ASK FATHER: Security video camera inside a confessional

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Are security cameras allowed inside the confessional? I went to confession to a Novus Ordo parish and when I was done saying my sins something prompted me to look up and when I did, I saw a security camera on the ceiling pointing straight at me. I’m concerned because I normally go to confession here, but I’m not sure how long that camera has been there. On my next regular confession, I went back to the same church just to make sure that in fact it was a camera and sure enough it was. Is there something in canon law that prohibits this. Wouldn’t this violate the seal of confession? Should I notify the bishop?

Just when I thought I had heard pretty much everything, there is this.

The Code Canon Law touches on this topic but does give a crystal clear answer to your question as you asked it.  Why?  Because we don’t know if that camera was recording sound or not.

It is possible that it was able to record the mouths of penitents moving, which means that a certain amount of lip reading could be done.  With new AI tools, who knows?

This is what the Code says.  Read this and then tell me!  This is the canon that deals with the censure for priests/confessors who violate the Seal and about anyone else who would reveal the contents of a confession. Emphases mine.  Most pertinent is § 3.

Can. 1386— § 1. A confessor who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; he who does so only indirectly is to be punished according to the gravity of the offence.

§ 2. Interpreters, and the others mentioned in can. 983 § 2, who violate the secret are to be punished with a just penalty, not excluding excommunication.

§ 3. Without prejudice to the provisions of §§ 1 and 2, any person who by means of any technical device makes a recording of what is said by the priest or by the penitent in a sacramental confession, either real or simulated, or who divulges it through the means of social communication, is to be punished according to the gravity of the offence, not excluding, in the case of a cleric, by dismissal from the clerical state.

The key items here are “any person”, and “any technical device” and “or by the penitent”.

Whoever turns on that cam is “any person”.  A security cam is a “technical device”.  The cam was aimed at “the penitent”.

Again, we don’t know if sound was recorded or lip movement was recorded.  If just the back of the penitent’s head and back were recorded without sound, I think this canon may not strictly apply.

HOWEVER… this has a VERY bad feeling to it.  The fact that you asking shows that.

Not too long ago, when making a confession of my own, I beat up a young priest for having his active mobile phone with him, which I could clearly see through the rather sheer curtain.  I also beat him up for screwing up the form of absolution.

I am fully aware that priests would want to protect their own physical persons and public reputations and have mitigating evidence in the case of false accusations.  Still, this doesn’t seem right to me.

I would bring this up with the pastor of the parish, in a written letter asking for a written response.  I would send a copy to the local bishop.   If the pastor will not respond… or if he does in an inadequate way, then send the copies of the correspondence with the pastor to the bishop.  If that doesn’t produce a response, then send copies of everything to Apostolic Nuncio.

Meanwhile, you might want to find somewhere else to make your confessions.