Opinion: Breaking sacred seal of confession was a misguided effort

The controversial proposed California law, SB 360, was pulled by state Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, Monday before a major committee hearing in Sacramento. He apparently didn’t have the votes, this time, to move the bill forward. So, for now, the proposed bill is dead. It would have broken the sacred seal of confession that Catholic priests have with their penitents as it would have required that they inform civil authorities when a fellow cleric or Church employee confesses the sin of child abuse during confession or as during any “penitential communication.”

Although every reasonable person wants to keep children safe from abuse, allowing the state to enter into the confessional booth would have been an affront to religious liberty, and it wouldn’t have solved the problem that Hill sought to solve.

First, Catholic priests are already child-abuse mandated reporters along with other clerics and professionals who work with children and families.

If a Catholic priest hears about possible child abuse during other conversations or observations they must follow current state law and report their suspicions to child protection authorities. The only exception to their mandated reporting obligation is during the sacred sacrament and seal of confession.

Second, there is currently no evidence anywhere that children have been abused by clerics after the cleric confessed to it during confession.

Third, while the clergy abuse problem has received a tremendous amount of publicity since 2002 following the Boston Globe’s investigative report, the incidence of abuse in the Church went from an average of over 600 new cases per year in the 1970s to about 12 new cases per year following the 2002 US Conference of Catholic Bishops Dallas Charter reforms to an average of one new case per year during the past half dozen years. The vast majority of clerical abuse cases occurred before the mid 1980s. In fact, the well-publicized Pennsylvania Grand Jury report, released last summer that launched the most recent cycle of media publicity, reported only two cases of clerical sexual abuse in the 21st century.

The confessional seal is an air-tight, sacred trust that is similar to the attorney-client privilege.  Catholics need to have the full trust of their priests in the confessional booth with matters related to their souls so that they can be fully honest and assured of confidentiality. If you crack the sacred seal of confession, just as you crack the seal of attorney-client privilege, there are many bad unintended consequences. And tragically, if you worry about confidentiality, you’ll keep your secrets to yourself with no hope of getting the help you most desperately need to reform one’s life.

Certainly, we need to keep children safe from abuse. Evidence-based approaches to child safety are readily available and actually now working within and outside of the Catholic Church. Any cracks in the system of child safety need to be filled, but putting an intended crack into the sacred seal of confession is simply wrongheaded and misguided. The bill is dead for now, and may it remain so during future legislative sessions.

Thomas G. Plante is a professor of psychology at Santa Clara University and an adjunct clinical professor of psychiatry at Stanford University School of Medicine. He has evaluated and treated both clergy abuse victims and offenders, conducted psychological screening evaluations for clerical applicants, and has conducted and published research on clergy sexual abuse for more than 30 years.