Article 4, SST / Normae de gravioribus delictis 2010: A Case Stury, and Praxis Considerations
The presentation is a case study based on Article 4, §1, 4° and 5° of Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela as revised in the Norms of 2010. The facti species concerns a religious cleric who is also the pastor (parish priest) of a parish where he has heard the sacramental confessions of five young women...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2019
|
| In: |
Ius missionale
Year: 2019, Pages: 215-236 |
| IxTheo Classification: | CA Christianity SA Church law; state-church law |
| Further subjects: | B
Case study
B State law of churches B Church law |
| Summary: | The presentation is a case study based on Article 4, §1, 4° and 5° of Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela as revised in the Norms of 2010. The facti species concerns a religious cleric who is also the pastor (parish priest) of a parish where he has heard the sacramental confessions of five young women (all adults), who experienced varying levels of discomfort during and after the experience. Second or third hand complaints have been received by the local diocesan bishop concerning the priest's celebration of the sacrament, including: (1) his physical comportment during these five confessions; (2) questions he asked and comments he made; and (3) a penance he gave. The bishop engages the priest in dialogue as part of a preliminary investigation. In his effort to defend or at least explain himself, the priest offers substantive information regarding the sacramental confessions and the penitents. The case analysis examines the primary issues concerning possible solicitations (Article 4, §1, 4°) and possible ciolation of the sacramental confessional seal (Article 4, §1, 5°). Further, the bishop's initial steps are critiqued; the role of religious major superior (provincial) is considered; privacy, good name, and appropriate application of "precautionary measure" issues are raised; and difficulties concerning how the accused might properly defend himself are noted. How one treats all parties in a pastorally and canonically appropriate manner is this complex case of fundamental praxis interest. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2520-0089 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Ius missionale
|