Several sites have picked up on various threats to introduce legislation obliging priests to reveal some matters revealed in the Confessional. It's nothing new of course. Recent years have seen credible threats against the seal from various legislatures on at least three occasions. Each time there has been a lot of posturing then a back down in the face of considerable opposition. I imagine if you scanned the newspapers of Britain in the 1880s you'd find similar stirrings. At the moment we seem to have two politicians rather ham fistedly attempting to gain votes for themselves by huffing and puffing over this old chestnut. Thankfully they both seem to be receiving a fairly firm 'not on your nelly' from the Church spokesmen in Ireland and Australia.
But what if, and only what if, some lawmaking group were to introduce legislation that would make keeping the seal an act against the State? Even the most liberal of Church men would not budge on this one. But is there a way that such a law could become ineffectual? To be able to report what you have heard in confession you would need to be able to identify the penitent in a manner that satisfied the civil laws of evidence. Traditional anonymous confession would seem to be a way forward here. Back into the box and away with the 'open forum' counselling session would seem to be a wise precaution. Of course all the faithful could play a part in protecting the seal by making a sure an abundance of penitents were available at every advertised session. It would be hard to single out the individual no matter who was looking on.
But what if, and only what if, some lawmaking group were to introduce legislation that would make keeping the seal an act against the State? Even the most liberal of Church men would not budge on this one. But is there a way that such a law could become ineffectual? To be able to report what you have heard in confession you would need to be able to identify the penitent in a manner that satisfied the civil laws of evidence. Traditional anonymous confession would seem to be a way forward here. Back into the box and away with the 'open forum' counselling session would seem to be a wise precaution. Of course all the faithful could play a part in protecting the seal by making a sure an abundance of penitents were available at every advertised session. It would be hard to single out the individual no matter who was looking on.
I threw my own tupence in on the matter, specifically identifying how this really is just political posturing and one that won't win Enda Kenny any favours in the long run. Ultimately even if the law gets past the one thing everyone will see coming is penitents who were likely to confess to a crime simply won't. Not when the confessional is not safe from the State. It'll be the most laughably ineffectual law in Irish history if it does come into force.
ReplyDeleteBut what if, and only what if, some lawmaking group were to introduce legislation that would make keeping the seal an act against the State? Even the most liberal of Church men would not budge on this one.
ReplyDeleteThat is what I think. God gives us free will, but He is also the God Who tells even the waves, thus far shall you go, and no further. It is true that priests are still sinners, and some have committed appalling crimes. But of even the worst of these, I have never heard it said that they divulged the secrets of the confessional.