The Church of England has published its response to the Government’s consultation on mandatory reporting. On the issue of the seal of confession, it says this:
“Like many other historic churches, the Church of England includes in its practices the ministry of Confession and Reconciliation. In this ministry, someone can come to a priest and disclose anything they feel they may have done wrong. It is the practice of the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox Churches to guarantee absolute confidentiality of what has been disclosed. This is often known as ‘the Seal of the Confessional’. The Seal is referred to in Canon Law, although the interpretation of the relevant legal provisions is contested.
This is a very restricted and circumscribed practice, also called ‘sacramental confession’. Absolute confidentiality does not apply in Canon Law to any other setting where confessions may be made as part of pastoral ministry, but only in the sacramental ministry of confession. This practice is not very widely spread in the Church of England, however, for those who practice it, it is held very strongly. It offers a safe space for someone to begin to acknowledge what they may have done, and start the journey towards change, including, if appropriate, be guided towards handing themselves in to the police. For those who do practise this ministry in the Church of England, it is a very important aspect of their ministry as priests. They share this view with the priests of the Roman Catholic Church, where this ministry is much more common, if not universal. Clergy in the Church of England who practise this ministry would often follow Roman Catholic teaching on this practice, as well as Church of England Canon law.
It is the view of those who practise this ministry that any breach of the Seal of the Confessional would irretrievably damage the practice, and introduce a ‘chill factor’ that would prevent those who have not committed reportable offences but simply want a safe space to process their own lives from accessing the support and help they may need. This view is not uncontroversial within the Church of England. Others would argue that the protection of children and vulnerable persons is always paramount and that absolute confidentiality should never be offered. Because the Church of England recognises historic abuses of the Seal of the Confessional and is aware of the need to balance out appropriate protection for all and freedom of religion, it has set up a working group on the Seal of the Confessional to enable an integrated conversation and decision-making process on how the practice of sacramental confession and absolution should proceed. The working group will report to the House of Bishops in October 2023 and the House of Bishops will consider whether, and how, the ministry of reconciliation should be framed with regards to reporting.
We would urge the government to consider carefully questions of religious freedom and to take heed to different churches’ response on this matter.”
It isn’t clear to me from following that link what body submitted this response in the name of the Church of England. In the 1950s the Church of England’s convocations both re-affirmed the seal “as an essential principle of church doctrine”– as an Act of Convocation this carried great weight. This understanding has been reaffirmed, most recently in 2015, in Acts of Convocation, the Professional Guidelines, citing the earlier Act.
It is of course open to an individual, or to one of the bodies which make up the Church of England, to take a different opinion. However, if an official response to HMG’s consultation is professing to speak for the Church of England (as this response seems to), it should at least advert to the official teaching of the Church of England as formally stated, which remains as I have quoted above.
I picked it up from the C of E website, so I had no reason to believe it wasn’t kosher: https://www.churchofengland.org/safeguarding/safeguarding-news-releases/submission-government-consultation-mandatory-reporting.
But it doesn’t say who wrote it.
I am sure it’s kosher, but in particular I think that whoever filled it in should have signed it in the name of the body they belong to–of course, that information might have been included on a cover page which has been lost in the process of posting to the website.
There wasn’t a cover page in the version on the C of E website: merely the questions and answers, taken from the respondents’ answers to the online questionnaire.
The Church Times states that this response was drawn up by the Church’s National Safeguarding Team (NST) with input from policy advisers, diocesan safeguarding teams, lead safeguarding bishops, and the Seal of the Confessional Working Group. It was submitted by the National Safeguarding Director and published on Tuesday afternoon.
“ We would urge the government to consider carefully questions of religious freedom and to take heed to different churches’ response on this matter.”
High level waffle.