First of all, from the point of view of diplomacy, with the deepest respect to the His Grace, I think that it is a mistake to refer to the proposal from Irish Prime Minister Enda Kelly and others as “absurd and out of the question” (“E’ assurda. E’ una proposta irricevibile” ) In Ireland, there is fury about the appalling failure of the Church to protect children and we should acknowledge that people will propose solutions that are as extreme as the violation of the seal of confession. What we need to do is to acknowledge the justified anger that is now at boiling point, and calmly explain why we cannot allow the violation of the seal of confession. If prelates from other countries want to know the mood in Ireland, it would be a sobering reality-check if they would take a flight to Dublin and walk around the city in a clerical collar for an hour or so.
Archbishop Girotti goes on to say:
Ireland can approve all the laws that it wants but it must always know that the Church will never submit to the obligation of the confessor to denounce to the civil authority. Confession is a private question which allows the penitent to be corrected and purified. The secret is a necessary condition. This does not mean that the bishops should not be vigilant regarding paedophiles and, if the appropriate evidence is there, to require such people to pay for their crimes. But if anyone wants to violate the confession, the response of the Church will always be “No”.Again, with the deepest respect to the His Grace, I think that this is unhelpful. What we need to convey is that the Church simply does not have the competence to dispense confessors from the seal of confession because the binding nature of the seal is a matter of divine law, not ecclesiastical law. The Church can change the penalties relating to the violation of the seal but it has no authority to release a confessor from the obligation of the seal. It is not a matter of saying “No” but of saying “We are not allowed to do this.”
The question of the seal being binding under divine law is obviously something that needs to be explored further and therefore I will write another post to deal with this subject specifically. (See: The confessional seal: a matter of divine, not merely human, law) We'll also need to consider what the priest should say and do if asked about matter that is under the seal.
5 comments:
Two points should be made:
1. Because of the seal, neither the priest nor the penitent could give evidence if a priest were to be accused under this law and the priest would be unable to plead.
2. Should the seal becoame a criminal offence, so be it. The priest would have to do his time but priests suffered more severe penalties under communist and fascist regimes. Perhaps it is time to defy unchristian laws such as those who would prescribe who adoption agencies should be allowed to choose as adoptees.
One should also remenber that the Irish state also covered up abuse in its childrens homes and in England it has been young female teachers who have been in the frame in the last couple of years.The church must not over react about a phenomenon which has been exceedingly rare.
Robert - I hope I haven't misunderstood you in (1), but remember that the penitent is not bound by the seal of confession, only the priest.
By priests making it clear that they will refuse to break the Seal of Confession, and will accept four years inside, putting their time to good use amongst the inmates, many of whom sorely need their help, support and of course the services of their priestly office.
I suspect that the Irish Government will then think twice if this is the consequence. They do not want to join the list of despicable tyrannies who have in the past attacked the Seal of Confession and have so persecuted the Church.
But priests have to make their position clear!
I suspect this is just a red herring. If the state were to try and oblige a priest to break the seal of confession by making it an offence not to do so then it would surely be conferring on the priest the right to say nothing as is normal for anyone who is accused of a crime. Such a law simply would not work.
Nicolas Bellord
The comments of ++Girotti are some of the worst and illconsidered that I have read on the new Irish question.
It is not just those of ill-will who will read the words "Ireland can approve all the laws that it wants but... the Church will never submit..." with a shudder. I admit that I take those words out of context but they strike such a discordant note of defiance when it would seem that the only defiance that clerical authorities can strike is when they protect clerical privilege (human as well as divine) but fail to act to protect the faithful from wolves (sexual as well as spiritual).
I have never in all my time visiting Ireland seen any disrespect for a man in a clerical collar but I have seen the confusion of the Irish as they salute a non-conformist minister, thinking he is a priest.
My fear is that the reaction of the Catholic establishment is so unfortunate that it will make it impossible for men of good-will to defend them whole-heartedly. Then the situation will change.
Post a Comment