or book, and I was to learn of the “twist” in advance, I would still enjoy it.

I have read spoilers in articles before I have watched movies/shows being discussed and it did not bother me.
 
Here’s “I Confess full movie” on YouTube:

Alfred Hitchcock (who was Catholic!) made this movie upon learning about the invioability of the sacramental seal of confession. Montgomery Clift plays a Canadian priest who hears the confession of a murderer. Because he cannot reveal anything in confession, i.e. he cannot break the sacramental seal, he is actually accused of murder. There’s flashbacks in the movie so you might have a hard time following it at first. I won’t spoil the ending for you though. Hitchcock also had one or two priests as technical advisors on the film (check the credits).
 
GVG said:
Somewhat in this same vein … can a priest make the penance conditional on a person taking responsibility for their transgression civilly?

Joe Public goes to confession and confesses that he killed someone, can the priest make his absolution and penance dependant upon him taking civil responsibility for his actions?
Click to expand...
I do not believe the Priest can make absolution conditional on the penitent revealing their sins to another party. Same goes for their penance.

The Priest may tell the penitent is to make restitution somehow for damages done, but he cannot require penitent to reveal themselves. He can suggest it, but he cannot require a person to reveal their sins publicly.

However, if a penitent made a public false accusation, for example, of sexual abuse against a local elected official, and confessed to calumny, in my opinion it would be part of the general purpose of amendment to retract their false claims if they had not done so yet and do whatever is possible to restore the reputation of the wronged. That is just an example.
 
Last edited:
Birds of a feather… 😉 I read the full synopsis on the TCM website.
 
GVG said:
Somewhat in this same vein … can a priest make the penance conditional on a person taking responsibility for their transgression civilly?

Joe Public goes to confession and confesses that he killed someone, can the priest make his absolution and penance dependant upon him taking civil responsibility for his actions?
Click to expand...
No, the priest can’t impose any penance that requires the penitent to turn themselves in. He cannot tell the penitent he must do so. However, if the priest does not feel the penitent is actually repentent he can withhold absolution.

To put it another way, a priest cannot use his authority to tell the penitent that he or she must break the seal.
 
Last edited:
YONYtheTONY said:
What I am trying to say is that we COULD change if we tried. it is not that hard to do.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but this is a fundamental Church teaching that does not change.
There are a lot of good reasons for the seal, one being that if a penitent was afraid the priest would tell others what he did, the penitent would probably hold some sins back. Then he might die in mortal sin and go to Hell.

I have no idea why you think the Church just changes its teachings because you think it’s a good idea. The Church isn’t a democracy. People don’t vote on what the teachings should be, and again, you don’t get a say. You are simply making yourself look foolish here.
 
YONYtheTONY said:
But there should be exceptions. Smaller crimes are less of a deal than murders and the sex scandal.
Click to expand...
If murder can be reported, then there’s no reason petty theft can’t. Because compared to murder, it’s “small”. They’ll only get a slap on the wrist compared to prison time, so there’s hardly any harm.

It is not the priest’s business to reveal what a penitent confesses in confession. Those sins that he hears are for God, and the priest is His agent. The priest has no right to use that information as he pleases.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top