Folia Canonica 10. (2007)
STUDIES - Péter Artner: The Canonical Protection of the Dignity of the Sacrament of Penance in the Penal Law
THE CANONICAL PROTECTION OF THE DIGNITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE 91 to repair damages. Not only the false denunciation of a confessor is to be punished, but the false denunciation of all priests. Although the canon says “confessor”, we can understand all priests, who could be a confessor. This canon, because it is not a penal canon is not to be interpreted strictly. The denunciation has to be addressed to an ecclesiastical authority (e.g. Ordinary, Superior, Ecclesiastical Tribunal, Holy See), and it has to be a denunciation, not a simple consultation.8 The formal retraction is the prerequisite for the absolution, but in urgent cases the confessor can forbear from demanding it;9 the canon does not concern the validity of the absolution, only determines the requirements for the licit absolution. “Harm” can mean all those moral or other damages that he/she caused for the innocent priest. In the case of the denunciation the priest has almost no possibilities to defend himself because of the confessional seal. The Authorities have to investigate the life of the accused priest, and maybe wait for another denunciation to ascertain if the priest can be really guilty in such an offence or not. On the other side, the priest has to ask questions very discreetly (c.979), so as not to appear in the mind of a mentally ill person, if the pastoral questions are solicitation. The punishment of the false denunciation is latae sententiae interdict, and latae sententiae suspension, if the offender is a cleric. The latae sententiae suspension, according to the §2 of c. 13 34 has all the effect, listed in § 1 of c. 13 3 3. At the absolution of this sin the confessor has to remit the censure, too, to what the offender incurred to receive the absolution licitly. 3. The Absolution of the Accomplice The c. 977 strictly forbids and invalidates the absolution of the accomplice against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue, except in danger of death. It would not be fitting, that the confessor, who has to be the judge in the confession, would judge over himself,10 11 and this cannot be allowed as the Regula Iuris says: “Nemo iudex in causa suaTo avoid these situations, the Church prohibited the priests with a positive ecclesiastical law to absolve their accomplice against the sixth commandment. This prohibition is not a penalty in itself, just the limitation of the faculty of the priest in the particular situation. It is a lex inhabilitans12, or an invalidating 8F. Loza, in Exegetical Commentary, Vol III/1, 813 9De Paolis, Delictis, 210 l0F. Morrisey, The Sacrament of Reconciliation, Ottawa, 1977-1978, 35 11 E. MlRAGOLI, II confessore e il "de sexto", in Ouaderni di Diritto Ecclesiale, 1991, 238-257, 241
