CAN WE DO A SECOND TAKE ON “RESERVED SINS?” [Asking for a friend.]
I did leave a lot hanging in the air in my last post on this stream, and probably none more controversial than “reserved sins,” those sins which cannot ordinarily be absolved in your parish confessional. Reserved sins [also known as “reserved cases”] must be addressed to a higher authority for absolution, either the local bishop, or in some cases the Vatican, specifically the Apostolic Penitentiary which speaks for the pope. I have very little specific information on how reserved sins are specifically handled, because Franciscan priests had faculties or privileges to absolve participation in an abortion when I was a friar. Abortion would be the most likely encountered reserved sin for most priests. Since 2016 Pope Francis has given permission to all validly ministering priests—including those in your parish—to lift the excommunication and thus absolve the penitent’s participation in the abortion process. Since the new 1983 Code of Canon Law, others involved—such as the biological father of the child, who may be pressuring the woman and/or paying for the procedure—must seek the confessional for relief from the excommunication and absolution from the sin. In researching today’s post, I learned an interesting point in Catholic Law: a minor under the age of eighteen is considered too young to incur excommunication for anything. This makes sense when one considers the other reserved sins which do incur excommunication: Apostasy, heresy, schism Violation of consecrated species [the post-consecration bread and wine at the Mass] Physical attack on a pope or bishop A priest who absolves an accomplice in sexual sin Unauthorized ordination of a bishop Direct violation by a confessor of the seal of confession Anyone who reveals the overheard confession of another. Pretended celebration of the Eucharist by a non-priest Attempt to hear confession by one who cannot validly do so. False accusation of the crime of solicitation in the confessional [if an adult states, falsely, that he or she was invited to have sex with the confessor during the confession, there is no way a priest can defend himself without breaking the seal of confession] Attempted marriage by a religious or cleric [for example, if a priest fails to seek laicization from Rome before marrying] Formal cooperation in abortion [with the above circumstances noted] If an individual engages with full consent and understanding in one or more of these acts, he or she is excommunicated on the spot by virtue of having done the deed [a latae sententiae excommunication as Latin would put it.] In short, an automatic excommunication. The process of the special appeal to the local bishop or even the Apostolic Penitentiary in Rome is lifting the excommunication so that the original priest confessor can confer absolution. This compilation of reserved sins was not cobbled together on Mount Sinai, and it has over the centuries added or dropped many kinds of sin. The most ancient Christian entry is the first one—apostasy—which is fitting, because it is not only an open, pronounced departure from the Church and a renunciation of one’s Baptism, but in many cases, it put the lives of Christians in danger vis-à-vis the Romans. But as personal confession itself did not take hold in the Western Roman Church till near the end of the first millennium, the number and specificity of “excommunicable sins” expanded in the West with remarkable productivity after 1000 A.D. Wikipedia has an entry entitled List of Excommunicable Offences in the Catholic Church, which makes for intriguing [if lengthy] reading. A few random excerpts from over the years: “Anyone who illicitly seizes the goods of a deceased bishop;” “All Christians who take their ships to Muslim ports from 1245 to 1249;” “All Christians who take their ships to Muslim ports from 1274 to 1280;” [not a misprint] “Clerics who pay too much attention to their hair or beards, or clerics who use silk and velvet instead of cloth and leather for their horses or mules, receives excommunication if he continues to do so after receiving a legitimate warning.” “Catholics who defend or promote materialistic or atheistic Communist doctrine (incur excommunication) [1949, Pope Pius XII].” HOW AND WHEN WAS ABORTION CLASSFIED AS A RESERVED SIN? It was exceptionally difficult to track down the inclusion of direct abortion on the list of reserved sins. Abortion has always been regarded as sinful, but Church fathers have debated the nature of embryonic development and thus the nature and gravity of the sin. St. Thomas Aquinas [1225-1274], for example, agreed with Aristotle that an embryo passed through developmental stages on the way to humanhood. With the invention of modern medicine—and the microscope, for example—Church moral theory and discipline was able to fine-tune confessional practice. For our purposes here, suffice to say that the 1917 Code of Canon Law decreed that the mother [alone] incurs a latae sententiae excommunication for obtaining an abortion. It is interesting to note, though, that the newer and current 1983 Code of Canon Law expanded the penalty to those who facilitate procurement. The mother is not singled out from a process that obviously involved other parties in most cases. This would certainly include the biological father if he were pressuring for the abortion or paying for it. Canonists today also hold that a minor under eighteen is exempt from latae sententiae excommunications by virtue of age. A teenager who confesses an abortion in the confessional may be absolved immediately by her familiar confessor, or any priest with whom she is comfortable. Pope Francis has granted broad powers for priests around the world to lift the excommunication and absolve those adults who procure and facilitate abortions. It is true that an abortion involving a minor may constitute a civil crime on the part of the male depending upon the specific American state and the circumstances. A priest in the confessional may [probably should] encourage a youth to seek professional/spiritual counseling outside of the confessional. Diocesan Catholic Charities or Counseling Services might be a good choice. Professional counselors and social workers—whether in the employment of the Church or not—are mandated reporters of abuse and fully trained in the delicate area of abuse reporting and interacting with law enforcement. A priest, of course, must maintain the seal of secrecy of the Sacrament of Penance and cannot report what he hears. Some states, such as Washington, are attempting to include priests as mandated reporters or have already legislated such requirements. Hopefully our American dioceses are discussing ongoing legislative proposals and confessional practice with their priests, attorneys, and diocesan state legislative lobbyists. A NASTY BUSINESS On the other hand, there is no church law forbidding a priest reporting indications of child abuse to civil authorities which he learns about outside of the confessional. In fact, much of our “clerical abuse crisis” involves the failure of bishops or priests to report and investigate suspected abuse in tandem with civil law enforcement. I was tangentially involved in a criminal report about 35 years ago while still in the active priestly ministry. I was working on my master’s degree in counseling while pastoring, and I had just been briefed by Rollins College at my internship site on the new reporting laws of the State of Florida. In the line of parish duty, I was meeting with a family in my church office about a real estate matter when I learned that one of the participants was engaged in inappropriate activity with two children under ten years old. I explained that I needed to report the situation to the Florida Department of Children and Families Protective Services, for the safety of the children. I suggested that the perpetrator make the call himself from my office, which he did. DCF told him it would meet him at his home. In fact, he was arrested on outstanding warrants involving drug trafficking. The perpetrator pleaded to reduce what was nearly a life sentence. I attended the sentencing in Orlando, and there was a very lengthy reading of the charges. For the first time I heard the full extent of the abuse—more than most of us can ever imagine. The judge interjected that the abuse was first brought to authorities by my intervention while “hearing confessions.” I had to insist that the court records be redacted to state that our encounter was of a business nature, and specifically not during a confessional encounter. In my later years as a psychotherapist, I made about two dozen reports and testified in several trials. Sadly, I learned that where there’s smoke, there is usually a raging forest fire. We will pick up this stream in a week or so on more info and questions related to the theology and practice of Confession.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
MORALITYArchives
February 2024
|