§ II. On the Seal of Confession

The Seal of Confession is a religious obligation of preserving secrecy concerning those things which are known from Sacramental Confession.

We must treat 1° of the obligation of the seal; 2° of the subject of the seal; 3° of the object of the seal; 4° of the various modes of violating it.

1489. Principles. - I. There is given a most strict obligation of preserving inviolably the Seal of Confession. It is established 1° from natural law, and indeed by title both of fidelity, and of justice, and of religion, whence it comes about that he who violates it sins gravely by the sin of sacrilege against the Sacrament, of infidelity against the onerous, although tacit, promise of preserving secrecy, and of detraction, if the sin is not public; 2° from positive divine law, at least implicit; for from the institution of Christ Confession must be secret: therefore by that very fact there has been imposed by Christ upon confessors the obligation of preserving the seal; 3° from ecclesiastical law, as is clear from several places of Canon Law, especially from the Fourth Lateran Council, c. 21, Omnis utriusque sexus, where it is said: "Let the confessor beware altogether, lest by word or sign, or in any other way whatsoever, he in any degree betray the sinner; but if he should need more prudent counsel, let him cautiously seek it without any expression of the person." - Yet the confessor is not held to avoid every vain suspicion in this matter, but only a probable one.

II. The obligation of the Seal of Confession always presses in every case, even after the death of the penitent, so that in no possible case is it lawful to reveal anything heard and received in Confession. The reason is manifestly clear; for, if some exception could be given, men would always fear lest such a sin were that cause for breaking the seal licitly; and therefore the Sacrament would become odious. Moreover no cause of attaining good, or of fleeing evil, can compensate for that evil of hatred of the Sacrament. Therefore in this the Sacramental secret differs from the natural secret: that although the latter sometimes arises on the occasion of Confession, nevertheless it does not oblige in every case; but the former can be violated in no possible case, as was said.

III. The obligation of the seal arises from every and only Sacramental Confession, namely that which is made with the mind of accusing oneself and obtaining absolution. It is said: 1° from every, because then the whole reason of the precept is present; and this holds, even if absolution had not been conferred from any cause whatsoever, since Confession is made in order to receive absolution at some time. It is said: 2° from only, because only Sacramental Confession includes the reason of the precept, since any other manifestation has no relation with the Sacrament of Penance.

IV. The obligation of the seal ceases if the penitent has given license to use the knowledge from Confession. But this license ought to be 1° express, 2° altogether spontaneous, 3° not revoked, nor 4° extended beyond the limits permitted by the penitent, 5° with the conditions at the same time preserved which were placed by him, nor 6° should it be asked, unless a reasonable cause demands it.

1490. Resolutions. - 1° A Confession which knowingly is made to a layman, or to a priest lacking jurisdiction, does not induce the obligation of the seal, but only of the natural secret. It would have to be said otherwise if the priest were believed to be approved; because the Confession on the part of the penitent is truly Sacramental.

2° If someone approaches a confessor with the mind of deceiving him, ridiculing him, drawing him into sin, or extorting something from him, he does not accuse himself in order to the Sacrament, and consequently there is no obligation of the Sacramental seal.

3° If someone opens his conscience to a confessor without the will of receiving absolution, and neither in order to making Confession, nor by way of continued Confession, but so that he may obtain counsel, or so that in some way he may satisfy the command of a Superior, only the obligation of the natural secret presses, because this is not done in order to absolution to be given or given already.

1491. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether there is smallness of matter in violation of the seal?

Resp. Negatively, at least in direct revelation. The reason is that matter, even the lightest, includes the whole reason of the precept.

I said: at least in direct revelation; because if the danger of indirect revelation is very remote or little probable, there can be lightness of matter. For revelation, if perhaps some followed then, would be judged to follow by chance and per accidens.

Quaer. 2° Whether it is lawful to use a probable opinion in the matter of the seal?

Resp. Negatively, because it is not lawful to use a probable opinion to the prejudice of the certain right which another possesses, etc. Therefore the confessor is held to the seal even in doubt whether something was said by the penitent in order to Confession.

Quaer. 3° What ought the confessor respond to one questioning him concerning things heard in Confession, or concerning absolution imparted?

Resp. As to the first, let him respond, even with an oath if need be, that he knows nothing, or has heard nothing; because he has no communicable knowledge. - Thus all.

As to the second, let him respond: I have performed my office; or: Are questions of this kind to be asked?

1492. Principles. - I. Primarily every confessor is held to the seal, whether true, or fictitious and through error esteemed legitimate, and consequently even a layman who would feign himself a priest and hear Confession. The reason is that as often as someone confesses in order to the Sacrament, whoever hears him by that very fact contracts the obligation of the seal; otherwise hatred of the Sacrament would follow thence. - Thus all.

II. Secondarily those who become participants in Confession are held, or all those to whom knowledge of the Confession comes in any way whatsoever, whether from the Confession itself, or from means ordered to it. It is said: 1° from the Confession itself; for the matter accused came to their knowledge by the same occasion or cause on account of which the obligation of the seal is given, namely lest hatred be created against the Sacrament. It is said: 2° from the means; for hatred of the means redounds upon the end itself.

Hence the following are held to the seal: 1° interpreters employed in performing Confession; 2° Superiors from whom, outside the Sacrament, a faculty is sought of absolving or of receiving absolution from a reserved case; 3° those who, while someone is confessing, hear a sin, whether deliberately or even inculpably, and likewise if some should perhaps hear it from these; 4° those who write the Confession of the uneducated, or of those ignorant of the language of the confessor, especially if the Confession cannot be made in another way; 5° doctors consulted by the Confessor, even with the license of the penitent; 6° all those to whom the confessor sacrilegiously or imprudently had manifested sins heard in Confession.

1493. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether the penitent also is bound by the seal with respect to the confessor?

Resp. 1° He is not held to the Sacramental seal, because the obligation of the seal is only in favor of the penitent.

Resp. 2° But he is held to the natural secret concerning those things which he cannot reveal without unjust damage to the confessor, or contrary to his reasonable will, or without injury and contempt of the Sacrament.

Quaer. 2° Whether the confessor can speak with the penitent concerning his Confession?

Resp. 1° He can speak in Confession concerning all past Confessions. Let this nevertheless be done cautiously and from sufficient reason, lest perhaps the penitent be offended.

Resp. 2° He can also speak after absolution before the penitent has departed, or if afterward he has returned. The reason is that although the Sacrament has been completed, nevertheless the judgment still morally perseveres.

Resp. 3° Outside the Sacred Tribunal, he cannot make even any word at all with him without the penitent's license concerning those things which pertain to his Confession. Except if the penitent himself first speaks concerning his conscience, i.e. concerning those things which were the matter of Confession. But then the confessor ought not exceed the matter about which the penitent made words.

Quaer. 3° Whether he is held to the seal who reads a paper in which the penitent wrote a Confession?

Resp. 1° Negatively, per se. The reason is that this is not a means of itself ordered to Confession, and consequently it does not per se bring in the obligation of the Sacramental seal, but only of the natural secret; yet this per se presses under grave, unless there is question of the lightest faults.

Resp. 2° Per accidens the obligation of the seal can be present, if the paper were or had been a necessary means to Confession: for example if it were written by a mute person, or directed to a Superior on account of some reservation; likewise if the paper had already been handed to the priest; but especially if someone were to read it while it is in the hand of the confessor, or in the act of Confession, or it had been lost by the confessor himself, or found in the confessional; for in these cases it pertains to Confession.

Quaer. 4° Whether a doctor consulted by the penitent himself is held to the seal of Confession?

Resp. Negatively, at least more probably, if he is consulted concerning Confession to be made to another; but he is held only to the natural secret. The reason is that the obligation of the seal arises from Sacramental Confession alone, in which the penitent manifests sins in order to absolution. - St. Alphonsus, against some who therefore affirm, because revelation would render Confession odious. But, as the holy Doctor deservedly replies, not the Confession itself, but the consultation would become odious.

I said: if he is consulted concerning Confession to be made to another; because if the penitent consults him concerning Confession to be made to himself, he is held by the seal, since this consultation must be regarded as Confession begun.

1494. Principles. - I. The object of the seal is all sins confessed, even venial sins, at least in particular, and all things which pertain to the individual explanation of sins. The reason is that the reason of the seal presses not only for sins, but also for all those things which help to explain them, and besides, these constitute one thing with sins. - I said: even venial sins, at least in particular. For he certainly would wound the seal who would say that Titius confessed, for example, a lie, or several venial sins; but not he who would say that he confessed venial matter. For by the very fact that he confessed, he is supposed to have confessed matter of this kind. In practice nevertheless the question seems to me, with others, to be decided according to circumstances, by considering whether by such a saying Confession could perhaps be rendered odious.

II. The object of the seal is also whatever has been manifested in Confession, and the revelation of which would yield to the burdening of the penitent or to hatred of the Sacrament; because the seal was introduced lest, from fear of revelation, the faithful be drawn back from the Sacrament of Penance.

III. Those things do not become the object of the seal through Confession which the confessor knows not from Confession alone, but at the same time from elsewhere, and insofar as he knows them in this way.

1495. Resolutions. - Under the seal of Confession fall:

1° All circumstances of sins, even those declared after absolution: for they are morally one thing with the sins already accused; indeed the same must be said even if it were doubtful whether the circumstances had been declared in order to Confession or not.

2° The sins of an accomplice, even if they were revealed without necessity with the sin, because they were said from the intrinsic occasion of Confession.

3° The penances imposed, unless perhaps they are very light, or from those which are accustomed to be imposed for the lightest faults.

4° Defects manifested through Confession for explaining the character of the sin, for example if the penitent says that he received Sacred Orders with an irregularity, because he is illegitimate, etc.

1496. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether the virtues and scruples of the penitent fall under the seal?

Resp. to the 1st. Negatively, per se, unless thence there follows a burdening of the penitent or of others. Resolve the same concerning extraordinary gifts of God. But that burdening would follow if these gifts had been manifested for better declaring the malice of one's own sin because of ingratitude.

Resp. to the 2nd. Affirmatively, if scrupulosity is in some way matter of Confession, or elsewhere from such manifestation there would follow a burdening of the penitent. But scrupulosity would be matter of Confession as to acts which the penitent from a scrupulous judgment thought to be sins and confesses; likewise scrupulosity which as a moral defect is subjected to the Sacramental judgment. - But its manifestation would have to be regarded as a burdening of the penitent if there were question of a Prelate, confessor, and the like, but not if of lay persons, to whom this rather turns to praise.

Quaer. 2° Whether natural defects of the penitent fall under the seal?

Resp. 1° Affirmatively, if there is question of "those defects the manifestation of which the penitent can bear with difficulty of itself, as it would be to say that he is dull in mind, irascible by nature, rude, incapable, poor, if he were of civic birth."

Resp. 2° But negatively, if they are "defects which are not to him a source of shame or reproach, such as to be blind, deaf, a beggar, and the like; and, on the contrary, they already commonly are known."

Quaer. 3° Whether sins committed in the very Confession fall under the seal, for example impatience, insult against the confessor?

Resp. 1° Negatively per se, because the penitent does not confess those faults, as is clear.

Resp. 2° Affirmatively nevertheless for the most part, although only per accidens; because, although those sins are not per se matter of the seal, nevertheless often per accidens they involve in some way the danger of revelation: for they furnish a probable judgment that the confessor either was unwilling to absolve the penitent, or on account of a graver fault reproved him more severely, etc.

But theft committed by the penitent to the damage of the confessor himself at the time of Confession would not fall under the seal. Indeed if it were established that the thief came to confess so that he might have an occasion of stealing, the sins accused by him would not be matter of Confession; since such a Confession would not be true, but only simulated.

Quaer. 4° Whether he violates the seal who says that he heard such a person in Confession?

Resp. Negatively; for that someone approaches to confess is recognized externally or outside Confession. Besides, this is not of itself odious, but rather brings praise. Nevertheless the confessor would be held to the natural secret if someone had approached secretly to confess; indeed even to the Sacramental secret, if by word or deed, namely by approaching secretly, he had signified "that he did not wish it to be known that he had confessed."

Quaer. 5° Whether he violates the seal who says that he absolved such a penitent?

Resp. Negatively, per se, because that cannot be burdensome to the penitent in such a case. Nevertheless in certain circumstances it could become burdensome to others, concerning whom the same cannot be said. - Thus commonly. Therefore parents, teachers, masters, questioning concerning absolution given to sons or subjects, are to be referred to the penitents themselves. Similar questions are accustomed to be made by Nuns devoted to the care of the sick in hospitals, so that they may know whether they ought to prepare the things necessary for administering Viaticum: these likewise are to be referred to the sick; or it is better that license be sought from the sick person to admonish the Nuns or others. But it will suffice to say to the sick person who is going to receive the Holy Eucharist: I shall admonish, etc.

Quaer. 6° Whether a confessor handing to a penitent not absolved a certificate in testimony of Confession can declare that he was absolved?

Resp. By no means. The reason is that it would be a lie, which, since it is intrinsically evil, can never be uttered. Thus St. Alphonsus. The holy Doctor excepts, as probable, if the certificates had been printed and in them it were said that absolution had been given, at least if they are sought publicly; because such certificates would be handed to all, and therefore the confessor would perform "only a material act" by "providing such a certificate."

Quaer. 7° How is a certificate of Confession to be drawn up?

Resp. It is customarily drawn up thus: I, the undersigned, testify that I heard the Confession of N., on such a day, etc.; to this certificate the confessor subscribes his name. Or more briefly: I heard such a one in Confession, on the day, etc. It can also be said: I heard a Sacramental Confession; because every Confession which is made in order to receiving absolution is Sacramental, whether absolution was given or not.

Quaer. 8° Whether a confessor violates the seal who denies a certificate of Confession to an indisposed penitent?

Resp. 1° Affirmatively, as often as he denies a certificate to a penitent asking for it outside Confession. The reason is that he uses knowledge of Confession for acting externally, and indeed with great burdening of the penitent.

Resp. 2° Affirmatively, even if the penitent not absolved asks for the certificate within Confession, and there is question of those circumstances in which it is customary to be given, or it is required by Superiors of the penitent, as often happens in the Paschal time for students of colleges, servants, etc. The reason is that from the denial of the certificate it becomes known to others that the penitent was not rightly confessed nor absolved, and therefore it will be an indirect violation of the seal. - Thus commonly.

Resp. 3° But negatively, if the penitent asks for a certificate in Confession outside the aforesaid circumstances, or when it is not customarily given to all, or is not required by Superiors. The reason is that then the confessor, saying nothing, bears himself merely negatively, and does not approve that Confession by positive testimony, to which he is not held. Besides, the penitent is not compelled by necessity of declaring to others that he was not absolved; hence, if he says this, he himself makes known his indisposition, not the confessor.

Sometimes, however, the confessor can give even to an indisposed penitent a certificate of Confession on account of various inconveniences which would follow from its denial; nor then will he cooperate in the sacrilege of the penitent, who perhaps uses this testimony of Confession for receiving a Sacrament of the living, for example the Eucharist or Matrimony, in the state of sin; the reason is that the penitent will have to attribute this to his own malice.

Resp. 4° Negatively also, as often as the penitent made a simulated Confession, for example to flee punishment, to avoid infamy, or to snatch a certificate, as if a young man with a view to Matrimony should thus confess: "I have done what young men of my condition are accustomed to do: nothing else remains to be said: I do not ask absolution, but a testimony of Confession performed." For the seal is not broken whether within or outside Confession the certificate is denied. The reason is that the seal arises from Sacramental Confession alone, which here in no way is had. Nor generally can the confessor concede such persons a certificate, because without sufficient reason he would cooperate in their future sacrilege. Besides he would assert what is false, namely that they had confessed, which is not true.

Quaer. 9° What ought the confessor do when detecting that the penitent is deaf?

Resp. See n. 1369. q. 6°. Hence 2°.

Quaer. 10° Whether a confessor can admonish the accomplice, with the license of the penitent, or another person for correcting the accomplice?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is that the accomplice from the Confession of the other accomplice acquires no right to the Sacramental seal; for this seal was instituted in favor of penitents only; and consequently the right of secrecy is acquired by him alone who commits it to another.

Ordinarily, however, it is not expedient that the confessor seek such license; but it will be better to induce the penitent to open this matter to him outside Confession; indeed it will be still better that the penitent himself report the matter to another, who can bring a remedy to the evil.

1497. - The seal can be violated in a twofold mode: 1° directly, by revealing expressly something pertaining to the secrets of Confession, for example if it is said: Titius did this, etc.; 2° indirectly, by saying or doing something from which someone can know or suspect either the object of the seal, or from which the Sacrament is rendered odious, or shame, trouble, disgrace, damage, or any burdening whatsoever can arise for the penitent or for others, for example accomplices.

Rule I. - The seal is violated indirectly as often as penitents or others can deservedly be offended by the sayings or deeds of the confessor from knowledge had from Confession alone. But it is not judged to be violated if the penitents would have these things indifferently, and there is no question of the proper matter of the seal. The reason for each is sufficiently clear from what was said above. - Thus commonly.

Rule II. - In doubt whether in such a mode of speaking or acting there is present danger of revelation or offense, one must stand for the safer part, or in favor of the seal. - Thus commonly; and it is clear from what was said above n. 1491. q. 2°.

Rule III. - There is no violation of the seal if someone narrates a sin heard in Confession in such a way that by no indication can the sinners be revealed. Nevertheless, excluding the usefulness of instruction or of asking counsel, one must generally abstain from similar narrations. The reason is that lay hearers, especially the simple, easily are scandalized, suspecting that the seal is violated. And sometimes in these frequent and mixed conversations there is danger lest someone be brought into suspicion of the penitent, indeed that revelation also follow.

1498. Resolutions. - He indirectly violates the secret of Confession:

1° Who, praising one above the others whom he heard, says that he committed only venial sins; because others thence are easily brought into suspicion of mortal fault.

2° Who speaks with others concerning the sin of a penitent known through Confession alone, though these know it from elsewhere, even if the hearers do not notice that it was received from Confession.

3° Who says that he did not absolve such a one, that he sent him back to such a time, or that he has not yet absolved him, or that the Confession has not yet been completed; the reason for the last is that a long Confession ordinarily denotes many sins, or the indisposition of the penitent, unless it were known to be a general Confession, or one resumed after a long time, and the penitent not bear this with difficulty. Likewise he who concerning Titius, known as a thief, says that he confessed to him his thefts with great contrition.

4° Who in a loud voice, or in another way intelligible to the bystanders, reproves the penitent; for this is both grave for the penitent and suggests to others the suspicion that he confessed grave sins; but a fortiori if by raising the voice too much he were to repeat the sins of the penitent, or question concerning their circumstances.

5° Who speaks with another confessor concerning the sins of some penitent, even if he had confessed the same sins to each.

6° Who, after hearing the Confessions of few persons, says that he heard such a sin, although he conceals the person; for the individuals suffer something of suspicion against themselves from that revelation. Likewise he who narrates sins known from Confession in such a way that hearers can by some reason conjecture or suspect who committed them.

7° Who, narrating the sins of some person which he knew outside Confession, adds some circumstance known from Confession alone, or who uses the knowledge of Confession to determine or confirm the matter more.

8° Who would say that in such a monastery he heard a grave sin, even if he did not name the person; because the individual Religious of that convent suffer detriment. A fortiori he would violate the seal who would say that in that convent, or even in that Order, such sins are committed. - But it is otherwise if he would say that he heard a grave sin of some Religious in general, without naming his Order, because there is neither revelation of the seal, nor does it redound to the burdening of the penitent or of any Order, since among various Orders there are not lacking some less good Religious. Resolve the same if he were speaking of a grave sin of only one Religious, naming the Religion, provided the Religion is large and notoriously relaxed, and sins of this kind are such as are accustomed to occur among the relaxed, and in this one have notoriously occurred, and also all danger of suspicion concerning some monastery in particular is absent. - But scandal of lay persons must be carefully guarded against.

9° Who after Confession looks at the penitent with a stern eye, does not speak to him as he was accustomed to do before, and shows by harsher words, gestures, or his whole manner of acting that he remembers his sins, is actually thinking about them, and makes less of him than before.

10° Who would decline the Confessions of a penitent because this one, for example, is accustomed to approach less well disposed, unless there is present a just cause altogether independent of Confession.

1499. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether the Confessor can deny Communion to a penitent to whom previously he denied absolution, if this one approaches the Sacred Table, or assistance at the Matrimony of him whose impediment, or Ordination to him whose irregularity, he knows only from Confession?

Resp. Negatively. See n. 1229.

Quaer. 2° Whether he breaks the seal who says that such a vice reigns in a city or village, or that grave crimes are committed there?

Resp. Distinguish. Affirmatively, if the place is sufficiently narrow, for example if it does not contain about three thousand men, i.e. Catholics. Otherwise, if the town is large, and public crimes are often committed there.

Quaer. 3° Whether preachers can use knowledge of Confession for speaking about those things concerning which they would not have thought, unless they had heard Confessions?

Resp. Affirmatively, with danger of revelation and burdening of the penitents excluded. The reason is, 1° because it can be a burden to no one that sometimes priests direct themselves in sermons from the knowledge of Confession, provided that here and now that burden is not present: therefore they can generally inveigh against vices which secretly spread abroad; 2° because for the confessor this would be too grave a burden; for he would always fear lest in preaching he use the knowledge of Confession. Nevertheless let the confessor beware lest he speak publicly about entirely particular sins of one or another penitent, especially if he has the sermon before some small community, for example in a monastery of Nuns, etc.; because then a burdening could easily be induced. Moreover Missionaries cannot reveal to the Pastor grave sins heard in Confession in general, that he may watch more. - Yet, according to St. Thomas, "the confessor can say to the Prelate that he should watch more diligently over his flock, yet in such a way that he does not say anything by which by word or nod he betrays the one confessing."

Quaer. 4° Whether a priest who from Confession knows that snares are being prepared for him can flee, or in another way forestall damage?

Resp. 1° Affirmatively, if from such caution the sin accused is not at all manifested to others, nor is any burdening brought to the penitent.

Resp. 2° Negatively, if he cannot flee without in some way manifesting that some sin had been accused by the penitent. The reason is that that flight would be an indirect revelation of a confessed sin; and, although the confessor might simulate flight under some pretext, nevertheless he would always furnish a reasonable suspicion of the sin declared. Lugo nevertheless notes that experience shows that a revelation, even indirect, is never necessary for escaping those dangers, since they can be met either from the license of the penitent or in other ways without breaking the seal.

Quaer. 5° Whether Superiors can use knowledge of Confession for external governance, if it in no way appears that they direct themselves from that knowledge?

Resp. By no means, with St. Alphonsus and others commonly against some older Theologians who defended the affirmative opinion. - The reason is that evidently this would yield to the burdening of penitents; and those who knew that such doctrine was everywhere taught could be drawn back from Confession. See the Decree of Clement VIII, p. XVII. XVIII.

Quaer. 6° Whether at least sometimes, or when, the confessor can use knowledge of Confession?

Resp. According to all Theologians, this can be done in the following cases: 1° for praying for the penitent, or acting more benignly toward him; 2° for consulting books or wise men, prudently however, with danger of revelation excluded; but if this danger is present, he who needs counsel should either propose the case in a suitable manner, for example as fictitious, or ask license from the penitent for using Sacramental knowledge, or seek elsewhere a learned counselor to whom the person of the penitent is altogether unknown, or remit the penitent to another confessor, etc. But if no means is at hand by which the seal may remain intact, nothing remains except that the Confessor, relying on divine aid and employing other suitable means, namely prayer and study, resolve the difficulty himself in the better manner in which he can; 3° for directing himself through experience acquired from Confessions, for example for increasing or tempering rigor, and for directing himself from the Confession of one toward prudently questioning or instructing others, giving no suspicion of the prior Confession; 4° for reforming his own morals, for correcting his own defects, or for performing his office better, for example for shaking off sluggishness, for watching more vigilantly over subjects, with suspicion of revelation excluded, etc., because everyone is held to correct his defects as soon as he notices them; nor can any penitent reasonably be offended because the confessor, on account of things heard in Confession, changes his life for the better.

Conclusion. - In a matter so grave, and so dangerous, the confessor must be supremely cautious lest he utter any little word, or do or hint anything, whence there could follow hatred, even the least, of the Sacrament, burdening of the penitent, offense or scandal of any others whatsoever. Therefore let him be prudent and discreet not only in words, but in his whole manner of acting.

Let him frequently pray with the Psalmist: Set, O Lord, a guard to my mouth, and a door of circumstance to my lips; or with the Wise Man: Give me wisdom, the assistant of thy seats. - Above all let Missionaries beware, and all who, for example in the Prayers of Forty Hours, assist Pastors extraordinarily, of imprudences, of useless loquacity, of boasting concerning many general Confessions heard, concerning great fish caught, etc. But especially let them see that they say nothing concerning anything heard or done in the tribunal of Penance in the midst of gatherings of priests or during dining, notably in the presence of a woman serving at table.

N. N. in the year of his or her age ... from the Parish N. (Quasi-parish; Mission), before me the undersigned, outside the Sacrament of Penance, complains that N. N. (Pastor, Quasi-Pastor, Missionary, Priest, Religious) in ... (Parish, Quasi-parish, Mission, College, Monastery) ... solicited her (him) in Confession (on the occasion, etc.) by words (deeds) of this kind ... to dishonest and shameful things, and is prepared to confirm this by oath also before the Episcopal delegate, her (his) own or neighboring Pastor N. N.

N. N., Priest, etc.

Given ...