A concerned Catholic asked,

"I would be very grateful for information about the exact nature of the confessional seal. The reason for my interest is this: several years ago, I had a very bad experience in the confessional with a priest whom I had thought I could trust completely. He isn't a traditional priest, although the Old Rite is celebrated by him or a member of his community every week. The community's approach to liturgy is as orthodox as you can get in this country, and because of that people flood in from miles around to attend their NO Sunday High Mass. He heard my confession at a very difficult time for me and my family (they were finding it very hard to adjust to my flying the nest, and relations were at breaking point). Well, the confession followed the usual lines - I forget the exact details. But afterwards he approached my mother and told her that he had heard my confession and that as a result he was somewhat concerned.

This was a disaster from the point of view of my relationship with my parents. Naturally they wanted to know what was wrong, and I refused to talk about it. It was shattering from my personal point of view, and because I was so preoccupied with the practical ramifications of this leakage I didn't consider the wider implications until much later.

What I would be interested to hear from other members is whether this could be considered a breaking of the seal of the confession (after all, he said nothing about what I had actually said), and if so, whether there are any steps I should take about it at this late stage."

Here is what I told them:

The priest was definitely wrong for even indirectly breaking the seal.

He is not allowed to let his behavior be influenced in any way by what he hears in the confessional.

If someone confesses to a priest, "I have poisoned the Mass wine." and he can't convince him to undo the damage (obviously, he won't get absolution unless he repents and dumps out the wine) -- the priest will have to say Mass (perhaps pouring a little less wine in the Chalice than usual) and hope for the best. He may have to be a martyr for the confessional seal.

But if he went out and said, "I think that wine is old, we need to throw it out." he would be breaking the seal, since that is odd behavior, and at any rate he wasn't about to do that before he heard the confession.

Let's put it this way -- if the man who made such a confession was a goth, and many people in the congregation knew that, many of them would put two and two together. ("The goth goes to confession, then after confessions the priest has the altar servers replace the Mass wine. I bet he told him he poisoned the wine!")

Sure, most people might not be that observant, but the point is, the seal of confessional is a grave responsibility and nothing can be left to chance. Otherwise no one would go to confession.


Matthew

  But, if someone confesses to a priest that he has hided a bomb somewhere, and that this bomb will work in two hours, the priest has to inform the police that someone has done such a thing and ask them to remove people from that place. Doesn't he?

I think people should be realistic about human nature.  I think priests are given special graces to keep the seal but that is not a guarantee.

I've heard enough bad stories even on this forum about "Traditional" priests in the confessionals, (and the very wicked advice some have given) that I would be very wary of confessing certain things to priests one knows personally.

A concerned Catholic asked, But afterwards he approached my mother and told her that he had heard my confession and that as a result he was somewhat concerned.

The priest excommunicated himself.  The penitent needs to contact the Bishop immediately, and then contact Rome, if necessary.

Quote from: clare

He cannot start locking his room if his housekeeper confesses stealing from him, for example.

I'm not so sure about that clare. He could follow the less probable opinion (locking his door) since it is indeed more probable. What if he had suspected that someone was stealing from him before the person confessed to it? He could report it to the police without giving the person's name or and still be safe.

This is the problem with face-to-face confessions.  Another, IMHO, bad idea from Vatican II.  I never confess face-to-face, except, for once, at a public "confession rally" or whatever the Novus Ordo call it!

I suspect what happened with our "anonymous" penitent was the result of a face-to-face confession and probably would not have occurred in a pre-Vatican II era.

Face to face confessions are still practiced by Eastern Catholics, they are not modernist. However, as Vlad pointed out, they have become pop-psychology sessions in the Novus Ordo.

That is true, and I have always wondered how they have dealt with issues like this.  For me, it is far, far easier to confess behind the screen than face-to-face, and I think that it is easier for confessors, too.  Makes me wonder how many Eastern Catholics seek out Western priests and their curtains for their "full" and/or "bad" confessions!

What gets me today when going to confession, is the advice I
get from the priest. What use to be sins before Vatican 2, are
now no longer sins. New sins have been invented that were
unheard of before Vatican 2. Many priest are getting their
theological training by watching to much TV.
My Great Grandfather who immigrated from Ireland in the
late 1800's claimed he overheard a priest that he confessed
to, discussing his sins in a bar. He left the Church and became
a protestant. My Family stayed protestant until my Mother
converted to the Catholic Church in 1953.