Is this an option in such a case? I read somewhere (I think in the ask an apologist forum) that, say a murderer, confesses his crime with a contrite heart, the priest cannot tell him to confess his crime again to the proper authorities. Rather his penance will probably be to secretly send financial support to the victim’s family or something. Has anyone heard this?
Yeah, I’m just wondering if the Seal played a part in the scandal at all. Was it a reason for any of the covering up?
I totally agree that their penance should be harsh. Is there a way to do this without revealing what the sin was? Would this still be considered cover-up?
Not in any of the cases that I’m aware of.
I don’t think this is true. I don’t think the priest can make him confess again to other people. As I said in an earlier post, I read somewhere (I think in the ask an apologist forum) that, say a murderer, confesses his crime with a contrite heart, the priest cannot tell him to confess his crime again to the proper authorities. Rather his penance will probably be to secretly send financial support to the victim’s family or something. Has anyone heard this?
You are right but there is one exception of sorts and that is when a person has falsely denounced a priest to his ecclesiastical superior with respect to a certain ecclesiastical crime called “solicitation.” In that case the penitent can be compelled to retract his false denunciation.
I don’t think the priest can require the penitent to do that, though he can suggest it. The priest certainly can assign as a penance that he pray for the victim.
Neither from the story. The story appears to say that the warden or prison officials had the Confession taped without the priest or penitent’s knowledge. Thanks and God Bless.
The State has absolutely no right to coerce priests to violate the seal of the confessional. The seal of the confessional is established with the authority of the Church and does not rely in any way upon the authority of the State. If a State in defiance of God were to try to coerce a priest to violate the seal, the priest would be obliged to not cooperate. As is stated in Church teaching and law, a priest is to respect the seal even at the cost of his own life.
The State has the obligation to protect children. Bishops proving that they cannot be trusted to protect our children brings the State in on the situation. If the State has to change the law which allows priests not to report confessional confessions of child abuse, because of the failing of Bishops to obey the law outside the confessional, it will be sad. No doubt a majority of our priests will end up in prison due to their devotion to God to refuse state law. All this could have been avoided had Bishops protected our children on information gained outside the confesssional.