Confession behind the screen: more than just preference

Much energy has been expended discussing the current liturgical problems in the Church (and not without good cause; the Divine Liturgy, where Christ is offered in sacrifice to the Father, is the most important aspect of the Church's worship). However, the abuses, ambiguities and modernist innovations current in ecclesial life are by no means limited to the liturgy alone. Today I'd like to discuss them with reference to the Sacrament of Confession.

How often is the deficient argument made that those who prefer the old rite do so for merely aesthetic reasons: that either rite is just as good, and there is no logical reason why we should have one over the other because they are both equally valid (and by the way, I think people who argue on terms of strict validity demonstrate a skewed point of view; to argue from validity alone is to argue on the basis of bare minimums and exceptions instead of what is the fullness of the rite and what are the proper norms, but I digress)? And if both rites are equally valid (which they are objectively speaking), then the one solitary reason why one should prefer one over another is for mere aesthetic, sentimental, nostalgic or romantic reasons. We see this in the Bishop's statements on the Motu Proprio; that it is for those "still attached" to the old rite, never imagining that there is a small army of persons alive who were born after the Council implementations but yet desire the old form because they know with Catholic sense that it is the fullness of Catholic worship.

In the sacrament of Confession we see this false mindset regarding validity and aetshetics in the discussion between whether it is better to co to the sacrament behind a screen or face to face. In most parishes today, face to face is the norm. Parish confessionals are still supposed to be set up for behind the screen confession, but, as with kneelers, many parishes have chosen to abandon the behind the screen option all together. The confessional has turned into a small conference room, complete with table, small lamp, cushy chairs, box of tissue paper (in case the penitent starts crying) and perhaps even a glass of water (for the penitent's throat after he spends 30 minutes blabbing about everything except his sins). I'd say only the most liberal parishes have done away with the behind the screen option altogether; the majority of parishes have a behind the screen option but with an option for face to face. Only a few parishes have exclusive behind the screen confessions.

I think face to face is a big problem, and not just because I favor behind the screen for aesthetic reasons. When looking at face to face vs. behind the screen, we have to look not at preferences and what makes us feel good, but what facilitates a more thorough confession and hence a firmer reconciliation to God with the reception of more grace. As we look at the differences in the two customs, remember that we are not talking about what the faithful "get out of it," but rather what is intrinsic to the practice itself. Please don't leave a bunch of comments saying "but I get a lot out of confession face to face"; that may be true, but it is not the point. There are a lot of people who "get a lot" out of Buddhism too, but it has nothing to do with what is good for the soul. Here are some things to consider:

Downsides to "Face to Face" Confession

1) The biggest and most obvious one is lack of anonymity. Confession of sin, since the early Middle Ages, has always been anonymous (in patristic times, it had been public, before the congregation, which I don't think anybody is anxious to return to). Knowing that the priest is now able to connect a face with the sins you are confessing makes it more difficult to bring everything out into the open.

2) It creates the atmosphere of a meeting room or a psychiatrist's office. A face to face format encourages discussion; after all, in society, we are always face to face when we discuss things. Thus, from habit, we tend more to want to "discuss" our sins instead of confess them. Behin the screen, it is easy to say, "Bless me Father, for I have sinned. It has been six weeks since my last confession. I confess that I have..." It is awkward to repeat this formula while you are sitting face to face with the priest. Instead, the confession tends to sound like, "Oh Father. I'm having such a problem with my daughter! Let me tell you about it..." This is one of the biggest problems of face to face confession; instead of confession of sin, it turns into discussion of problems.

3) Flowing from the above tendency of confession to turn to discussion comes the consequent that confessions take a lot longer; it takes a lot longer to discuss things with a priest face to face than to simply make a confession behind a screen. Face to face confessions often run twenty-minutes a piece. The avergage confession made to St. Padre Pio was under two minutes.

4) It fails to give any sense of the fact that sin puts you outside of God's grace; i.e, the sacrament done face to face has very little sign value. It has the feeling of a fireside chat.

Benefits of "Behind the Screen"

1) Easier to recollect sins because of the absence of having the priest looking at you while you are trying to do it, thus rendering confession more thorough and thus more fruitful.

2) Preserves anonymity, again making it easier to recount and recollect sins. The anonymity also, in a way, symbolizes the gratuitous nature of God's grace, who gives without distinction of persons. The fact that the priest cannot see you is in a way symbolic of the fact that to God all men are equal and that He judges by the heart.

3) Keeps confessions shorter; it is harder to get into a "discussion" from behind a screen.

4) Sign value: placing yourself behind a screen with the priest, acting in persona Christi, reminds us that sin does indeed put up a barrier between ourselves and God.

5) Greater humility: when we are visible to another person, especially a priest, we will tend to try to look more impressive in our demeanor and facial expressions. Behind a screen (especially if there is a kneeler), we are enabled to forget our image and truly humble ourselves. This is the proper disposition for the sacrament and thus makes it more fruitful.

I'm sure there are many others, and this is not even taking into account the actual words and rubrics of the rite itself! So we can see that confession behind the screen helps instill greater humility, makes it easier for the penitent to recall his sins, preserves anonymity, keeps the confession time shorter (making it more practical) and, if the proper dispositions are all there, facilitates a greater reception of grace ex opere operantis to the penitent. It is no mere matter of taste. If a priest took seriously his obligation to make the greatest amount of grace available to his flock, it seems that he ought to fervently recommend confession behind the screen.