CAN
WE CONFESS OUR SINS BY TELEPHONE? *** Religious and cultural changes explain why confession over the telephone has at times been suggested. The problems created by the shortage of priests in our western countries prompts some of the faithful to dream of new solutions. This is why certain people favor confession by telephone, letter or e-mail. Can technical developments threaten what is sacred? Since the end of the 19th century, there is a fascinating controversy in regard to confession by telephone in case of emergency. I repeat: in case of emergency... According to the unanimous consent of theologians, there is no possibility of confession by telephone if there is no case of urgency. But, if a person or a community can’t go to confession, while there is an imminent danger of death, can they receive the sacrament over the telephone? In 1884, the Sacred Penitentiary refused to take a position on the matter. The problem was considered a doctrinal problem, to be discussed among moralists. This response cast doubt on the validity in regard to confession by telephone in case of emergency. Some believed that there was a certain possibility of validity in case of absolute necessity; the majority were against it. As for its lawfulness, they knew it depended on the Church’s authority. Nothing was solved by the Code of Canon Law published in 1917. The 1983 Code states: “Except for a just reason, confessions are not to be heard elsewhere than in a confessional” (Can. 964, 3); some interpreted this rule as a negative reply regarding the use of the telephone. Confession by correspondance had already been condemned in 1602 by Pope Clement VIII. Those opposed to the validity of confession by telephone, even in case of emergency, cite the constant Tradition of the Church against such a procedure; the physical presence of the penitent before a confessor appears to be a necessity. Others, who believe in the validity of confession by telephone in case of emergency, say that the situation is new, caused by technological advances in sound transmission and that there is a moral presence in this method of communicating. The primary problem is the necessary physical presence of the penitent and the confessor, the union of matter and form. The American Secretariat for the Liturgy reminds us that no sacrament may be received by electronic device. All liturgical celebrations require the physical presence of the faithful and the physical presence of the bishop, priest, deacon or presiding minister. For the sacrament of reconciliation in particular, only the physical presence of the priest near the penitent may be a sign of the meeting with the Father who welcomes and forgives the sinner. The Secretariat declares that electronic communication by telephone, television, video or internet is not sufficient for the celebration of the sacraments. It seems to me that this is the official position of the Church. Confession by telephone is forbidden under all normal circumstances. I believe that Rome never published a formal interdiction or condemnation of confession by telephone in case of emergency, when death is near and it is impossible to call for a priest. Is there a sufficient doubt that the absolution could be validly given then, at least under these conditions? The confessor, in such an exceptional and urgent situation, must decide what to do according to his conscience. We should always remember that we must work to achieve perfect contrition. Perfect contrition, which we may obtain from God through prayer, helps us regret our sins since our faults are a lack of love and manifest the weakness of our friendship for the Lord. Perfect contrition obtains forgiveness for our sins. |