|
Dear Mathibela —
The seal of Confession is absolute.
Now a priest may make as a condition
of penance — which is required
for forgiveness — that the
person turn themselves into the police,
but the priest cannot reveal the
contents of the Confession in a way
that links it to a specific person,
nor can they act on it. I have heard
it said that the following used to
be taught in seminaries — though
I'm not sure if it still is — that if
some miscreant, one who behaves
criminally or viciously; basically
a low-life, confessed that he
had poisoned the altar wine, the
priest would be bound to act as if
nothing had happened, and drink the
poisoned wine anyhow.
You said:
- What would be
the Church's moral arguments or reasons
for keeping the seal, if society may be harmed?
The Church cannot take any adversarial
position — or anything that
could be construed as adversarial — otherwise,
it would violate the trust the sinner
has in the Church to confess sins,
and make them reluctant to confess
sins in the future.
Imagine the difficulty of a person
with a sin which must be confessed
in order for them to be saved, but
they mistrust the priest because
the priest may betray them and turn
them in.
There has to be absolute trust there,
so the sinner is never hesitant to
bring his sins to the priest for
healing and forgiveness, so they
may receive salvation. To ensure
that trust, and to make it clear
to the faithful can confess their
sins without fear, the Church imposes
strict penalties on any priest who
violates the seal of the Confessional.
You said:
- Do you know of
any priest in recent history who
has been excommunicated for breaking
the seal?
I do not; perhaps one of my colleagues
does.
Eric Ewanco
|
