SSPX on abuse, the seal of the confessional and confidentiality

  • Thread starter Thread starter FiveLinden
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FiveLinden

Guest
I started another thread on the SSPX v Church Militant issue and don’t want to derail that so I have posted this as a separate thread. I hope that is the right thing to do.

I had thought that the Church holds the seal of the confessional as absolutely inviolate but that it accepted civil law in relation to reporting abuse identified outside the confessional. The SSPX, replying to allegations from Church Militant posted this at the weekend on their US site. This seems at odds with what I have understood the Church (and I would have thought) the SSPX position to be. (Because I’m talking about the issue not the alleged incident, I have deleted the names):

Fr. [name] vehemently denies the reported allegations of Mr. [name] concerning his supposed advice not to report abuse.

Contrary to accusations made on April 22, 2020 by the website Church Militant , the clergy-penitent privilege most certainly does apply to discussions in the course of ministry outside the confessional, and, more crucially, the obligation of professional secrecy applies in conscience to such “internal non-sacramental forum” conversations. If the other party to the conversation releases Fr. [name] from this secrecy, he will provide his side of how the conversation actually developed and the advice he gave. Until then, Mr. [name]’s accusation places Fr. [name] in an impossible position.
 
From my understanding:

The clergy-penitent privilege is a general obligation of confidentiality that applies to all interactions - even outside the confessional - where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. For example, during various forms of counselling, such as spiritual and marital.

This somewhat overlaps with a general professional regard for privacy and secrecy wherever one receives personal, identifiable information.

The seal of the confessional is the specific inviolable obligation of confidentiality placed upon the sacrament.
 
Bithynian said:
The clergy-penitent privilege is a general obligation of confidentiality that applies to all interactions - even outside the confessional - where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. For example, during various forms of counselling, such as spiritual and marital.
Click to expand...
This would be generally true in civil law (where the privilege exists), although a number of jurisdictions have abolished marital privilege. However, in Canon Law there’s an obligation of confidentiality attached to what’s called the internal forum which encompasses the sacrament of penance (which is itself additionally protected by the seal). However, the internal forum also applies outside of the sacramental context, for example in the context of spiritual direction and, just as for confession, nothing said in spiritual direction (for example) can be repeated or used to the detriment of the one it came from. This is why seminary spiritual directors can never be consulted about a decision to ask a seminarian to leave or to admit them to orders.
 
InThePew said:
in Canon Law there’s an obligation of confidentiality attached to what’s called the internal forum which encompasses the sacrament of penance (which is itself additionally protected by the seal)
Click to expand...
I’m no canon lawyer and could not find this. Please may we have a reference?
 
Yes; vague I know but basically what is says in 130 is the external and internal forums are distinct and what goes on in the internal forum isn’t public. The relevant commentary from Beal, explains it a bit.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top