Luther, and the Confession of sins

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

So...you are going to selectively pick and choose which things a penitent says are really "in confession"? That doesn't seem right. If I go to confession, then I consider anything that I say from the moment the confession begins until absolution is pronounced to be "in confession". If I had a pastor that tried to judge the intent of what I said to determine whether or not any of what I said was really part of my confession or not...so he could decide whether or not the seal of the confessional really applied to that part of what I said...well, I would be seriously ticked off...

If I did have suicidal thoughts, then I would confess them...since I believe that such thoughts are sinful. This would be part of my confession of my actual sins...not just some conspiracy to sin in the future.

You cannot blatantly make confession into whatever you want. To do so is an insult to the office itself. The pastor is not judging intent of whether or not you are penitent, but they are standing into whether or not you are in fact making a confession of sin or conspiring to sin. There is a clear difference.

Use the example you posted. Saying you had suicidal thoughts and saying you are suicidal are different as well. One indicates that you struggled with this the other indicates you are planning on committing suicide. You cannot go to a pastor and say "Pastor forgive me I am going to murder three people tomorrow." Not only is it not confession because it is not an act of repentance, but it is a clear intent of harm. Just because you want to make it confession does not make it confession. And the distinction is between confessing sins verses planning sins.
And quite frankly, you should be concerned if your pastor is not making an effort to understand the difference. Theologically it skews our understanding of forgiveness into cheap grace, which is detrimental to faith. Practically it enables you to live in sin, which is not only detrimental to your faith, but also may be of harm to yourself or others.
You should also realize that pastors do not tread these roads carelessly. Most pastors would in fact confront the person, especially if it is in anyway ethically gray. For example, if you confess you have suicidal thoughts, most pastors will gauge when you have these thoughts, if you still have them, and will ask that essential question "Do you have a plan?" They won't simply pick up the phone mid-conversation and call for help, nor will they divulge the information to others who do not need to know for your care.
Why is private confession retained among Lutherans? It is that particular consciences may be freed from their burden. It is so they can hear words of forgiveness for that sin. Therefore that is what confession is for, if you are not seeking forgiveness, and do not wish to turn from your sin, that is not confession.
Now if you are not making confession, under what ethical grounds then should the pastor be bound under the seal of confession? The entire point of the seal is because the pastor is acting in a priestly function, that is, standing as God's voice to you so you may hear absolution. Ethically, the seal is to make someone trust that they may enumerate any sin for the sake of their soul without fear of the words being shared with others. The pastor's willingness to break confidentiality in relation to future harm should not break the trust that past harms cannot be enumerated. Without reading that book you quoted from I would imagine that they agree with me on this, that they are talking clearly about confession not conspiracy. And if they are not, I'd like to hear the rational for that.
And ethically, this is also about the fact that confession is not something the pastor has the power to change. That is, he cannot go back and prevent the harm from happening, but conspiracy is something different, it is something he has the power to prevent and is bound by Christian love to do so.

 

[Bryne]

I am not trying to make confession into whatever I want. But something doesn't suddenly stop being confession because something is said that isn't a direct confession of sins. Once a confession starts, then anything said is part of the confession until the confession ends. You can't just pick and choose which things said are part of "real confession" and which things are not.

If I try to get forgiveness for a future act during confession, I would expect the pastor to tell me that that is not how it works. But that is still something that I said during confession.

This is kind of getting a bit off track. You stated that ELCA allows for a break in confidentiality in the case of intent to harm. That is fine...that is ELCA's policy. I am not really objecting to that so much your claim that those statements aren't really a part of confession...but it seems we just going around in circles on this one.

BUT....DaRev claims that that is the LCMS policy as well...but that doesn't seem to coincide with the LCMS document that I quoted from. So...my question is really to him...

According to the LCMS document on confession, a pastor is not to reveal ANYTHING told to him during confession. It seems to me that an expression of an intent to harm would be included in "anything". How do you (DaRev) reconcile alerting the authorities with the quotation in question?

 

[DaRev]

Regardless of intent, if it is said in the confessional, then the above quote would apply. It is very clear:

"...under no circumstances should a pastor reveal anything told him in confession by a penitent."

How do you (DaRev) reconcile alerting the authorities with the quotation in question?

The key words are "in confession" which denotes past acts. Divulging the intent to do something is not a confession of a past act, it's the revelation of a future intent. A pastor does have the duty to prevent a sin from occuring is he has the opportunity to do so. This is why we will ban someone from the communion rail if we know that they will committ a sin by partaking, to prevent them from receiving in an unworthy manner.

 

[DaRev]

I am not trying to make confession into whatever I want. But something doesn't suddenly stop being confession because something is said that isn't a direct confession of sins. Once a confession starts, then anything said is part of the confession until the confession ends. You can't just pick and choose which things said are part of "real confession" and which things are not.

But you yourself are trying to define what "confession" is in this statement. Is your definition of "confession" 'the telling of your sins to the pastor', or is your definition of "confession" 'anything I say at all during the 10 minutes I am sitting in his office'? We don't define it that way, and I don't believe that the statement you keep quotintg defines it that way either.

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

But you yourself are trying to define what "confession" is in this statement. Is your definition of "confession" 'the telling of your sins to the pastor', or is your definition of "confession" 'anything I say at all during the 10 minutes I am sitting in his office'? We don't define it that way, and I don't believe that the statement you keep quotintg defines it that way either.

agreed

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

If I try to get forgiveness for a future act during confession, I would expect the pastor to tell me that that is not how it works. But that is still something that I said during confession.

yes, the pastor should say that is not how it works, but he still has a responsibility to prevent harm. Ignorance to what confession is and what is protected confidentially on the part of the penitent does not excuse the pastor from his ethical call.
The pastor whenever he encounters something he may have to breach confidentiality for should not stop confession or pass over it carelessly. The pastor should further address the issue to be clear it is a time when confidentiality must be breached and confession has become conspiracy.

 

[Bryne]

But you yourself are trying to define what "confession" is in this statement. Is your definition of "confession" 'the telling of your sins to the pastor', or is your definition of "confession" 'anything I say at all during the 10 minutes I am sitting in his office'? We don't define it that way, and I don't believe that the statement you keep quotintg defines it that way either.

So...show me how the LCMS defines it...can you give me a reference?

My understanding is that once private confession starts, then all that is said is part of that. I don't think you can take it apart like a puzzle or something and say, "these pieces are confession, but these pieces aren't". If that is so, then how am I to know what my pastor considers part of my confession and what he doesn't. I would not be at all comfortable confessing under these conditions...nor would I have the same trust level as I would knowing that anything I said was considered part of the confession.

Now...I am not saying that I think there are never good reasons to divulge something that is said in confession...maybe there are...but I don't think you should use the excuse that certain types of statements can be divulged because they aren't really "in confession". That seems like a complete cop-out. I could phrase something so that I was only speaking of my past sin, but still made it clear that there was a danger of me doing it again...then what? You don't divulge it?

For example...

I could say that I had suicidal thoughts and had even written a suicide note...but I threw it away. Those are past acts...but that doesn't mean the danger is gone. What if this just happened a few hours ago? I would be very concerned that there was still a danger at that point, but only past actions were confessed. So, do you keep quiet until I actually say that I still might go through with it?

If you believe that your obligation to keep people safe overrides your obligation to not divulge what is said in confession, then it shouldn't matter how it is phrased...whether in terms of past sins or future intent.

 

[QuiltAngel]

How can you confess to doing something which you have not done?

 

[Bryne]

You can confess that you want to do something. You can confess that you have done something, and are having trouble not doing it. You could confess to an act that is often repeated and not just a one time thing. These can indicate the possibility that you may do it in the future.

If I go to a therapist and confide that I abused my child in some way...even if I say that I will never do it again and I feel terrible and am seeking help...the therapist is required by law to report me...because a child is in danger. Chances are that if I did it once, I will do it again...even if I am sorry for it.

So...if I confess that to my pastor instead of a therapist...then what? Will my pastor report me? I used to think not...but now I am not so sure.

 

[DaRev]

Well..... I guess the MDiv on my wall is meaningless.

We were instructed in seminary that whenever we meet with someone our first statement to them is to be "Everything discussed in here is confidential and will not be discussed with anyone, except if you threaten to harm yourself or someone else." That pretty much explains and defines what can and cannot be divulged outside of that confidentiality.

If I go to a therapist and confide that I abused my child in some way...even if I say that I will never do it again and I feel terrible and am seeking help...the therapist is required by law to report me...because a child is in danger. Chances are that if I did it once, I will do it again...even if I am sorry for it.

So...if I confess that to my pastor instead of a therapist...then what? Will my pastor report me? I used to think not...but now I am not so sure.

If you had read anything I posted, you would know the answer to that question.
If you had confessed to abusing your child and were truly repentant, I would absolve you and would never divulge that to anyone. But if you said to me "I'm going to abuse my child" then I would need to follow up on that.
You are comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Bryne]

If you had read anything I posted, you would know the answer to that question.
If you had confessed to abusing your child and were truly repentant, I would absolve you and would never divulge that to anyone. But if you said to me "I'm going to abuse my child" then I would need to follow up on that.
You are comparing apples and oranges.

Well, I read this:

A pastor does have the duty to prevent a sin from occuring is he has the opportunity to do so.

And if a person is abusing a child or a spouse, then it is highly unlikely that they will stop even if they are truly repentant and confess. The person doesn't have to explicitly state "I am going to do it again" for a reasonable person to conclude that they will almost certainly do it again. This is especially true if sexual abuse is involved. Therefore, if you have a duty to prevent such a thing from occurring, then it is reasonable to conclude that you may consider such a statement reason to break confidentiality.

The same could be said of confessing to suicidal thoughts. Even if the person doesn't outright say that he is going to kill themselves, you can still reasonably conclude that the person is in danger based on certain past actions/thoughts.

It seems that you have drawn a line, so to speak...as to what kind of statements are considered not OK to divulge and what kind of statements you must divulge. I suppose this is good to know. But I still have a problem with the reasoning behind it. If you really do have a duty to stop harm, then any information that indicates a person might harm themselves or another should be divulged.

 

[seajoy]

I think it all boils down to the fact that pastors need to be in the Word and in prayer, daily (along with the rest of us for that matter). We can come up with all kinds of scenarios, but really, God's guidance is what's needed in these things. Pastors are human and do the best they can with the information they are given. I would think they rely on God in their decisions in these matters.

 

[DaRev]

And if a person is abusing a child or a spouse, then it is highly unlikely that they will stop even if they are truly repentant and confess. The person doesn't have to explicitly state "I am going to do it again" for a reasonable person to conclude that they will almost certainly do it again. This is especially true if sexual abuse is involved. Therefore, if you have a duty to prevent such a thing from occurring, then it is reasonable to conclude that you may consider such a statement reason to break confidentiality.

The same could be said of confessing to suicidal thoughts. Even if the person doesn't outright say that he is going to kill themselves, you can still reasonably conclude that the person is in danger based on certain past actions/thoughts.

It seems that you have drawn a line, so to speak...as to what kind of statements are considered not OK to divulge and what kind of statements you must divulge. I suppose this is good to know. But I still have a problem with the reasoning behind it. If you really do have a duty to stop harm, then any information that indicates a person might harm themselves or another should be divulged.

I cannot see into a person's heart and know what they are thinking or feeling. I also do not have e.s.p. to read people's minds. I can only go by what they specifically say. If someone confesses to abusing their child, I will absolve them. If they specifically threaten to do it again, I need to follow up on that.

 

[QuiltAngel]

Where in the definition of confession do you see anything about something one wants to do or is thinking about doing?

confession |kənˈfe sh ən|
noun
1 a formal statement admitting that one is guilty of a crime : he signed a confession to the murders.
• an admission or acknowledgment that one has done something that one is ashamed or embarrassed about : by his own confession, he had strayed perilously close to alcoholism.
• a formal admission of one's sins with repentance and desire of absolution, esp. privately to a priest as a religious duty : she still had not been to confession. See also sacrament of reconciliation .
• ( confessions) often humorous intimate revelations about a person's private life or occupation, esp. as presented in a sensationalized form in a book, newspaper, or movie : confessions of a driving instructor.
2 (also confession of faith) a statement setting out essential religious doctrine.
• (also Confession) the religious body or church sharing a confession of faith.
• a statement of one's principles : his words are a political confession of faith.
DERIVATIVES
confessionary |-ˌnerē| adjective
ORIGIN late Middle English : via Old French from Latin confessio(n-), from confiteri ‘acknowledge’ (see confess ).

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

Well, I read this:




And if a person is abusing a child or a spouse, then it is highly unlikely that they will stop even if they are truly repentant and confess. The person doesn't have to explicitly state "I am going to do it again" for a reasonable person to conclude that they will almost certainly do it again. This is especially true if sexual abuse is involved. Therefore, if you have a duty to prevent such a thing from occurring, then it is reasonable to conclude that you may consider such a statement reason to break confidentiality.

The same could be said of confessing to suicidal thoughts. Even if the person doesn't outright say that he is going to kill themselves, you can still reasonably conclude that the person is in danger based on certain past actions/thoughts.

It seems that you have drawn a line, so to speak...as to what kind of statements are considered not OK to divulge and what kind of statements you must divulge. I suppose this is good to know. But I still have a problem with the reasoning behind it. If you really do have a duty to stop harm, then any information that indicates a person might harm themselves or another should be divulged.

In accord with the 8th commandment the pastor should not simply assume a child abuser who is repentant will do it again.
However, as in all cases where there is concern of future misconduct and question as to whether the issue is confessed and only in the past or a real concern for the future the pastor would talk further to discern if further action is necessary.

 

[Bryne]

Where in the definition of confession do you see anything about something one wants to do or is thinking about doing?

Is it not sinful to think about doing certain things? Didn't Jesus say that looking at a women with lust is the same as committing adultery with her? Wouldn't that be a sin? Shouldn't that be confessed?

Don't we confess that we have sinned in thought, word and deed? If we have sinned in thought, shouldn't that be confessed? I know that I confess to sinful thoughts, and not just sinful deeds.

 

[Bryne]

I cannot see into a person's heart and know what they are thinking or feeling. I also do not have e.s.p. to read people's minds. I can only go by what they specifically say. If someone confesses to abusing their child, I will absolve them. If they specifically threaten to do it again, I need to follow up on that.

You don't have ESP, but you could make a reasonable conclusion based on a general knowledge of human behavior. If the duty is to prevent harm, then knowledge of possible harm should be acted upon. While it is true that you might not know with 100% certainty that someone will be harmed based on past actions, the same can be said if someone threatens to do harm. We don't know with 100% certainty that the person will do harm.

I suppose it is better to have an objective guideline rather than rely on subjective judgment. But given the reasoning behind the guideline, I find it troubling.

 

[DaRev]

You don't have ESP, but you could make a reasonable conclusion based on a general knowledge of human behavior. If the duty is to prevent harm, then knowledge of possible harm should be acted upon. While it is true that you might not know with 100% certainty that someone will be harmed based on past actions, the same can be said if someone threatens to do harm. We don't know with 100% certainty that the person will do harm.

It is not my place to make guesses about someones possible behavior. I can only go on what I am told. If someone specifically threatens to harm themselves or someone else, I am obligated to intervene.

I suppose it is better to have an objective guideline rather than rely on subjective judgment. But given the reasoning behind the guideline, I find it troubling.

You're making it troubling by your own means. The guideline isn't troubling at all.

I don't understand why you find this so difficult to comprehend.

 

[DaRev]

Is it not sinful to think about doing certain things? Didn't Jesus say that looking at a women with lust is the same as committing adultery with her? Wouldn't that be a sin? Shouldn't that be confessed?

Don't we confess that we have sinned in thought, word and deed? If we have sinned in thought, shouldn't that be confessed? I know that I confess to sinful thoughts, and not just sinful deeds.

But can the pastor know what sins of thought that person has committed in order to withhold forgiveness or make any type of judgement call? Or does that person have to TELL the pastor what sins have been committed in order for himn to know that? We can only go by what we are specifically told.

 

[Bryne]

But can the pastor know what sins of thought that person has committed in order to withhold forgiveness or make any type of judgement call? Or does that person have to TELL the pastor what sins have been committed in order for himn to know that? We can only go by what we are specifically told.

I was refering to confessing sins...so yes, I would tell the pastor what sins I have commited. If I were having suicidal thoughts, for example, I would confess that to the pastor. Nothing was mentioned concerning withholding forgiveness, as far as I can recall.