Posted on 08/18/2011 7:18:16 AM PDT by marshmallow
So why is the seal of confession inviolable? Why does the seal bind under such a grave obligation that the Church excommunicates any confessor who directly violates it? (See: The seal of confession: some basics)
There are two principal reasons why the priest must preserve the seal: the virtue of justice and the virtue of religion. The motive of justice is evident because the penitent, by the very fact of entering the confessional, or asking the priest to hear his confession (we’ll deal with “reconciliation rooms” another day) rightly expects that the priest will observe the seal. This is a contract entered into by the fact of the priest agreeing to hear a person’s confession. To mandate the violation of the seal is in effect to prohibit the celebration of the sacrament of Penance.
Much more grave than the obligation of justice towards the penitent is the obligation of religion due to the sacrament. The Catholic Encyclopaedia gives a brief explanation of the virtue of religion which essentially summarises the teaching of St Thomas Aquinas. (Summa Theologica 2a 2ae q.81) Religion is a moral virtue by which we give to God what is His due; it is, as St Thomas says, a part of justice. In the case of the sacrament of Penance, instituted by Christ, Fr Felix Cappello explains things well [my translation]:
By the very fact that Christ permitted, nay ordered, that all baptised sinners should use the sacrament and consequently make a secret confession, he granted an absolutely inviolable right, transcending the order of natural justice, to use this remedy. Therefore the knowledge which was their own before confession, after the communication made in confession, remains their own for every non-sacramental use, and that by a power altogether sacred, which no contrary human law can strike out, since every human law is of an inferior order: whence this right cannot be taken away or overridden by any means, or any pretext, or any motive.
The penitent confesses his sins to God through the priest. If the seal were to be broken under some circumstances, it would put people off the sacrament and thereby prevent them from receiving the grace that they need in order to repent and amend their lives. It would also, and far more importantly, obstruct the will of God for sinners to make use of the sacrament of Penance and thereby enjoy eternal life. The grace of the sacrament is absolutely necessary for anyone who commits a mortal sin. To mandate the violation of the seal is in effect to prohibit the practice of the Catholic faith. Some secular commentators have spoken of the seal of confession as being somehow a right or privilege of the priest. That is a preposterous misrepresentation: it is a sacred and inviolable duty that the priest must fulfil for the sake of the penitent and for the sake of God's will to redeem sinners.
A possibly misleading phrase in this context is where theologians say that the penitent is confessing his sins as if to God "ut Deo." (You can easily imagine secularists deriding the idea that the priest makes himself to be a god etc.) In truth, the penitent is confessing his sins before God. The priest acts as the minister of Christ in a sacred trust which he may not violate for any cause - precisely because he is not in fact God. By virtue of the penitent’s confession ut Deo, the priest absolves the penitent and, if mortal sin is involved, thereby readmits him to Holy Communion.
There will be more to follow on the sacrament of confession. As I mentioned in my previous post, this series is not intended as a guide for making a devout confession but rather as an introduction to some canonical and theological questions regarding the sacrament which have become important recently. (For a leaflet on how to make a good confession, see my parish website.)
I have been told that the threat in Ireland to introduce a law compelling priests to violate the seal of confession has been withdrawn, at least for the time being. Nevertheless, I will continue with these posts because I think that the Irish proposal will be picked up by other secularists and may pose a problem for us. Further posts will look at the proper place, time and vesture for hearing confessions, one or two more particular crimes in canon law, the question of jurisdiction and the much misused expression “Ecclesia supplet”, and, of course, what to do if the civil authority tries to compel a priest to break the seal.
If I only had a dollar for every time I misspelled on FR....
I know what it means.
Our salvation is conditional. Jesus guarantees his offer to us. It is up to us to accept it. We have the hope of Paul; but if we do not persevere until the end, we will fall short and will fail.
The three parables in Matthew 25 are illuminating.
I couldn't tell you what's in the nicene creed
Weeds cannot tell us what is in Roundup either.
I couldn't care less what's in the nicene creed
Somehow I doubt it.
I don't need any creed other the the words of God in the scriptures...
And the face of God in the mirror...
And you said you copied and pasted it right from the Original Greek... That's quite a whopper...
Nope. I posted an excerpt from Strong's which absolutely contradicted just about everything you said in your previous post. Why is it that you get just about everything so boneachingly wrong?
HaHaHa...You guys have to find your biblical truth all in one chapter
We understand that things which are related in certain ways are related in those certain ways but not in others. We also understand that others spend their time creating fantasies and calling them Christian.
That's not the way the Holy Spirit wrote the bible...
Do you have any more of this wisdom? I find it very entertaining.
Well certainly it's Christian
It is not and never has been.
People have been posting scripture after scripture after scripture showing you just that...
The problem with that statement is that they haven't
Never rode in a Limo...That's going to be fun...
Especially when the final destination is revealed...
We've already gained it
See?
We're sealed
You apparently have no idea what sealing is.
And that is Good News...
Not to we Christians who are trying to bring everyone to the Faith.
Elements of both keep popping up, dear bb. I wish that we could bring you out of the fogginess of what seems to pass for Christianity in some circles.
Gnostics know. Christians believe.
Hmm; trailer park Mormons...
You mean where Scofield tells us that the limo ride is irresistible?
How many times and in how many ways must God repeatedly tell you until you will believe him? Here's the good news: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Yes, in Him and not in some construct that someone may put together after gazing fondly into the mirror. The parable of the workers in the vineyard is very illuminating. It is those workers at the end of the day that are rewarded.
So who is being arrogant here? One who falls upon the throne of grace believing and trusting in God's promise that we shall not perish but HAVE eternal life or the one who says they throw themselves on the throne of God's mercy but refuse to accept what his mercy actually gives them?
If you read through the OSAS posts versus the Catholic posts, you will get a very good illustration of what true arrogance is.
Just think what could happen if we used this expenditure of energy for good...
Are you saying that your rejection of Catholicism is based upon convenience and appeal?
Not in an unrepentant state. Do none of the Gospel teachings matter to you guys?
No doubt you think that my six kids were conceived in a test tube...
Are you also going to blame God for rabies, gingivitis and toenail fungus?
Another failure.
The Venerable Bede is not African...
I would worry, but since you've been here for 72 months...that seems a bit histrionic.
“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” John 6:44
The Greek word translated “draw” is helkuo which means to drag (literally or figuratively).
Helkuo: to draw, drag off http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1670
The same word is used in other verses.
In John 21:6 where they are pulling a heavy net full of fish.
In John 8:10 where Peter is drawing his sword.
In Acts 16:19 where Paul and Silas being dragged into the marketplace before the rulers.
Was it “up to” the fish being dragged in, or the sword? How about Paul and Silas? Was it “up to them”? Knowing what the words mean is rather “illuminating” I would say.
That said the idea that this translation “can be be traced back....” etc., etc., is ludicrous. And as for added words, few translations have as many spurious texts included as the AV.
I know many of the KJV only people think it fell from heaven and that Jesus spoke a quaint form of English but surely something has been learned from the many hundreds of manuscripts found since 1611!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.