How far does confidentiality extend itself in the confession booth?

Clint,
Thank you for your kind post as moderator and your caution against the mud-slinging.

To All,
It is unfair and illogical to focus on the secrecy of the Sacrament of Penance in examining the problem of pederast priests. There are many ways that pederast priests have been identified outside the confessional. So the thread of this topic starts off on a wrong premise: that pederast priests are allowed to get away with their sins which are hidden in the confessional. Gotta tell you, folks, that premise just doesn't stand.

Pederast priests have been identified by victims of their abuse, by suspicious family members and by suspicious parish members and, very likely, by other priests. The seal of the confessional did not protect them from being identified.

Most of these cases come from 40 to 25 years ago.
What was the understanding in our society during those years in relationship to this problem?

Here is a quote from an Archbishop, "From what I have learned over the years, I now recognize that church leaders 20 years ago, still rather unfamiliar with the nature of child abuse, often dealt with this matter as a moral problem." This same Archbishop goes on to say, "I have now served as a diocesean bishop for nearly fifteen years. There is no matter which has consumed more of my time and energy and prayer than this one..."
He goes on to relate what he has learned about this problem. I am presenting the facts from his article in a brief form.

A first time offender was treated according to the methods that any sinner with a moral problem would be treated, and given another chance -- which all seemed in accord with Gospel teaching. When this failed, the offender was sent to a treatment center. After treatment, the offender was sent back to the bishop and recommended for re-assignment in a new place. If the bishop wondered about re-assigning the offender, he was told it was necessary for the offender's welfare. And no attention was paid to the "tragic effects" on the victims.

That was the standard of people in that period of time, including the experts in the treatment centers.

It wasn't until the last 10 to 15 years that Church officials have come to understand, that even with treatment, those who abuse children can never again be allowed to hold positions of trust involving children.

This Archbishop has expressed his "deep regret for the scandal of child abuse in the Church" He set up a task force, which included some victims of such abuse from a priest. A plan to deal with the problem has been put into effect. And the Archbishop has asked forgiveness of those who have suffered abuse from any personnel of his diocese.

He is getting some flack over the plan because it is both costly and time consuming. It requires a background check on every person in the diocese who serves in a position of trust in regard to children and youth. There are also stringent educational requirements to help prevent any such occurences in the future.

I hope this corrects some of the misconceptions about this problem being hidden behind the seal of the confessional.

Pauline

 

I wonder at the strong condemnations against Catholic priests over this problem and the lack of recognition that the problem is just as prevalent among Protestant pastors and youth workers.

Why is this? Is it because the media tends to focus on Catholic priests too?

Do Protestants sweep their similiar problems under a rug of secrecy? A local pastor said there have been four such cases of sexual sins among Protestants in our county in recent years. And that not one of them has been reported publicly.

Well, let's face it -- and it is evident from the favored topics on this board -- it's alot more fun to tackle the Catholics.

Well, Catholics can take it -- and hopefully, take it in charity too -- because of the graces we receive from the Sacrament of Penance and from the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

In Christ's love to all of you,
Pauline

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

Please edeavor to be accurate in your posts, Jeanie.

I said I was leaving the Lutheran board to become Muslim. I never said I actually made a Shahadah (the Muslim profession of faith). I did intend to do so. Through the Grace of God I was spared from making that huge mistake. I can credit my many good friends and the loving council of many posters on a Catholic Board I frequent and a well place song of all things with bringing my heart and my head back to dead center.

In April my husband and I will join our RCIA class with the Rite of Welcoming. We will have meetings in April, May and June - break for the summer and then the RCIA class will pick up again in September. With God's blessings we will be received into the Roman Catholic Church at Easter Vigil 2003.

This story isn't new to others here who post with me at a board dedicated to Catholics and Catholic Converts. One that Grant visits as well.

My story is much better known to them than to you Jeanie. I have been posting on the Catholic board for almost 3 years (with a break of about 8 months) under the name Carole or my initials CK. It has been there that I have questioned my Lutheran upbringing in contrast to the truth I have found in the Catholic Church.

Again, you are entitled to your own opinion. You are not, however, entitled to call into question my theology or my Christianity on a public board.

It would likely be best for both of us and for the welfare of this board if we left off board hostilities where they belong - off board.

Peace be with you,

Carole

 

I would like to broaden the discussion slightly and get away from the endless Protestant vs. Catholic debate. Protestants pastors have people come confess to us and ask for prayer and if that person confesses to us they committed a crime and we fail to report it we can be dragged it as a accomplice. The same person could go confess this to a lawyer and the lawyer is protected by law. Is not this a contradiction? Should not a pastor have the same confidentiality as a lawyer?

Now I would encourage that person that if they have committed a crime and repented to turn themselves in to the Law but should we or should we not turn this person in to the police or should we have the same protection as Lawyers? Is not this a case of separation of Church and state? I have mixed feelings in this day when the government continues to try to get itself in Church activities.

 

Hi Kiffin,

I'm certain that Protestant pastors have the same protection for statements made in confidence to a pastor while he is acting in that capacity.

Do you remember O.J. Simpson's loud jail-house confession to his pastor? Can't remember his name at the moment but he was a former NFL player. OJ's statement, heard by many, could not be used against him.

Matter of fact a friend recently sent me a news-clipping about a lawsuit and judgement against a pastor who broke his "seal".

Grace and peace,
Uncle Ray

 

Kiffin,
This is a complicated question, isn't it? We probably all agree that confidentiality is essential in the pastor-client relationship. It is after that we get into disagreements.

In my state, Oregon, in the last few years, there was a case of prison officials secretly taping the confession of an inmate to a Catholic priest. The officials intended to use it as evidence against the inmate. The Catholic Church leadership in our area protested vigorously. And the decision was made that prison officials could not use it as evidence. If I remember correctly, at that time, reference was also made to the fact that Protestant pastors would be treated the same. I'm sorry I don't have any documentation on that for you. The case was widely reported so documentation could be obtained.

I consider our Lord very wise in protecting the confessions of sinners by the seal of Confession in the Catholic Church. Yes, I expect several to jump on that and say that the Lord didn't do it, that the Catholic Church did. But I stand on my statement, the Lord did establish the Sacraments, including the Sacrament of Penance. And He did lead the Catholic Church in seeing the necessity of the seal of secrecy. So even though it gets complicated for us humans, it works. The person in the confessional is confessing to God. The presence of that priest is in persona Christi. Christ is not going to tell others about the sins confessed to Him there, so in Christ's stead, the priest cannot tell either.

BTW, have any of you seen I Confess, an Alfred Hitchcock movie? It is instructive, as well as interesting, concerning the subject of confession of a murder to a Catholic priest who is then accused himself of being the murderer.

Up above someone posted that the Catholic Church can decide, and has in one case decided, to break the seal of confession. But that could only be done IF it was never an actual sacramental confession. And the Church has ways of knowing whether it was or not, depending upon the circumstances in which it took place. If it had been an actual sacramental confession, the Church does not have the authority to break the seal of secrecy.

Protestant seem to think the Catholic Church has the authority to change whatever she wishes of our teachings and practices. That is not true. The Church has been given those teachings and practices by our Lord. She has authority over certain ones which are disciplines (changeable), she has no authority over the others, except to use and pass them on as our Lord gave them to her. Our Lord decided they will be as they are and so they must remain.

Pauline

[ March 06, 2002, 03:17 PM: Message edited by: Pauline ]

 

Celibacy, being a discipline. Amen.

 

Dojo,
Yes, celibacy being a discipline.
But ordination of women priests being an example of something that is not a discipline.

I learned that recently about the ordination of women priests after downloading and studying the key documents on the subject.

The ban on the ordination of women as priests is part of the deposit of faith, part of sacred Tradition and the Church has no authority to change it. Therefore, every faithful Catholic is required to accept that ban or he ruptures his relationship with the Catholic Church.

It is an interesting study. If anyone want to pursue it, let me know and I'll provide the links where I found the documentation.

In Christ,
Pauline

[ March 06, 2002, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: Pauline ]

 

Hi Mr. Curtis,

You wrote, "The vow of celibacy is unscriptual. If you can prove otherwise, please do so, using scripture only.

Please allow me to do just that.

In the 19th Chapter of Matthew's Gospel, we read the discples' response to Jesus' emphatic abolition of Moses' Deuteronomic concession of divorce:

v.10 - "The disciples said to him, 'If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.'"

Jesus then goes on to stress the option to marriage concerning the Kingdom of Heaven:

v.11 - "But he said to them, 'Not all men can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it.'"

Eunuchs were castrated men who were placed in charge of the King's harem.

We see an example of this in Est 2:3 -

"And let the king appoint officers in all the provinces of his kingdom to gather all the beautiful young virgins to the harem in Susa the capital, under custody of Hegai the king's eunuch who is in charge of the women; let their ointments be given them."

Jesus, who has only one bride, tells us that "there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven". In other words, some ministers are to renounce marriage for the sake of caring for the Bride of Christ, which is the Church.

And, St. Paul actually stresses that celibacy is a higher good than marriage in 1 Cor 7:

Paul begins in v.7 by saying that he wishes all were celibate as he is, "I wish that all were as I myself am."

Paul's advice to the single and the married in v.27 again stresses his opinion, "Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage."

And, we read of his reasons in v.32-38:

"I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord. If any one thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry -- it is no sin. But whoever is firmly established in his heart, being under no necessity but having his desire under control, and has determined this in his heart, to keep her as his betrothed, he will do well. So that he who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better."

I have give you two Scriptural examples:

1. Jesus on celibate Christian ministers.
2. Paul on celibacy in general.

God bless,

Carson

 

Hi Carson.

1Timothy 3:1-7 describes to me what the qualifications for the office of bishop in a church.(Bishop, elder, deacon, pastor)

I know we will go around & around on this & soon somebody will come in & start insulting one of us for stubbornly holding onto our views. But that isn't how I want this to go. The original question, as I saw it, is if people should be held legally responsible for crimes confessed to a priest. I think they should. Up here in Massachusetts this is a pretty heated issue, & I believe the tuition in some of our Catholic Grade Schools will increase due to the Bishop's fund being depleted in the settlement agreed to by Cardinal Law. It is a pretty sad state of affairs. But it should have been dealt with a long time ago. It isn't an issue of us bashing the RCC. This is a very catholic area, remember, the Kennedy's are from here. (Although I don't expect mant RCC members to stick up for them.)

Again, Carson, I don't wish to get into a point to point debate over the Catholic-Baptist thing with you. I do have respect for you, & how much you have studied this, & how much you seem to care about people in general.

 

Clint the Moderator:

THANK YOU. 'Somebody' needs to step up and 'moderate' in a leadership capacity, and I think you did just that. I would have posted on this thread, but I was in shock over the anger and tone. Best to stay out sometimes.

God Bless

-Chuck

 

Mr. Curtis,

Please go back to page four and read my response to these verses. Even if you don't interpret that the same way, that is the Catholic position, and it does make sense. Being married to one wife means don't be divorced. It doesn't command marriage, but if there is marriage, that one is not to divorce/remarry. Titus speaks of the same thing, except he leaves off the marriage bit.

 

"One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity,(for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)" 1Timothy 3:4&5

 

You didn't bother to read my post, did you? Celibacy is a discipline. I've already said that like three times. There are married priests, because there are exceptions to this "rule," because it's merely a discipline. If a "bishop" has children, should he not care for them? All these points are about being able to rule your own house. That can be your elderly mother if the situation calls for it. Take care of your house so that you can take care of the house of God. Please read my post.

 

Don't Priests also claim to have the authority to tell you what you must to before you are forgiven? Like "say 10 Hail Marys" or something like that. I know my sister had to call my dad and tell him how much he meant to her, because her preist told her to during confession.

Why then doesn't the Priest just say, "ok, now go and turn yourself into the authorities and all will be forgiven?"

Or do I misunderstand what all the Hail Mary's are supposed to be for?

Please don't get into a long explanation, I just want the simple answer. I personally believe the Bible has all the explanation we need, of course, like many Catholic traditions, it isn't disucssed in there.

~Lorelei

 

Hi Lorelei,

The quickest answer I can give you is that a priest can counsel someone to go and turn themselves in for a crime, and no doubt would recommend the confessor do just that in most cases. Of course that would not negate the usefulness of penitential prayers.

As for your comment that "...like many Catholic traditions, it isn't discussed there (the Bible)", I have to point out that, if you are talking about the act of confessing our sins not being in the Bible, I would refer you to my earlier posts on this thread.

God Bless.

IOA,
Deacon's Son

[ March 07, 2002, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: Deacon's Son ]

 

Hi all,

In regards to the topic of this thread, I thought I would post a selection from the Catechism of the Catholic Church that deals precisely with the Church's view of the seal of the confessional.

I'm also posting another selection that deals with the penance given by priests for those that are curious.

" Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons, the Church declares that every priest who hears confessions is bound under very severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him. He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents' lives. This secret, which admits of no exceptions, is called the 'sacramental seal,' because what the penitent has made known to the priest remains 'sealed' by the sacrament. " ( CCC 1467 ).

" The penance the confessor imposes must take into account the penitent's personal situation and must seek his spiritual good. It must correspond as far as possible with the gravity and nature of the sins committed. It can consist of prayer, an offering, works of mercy, service of neighbor, voluntary self-denial, sacrifices, and above all the patient acceptance of the cross we must bear. Such penances help configure us to Christ, who alone expiated our sins once for all. They allow us to become co-heirs with the risen Christ, 'provided we suffer with him.' " ( CCC 1460 ).

I hope this is helpful in getting a clearer glimpse of the "official" Church position.

God Bless.

IOA,
Deacon's Son

 

I belive you are talking about Penance. Penance should not be viewed as a punishment. While are sins are COMPLETELY forgiven by God, the hurt that we caused or were a part of may still remain on earth. If you had a huge argument with someone, and you sincerely repent before God, obviously he will provide you with that forgiveness. However, that bond between you and this person may still be severed. Penance is trying to make things right again with others or ourselves. Forgiveness turns us from sin, and Penance strives to help keep us on that path. Penance can be to read a Psalm or other Bible passage, to do the Stations of the Cross (reflect on the crucifiction of Christ), or say prayers. In big circumstances, it can involve reconciling with the person whom you've hurt. It's all about healing and sealing the wounds.

[ March 07, 2002, 03:01 PM: Message edited by: DojoGrant ]

 

To dojo Grant:

I have read your post. I just disagree. I don't believe the RCC's Priests are in the will of God. And I'm not likely to change my mind.

 

Hi Lorelei,

You asked, Don't Priests also claim to have the authority to tell you what you must to before you are forgiven?"

What this is.. is called "penance"; it's a work to be performed that helps repair the damage (this has nothing to do w/ forgiveness) that your sin caused. This is a recommendation by the priest, and, usually, the penance is never quite large enough to even begin to repair the structures of sin (the social effects, both visible and invisible in the body of Christ) that have formed from such sin.

Penance, today, is given immediatley before absolution. At the moment of absolution, all mortal sin is forgiven and the sinner, if without grace, is reinstated with supernatural grace, regardless of whether he/she performs the act of penance.

In the early Church, it was different. If you, let's say, had an abortion, then you would approach the bishop, who would then assign 10 years of public penance. After these 10 years of public penance, you would be reconciled to the Church by the bishop, who would administer the sacrament of penance.

God bless,

Carson

[ March 08, 2002, 01:05 AM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]