Direct violation of the seal (Can. 2369)

Canon 2369 IV. Confessarium qui sigillum sacramentale directe violare praesumpserit, manet excommunicatio specialissimo modo Sedi Apostolicae reservata; qui vero indirecte tantum, obnoxius est poenis [suspensionis a celebratione Missae, et ab audiendis sacramentalibus confessionibus vel etiam pro delicti gravitate inhabilis ad ipsas excipiendas declaretur, privetur omnibus beneficiis, dignitatibus, voce activa et passiva, et inhabilis ad ea omnia declaretur, et in casibus gravioribus degradationi quoque subjiciatur. (A confessor who presumes to violate the sacramental seal directly lies under an excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See in a most special manner; but one who violates it only indirectly is liable to the penalties of suspension from celebrating Mass and from hearing sacramental confessions, or may even, according to the gravity of the offence, be declared unfit to hear them; he is to be deprived of all benefices, dignities, and of active and passive voice, and declared unfit for them all, and in graver cases he is to be subjected to degradation as well.)] Only a confessor who with full knowledge of the crime which he is committing, and of its penalty, directly violates the seal of confession and incurs ipso facto excommunication very specially reserved to the Holy See. The penalties assigned by the Code in punishment of others besides confessors, and of confessors who presume to violate the seal indirectly, are ferendae sententiae.

630. Observations. - 1. According to can. 2369: a) A confessor who shall have presumed to violate the sacramental seal directly incurs by that very fact an excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See in a most special manner.

b) But one who has violated the seal only indirectly is liable to penalties ferendae sententiae, the same as confessors soliciting to shameful things (can. 2368, § 1), namely suspension, or even inability to hear confessions, privation of benefices, dignities, and active and passive voice; indeed, in the graver case, degradation.

c) Rash and therefore conscious violation of the seal by an interpreter or by all others to whom knowledge of confession has in any way come is decreed to be punished, according to the gravity of the guilt, by a salutary penalty (ferendae sententiae), which can even be excommunication.

2. In ecclesiastical law, according to can. 1757, § 3, the following are repelled as incapable of giving testimony: "priests, as regards all those things which have become known to them from sacramental confession, even if they have been released from the bond of the seal; indeed things heard by anyone and in any way on the occasion of confession cannot be received even as an indication of truth."

3. Lest the seal be broken indirectly, it is better always to respond in the same way. Thus, when asked about sins, let him say that he has heard or knows nothing; - when asked about absolution given, let him say: I have discharged my office, or: are such questions to be asked?; - when asked about communion to be ministered (e.g., in a hospital), let him say: ask the penitent whether he wishes to communicate.

4. Concerning a certificate of confession to be given or denied, let it be noted: a) such a certificate can always be given to all who truly intend sacramental confession, whether absolved or not absolved; - b) a certificate cannot be denied to an indisposed penitent who has truly confessed, if he asks for it outside confession; because thus the confessor would use knowledge of confession with burden to the penitent; - c) likewise it cannot be denied to a penitent asking for it in confession, provided the penitent is in those circumstances in which it is customarily given, because it would be an indirect violation of the seal, since it would be revealed that the penitent had not confessed duly; - d) it must always be denied to those who simulate confession, even if this is done to obtain a certificate: for then there is no obligation of the seal, indeed the confessor, by giving the certificate, would falsely say that the penitent had confessed; nevertheless on account of grave inconveniences he could say that such a one approached him or that he heard him in the confessional; - e) a testimony of absolution granted cannot be written for one who was not absolved, because it would be to lie; yet if a printed certificate should imprudently exhibit a testimony of absolution, it would have to be handed over also to him who was not absolved, at least if generally it is customarily handed over, or he himself publicly asks for it: thus because of the seal; nor would the confessor lie, but he would only place the material act of handing over (or signing) the certificate for a proportionately grave reason, in circumstances which sufficiently indicate the restriction.

5. If the confessor in a difficult case needs counsel: a) he can have recourse to a theologian to whom the penitent is altogether unknown; - b) if this cannot be done, let him set forth the case in such a way that he avoids danger of revelation, i.e., as fictional, omitting non-necessary adjuncts from which the penitent could be known, and mixing in false things which do not change the substance of the matter; - c) or, if it is not conveniently done thus, let him ask from the penitent permission to take counsel and to speak with another about a matter pertaining to confession; - d) but if this is denied, and in no way can he avoid the danger of revelation, let him send him to another confessor, or if this can scarcely be done, after diligently employing study and prayer, let him trust in God and solve the difficulty himself in the better way in which he can.

It can be that others are bound by the seal. In this canon there is treatment only of the confessor violating the seal directly. Direct violation of the seal consists in the express revelation of matter known under the sacramental seal together with the manifestation of the penitent. The excommunication is reserved in a most special mode.

A Bishop consecrating someone as Bishop, the Bishops or, in place of Bishops, the assisting presbyters, and he who receives consecration without apostolic mandate contrary to the prescription of can. 953, are suspended by the law itself until the Apostolic See shall dispense them (Can. 2370).