In Quodlibet 1 we quoted the Church's Code of Canon Law, which says:
"The sacramental seal is inviolable. Accordingly, it is absolutely wrong for a confessor in any way to betray the penitent, for any reason whatsoever, whether by word or in any other fashion." (canon 983 §1)
So there is indeed no way that a priest can tell the police about a penitent's confession, no matter how serious the crime. In fact, if the priest were to do so, he would automatically be excommunicated (canon 1388 §1). The Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us that this secrecy "admits of no exceptions" (para. 1467) and that it "cannot be violated under any pretext" (para. 2490). Nor can the priest use information he learns from confession to the penitent's detriment (canon 984 §1).
The priest can, however, use what he has learned from confession to prevent harm, provided he doesn't betray the penitent or use the knowledge he has gained to the penitent's detriment. The classic example is the penitent who has confessed to poisoning the cruet of wine that the priest is about to use for Mass. In such a case the priest can safely dispose of the poisoned wine and use fresh wine instead, without danger of betraying the penitent or to the penitent's detriment.
Similarly, there might be ways that a priest could seek to avoid harm being done by someone who has confessed to being a murderer/rapist/abuser of children: for example, by taking special care not to leave vulnerable people alone with such a person. But the priest must always remember that the seal of confession is inviolable. He may never disclose or even hint at what has been confessed to him.
The priest hearing a confession has a vitally important responsibility to help the penitent towards healing from his sin. That would include helping the penitent realise the steps he needs to take to stop sinning and to avoid the "occasions of sin", those situations where the penitent might not be strong enough to resist temptation. With the sort of sins that the questioner mentions, one possible way for the penitent to avoid future occasions of sin and obtain the psychological help he may need would be to hand himself over to the police. It might be appropriate for the priest to suggest this. Although the priest cannot make it a condition for absolution (cf. canon 980), a truly contrite penitent will certainly want to take the steps necessary to avoid sin and the danger that others might come to harm in the future.
So while the answer to the question is that the priest may never reveal what has been confessed to him under any circumstances, he nevertheless has a crucial role in seeking to avoid harm being done.
The answer to this question is provided by Fr. Ben Earl, a canon lawyer, who teaches at Blackfriars, Oxford, and is the Provincal Bursar of the Province.
This is very interesting, many thanks for this.
ReplyDeleteI suppose it occurs to me that it might still be open to the priest to, in effect, choose excommunication by speaking to, say, the police about a confession that he has heard - in effect choosing to make a sacrifice of their priestly identity for the sake of others.
Sacrifice for the sake of others stands at the centre of the Christian faith; but that sacrifice has to be a free offering, not a penalty justly incurred. Our Lord's sacrificial death on the cross was the death of an innocent victim; a priest excommunicated for directly and deliberately violating the trust inherent in the priestly ministry of the confessional is justly punished for a crime he himself commits. The two are not comparable.
ReplyDeleteI suppose there might be a temptation in some serious cases, e.g. if a priest saw a man unjustly sentenced to death for crimes he did not commit.
ReplyDeleteWe are all, at times, in situations where we choose to do the wrong thing for what we think (at the time)is a good or at least a justifiable reason. This is a dangerous way of thinking.
Thank you for this posting. I had not realised how difficult it must be sometimes to hear confessions. One is always preoccupied with the confessing bit, feeling ashamed and a bit anxious about the priest's response (I know, but we're human!) I had never thought of the possible predicaments on the other side of the grille.
Dear Father Ben,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your words, they have given me much to think about.
Breaking the seal of the confessional is a terrible crime and is justly punished by excommunication – that this is correct seems very clear to me.
But saying that breaking the seal of the confessional is justly punished by excommunication isn’t quite the same, surely, as saying that no case could be conceived in which committing this - undoubtedly very grave - crime were not the lesser of two evils?
For instance - to let, by inaction, a child be killed (and here I’m using, I accept, the most emotive case for rhetorical effect) this seems to me to be clearly the greater crime.
To break the seal of the confessional even in a case like this would rightly necessitate the excommunication of the priest concerned - to apply any other penalty would risk lessening the trust that the faithful must have in the confessional. But surely, to take direct steps to save the life of a child, acting with this alone as one’s aim - even with the full knowledge that the act must of necessity lead to one’s excommunication – surely this would be an ethical (by which I mean, I hope, ‘Christ-like’) act?
In taking this terrible step, might the priest not in this case perhaps be following Christ ‘outside the camp’ (as I think it says near the end of Paul’s letter to the Hebrews)?
Sincerely,
Pete Owen
In replying to Pete Owen. Surely this would be a case of choosing to do the wrong thing for a good reason?
ReplyDeleteWhen a person confesses to a priest, he is confessing to God through the Church's representative, he is not confessing to the person of the priest, but to Christ's and the Church's representative. Therefore, in my opinion, the priest would be widely over-stepping his duty and following a "false god" if he did act in this way.
The situation Pete Owen describes is the nightmare scenario, but the priest has to hang on to the law of the church. That is our safeguard, even though it might seem dificult at times.