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.
How ridiculous to assign blame to a whole group for the anonymous actions of one person, who may not even be part of the *group*, as the RM suggested in his last comment.
The RM suggested that it wasn’t even a RF regular who did it, and yet, here we all are to blame.
Sheesh......
Some people need to chill out more.
The only tarring is done by the tarrer.
Oh yeah? Prove it.
Oh yeah. Also THANKS FOR THE PING WHEN MENTIONING ME BY NAME AND ACCUSING ME OF SOMETHING.
There, fixed it.
(I knew it was just an oversight on your part)
We have no more insight that the average born again Christian who likes to spend a little time in the scriptures to find truth...
But I'll agree with you; man's words and man's reason along with man's wisdom is nothing in light of the word of God...
ROFLMAO! Seriously!
If I AM mistaken, it isn't the first time, won't be the last.
1 Corinthians 2
12Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. 13And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.
14The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 16 “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
Wasn't me...I didn't think of it quick enough...
“Are you trying to teach the bible ???”
Now that’s a silly question.
I posted a simple and direct Scriptural quote with no other comment and no other intention except that which the Scripture conveys.
They can read it but they don’t get it...
You have a problem with the Good News? And disobedience of not following commands?In my carnal and philosophical way, when I see a pronoun, I look for its antecedent.
Mark 16:15 He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation".
I find that the antecedent, the noun to which the pronoun refers, is the "eleven". Of course you are not saying you are one of the eleven. So was it given to you? How does a command given to the eleven put you under obedience?Mark 16:14-15
King James Version14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Finding the culprit by the process of elimination. That’s what Catholics keep doing to find out the ID of the RM.
Nice of you to accommodate her but I’m not playing.
Abstinence from meat on Friday is not a teaching. Nothing was "taught" about it then, and nothing is taught about it now.
You're welcome. I always appreciate it, too.
Then why did Judith Anne mention performing a penance if her mother made meat on Friday and she ate it, not wanting to offend her? What’s a penance if it’s not based on a teaching?
Believe it or not, it’s possible I misspoke. My only excuse is that my vocabulary is insufficient.
When did I mention you by name and not ping you?
Where did I accuse you of something and not ping you?
Please show me the posts.
It is not a teaching. As such it doesn't reallypertain to the "magisterium" which is the teaching function of the Church.
Rather than a teaching, is a devotional practice, a kind of gentle fast.
And Judith Anne described not an accidental eating of meat but a deliberate act of charity toward those who, not sharing in the fast, offer meat with a good intent.
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.