Recently, an influential priest answered the question, “if someone confesses murder, what do you do?” with “I forgive them – in the person of Christ.” Even if someone else is falsely charged (or convicted) of that murder! And the Seal of Confession prevents Fr David Michael Moses – as he explains – from reporting the murderer or even acting differently towards him afterwards.
I think his answer unhelpful. Especially on the heels of [Roman Catholic and other] sex-abuse scandals. And the secrecy and cover-ups.
Let’s be honest, the chances of someone confessing murder to Fr David Michael are low to zero. Far higher is the probability, in confession, of him encountering an abuser.
At the start of the video, David helpfully differentiates confession from other forms of confidentiality – distinctions I often explain myself. Ordinary confidentiality is kept just as other professionals do: unless there is harm to others or to oneself. I am as strongly in favour of the sacredness of the Seal of Confession as he is. Only recently, I critiqued the breaking of the Seal of Confession in the Conclave movie. In that case, as I wrote, “clergy colleagues interpreted it as a choice between two evils”. In the case of a murderer confessing and someone else falsely imprisoned or destined to be executed, some clergy may choose to break the Seal of Confession as the lesser of two evils. That is certainly not an option in the video.
Furthermore, I would be very strongly opposed to any removal of confessor-penitent privilege in law (it has been removed or reduced in some jurisdictions).
In the case of confession of murder or abuse, however, David Michael does not even suggest a much more obvious response. Absolution can be refused or deferred. This option is provided for in RC Canon Law (Canon 980).
The matter for sacramental confession is genuine sorrow for sin, desire to change one’s life, confession of the sins, intention to perform the penance assigned by the confessor. The confessor can pause the confession, deferring absolution, offering to go to the police with the person confessing – should the one confessing be unwilling to be accompanied to the police, this would demonstrate that there was no genuine sorrow or desire to change. In other words, the matter isn’t there for a valid confession!
RC Canon law is clear:
In hearing confessions the priest is to remember that he is equally a judge and a physician and has been established by God as a minister of divine justice and mercy, so that he has regard for the divine honor and the salvation of souls.
Withholding absolution, and opposing any tendency towards cheapening grace through sacramental confession, can point to Jesus’ words:
If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.
Going to the police with the person confessing grave sin (murder, abuse) is a far better way to preserve the sanctity of the Seal of Confession AND not have an innocent person imprisoned, executed, or continue the Christian appalling history of abuse.
What do you think?
Do follow:
The Liturgy Facebook Page
The Liturgy Twitter Profile
The Liturgy Instagram
and/or sign up to a not-too-often email
