Ban on children’s confession. Why should it be introduced?

In an interview with Krzysztof Gwizdała Rafał Betlejewski talks about the petition he submitted to introduce a ban on children’s confession. In his view, the ritual is humiliating because it forces a child to reveal all their “sins” in an atmosphere of fear of condemnation and the vision of hell. Many young people take traumatic experiences away from their first confession, resulting in feelings of guilt and long-lasting anxiety.

Betlejewski stresses that children have the right to preserve their intimacy, and that violating it can affect the development of their personality. Parents often “push” children toward First Communion, treating it as an important social ritual, but fail to consider the psychological burdens associated with confession. The ban would therefore protect the youngest children from unnecessary stress and fear.

Betlejewski also notes that the matter should be resolved systemically rather than left solely to the goodwill of parents. His initiative has received support online and will be considered by the Sejm’s petitions committee.

Krzysztof Gwizdała: – Hi Rafał, good morning.

Rafał Betlejewski: – Good morning.

– I’d like to ask about the petition concerning a ban on children’s confession. Again. When did you launch this initiative?

– First, I wanted to point out that we’re wearing similar clothes: a kind of grayish jacket and a darker interior. We’re arranged similarly. I thought this might be the style of priests of atheism...

– The only thing missing here is something white...

– But you know what? I have something white here, look. And that could be a symbol of this new atheism, of priests of the new world. As a priest of the new world, I thought I would submit such a petition to the Sejm. I have already submitted it twice. The first time, I think unsuccessfully, because it was still during the time when PiS governed the country. It was rejected, and I was not even informed about it, for some formal reasons. But fortunately, Deputy Józefaciuk got in touch. He said that he was on the petitions committee and that we should do it again. He helped me adapt it formally to the Sejm’s requirements, so I simply sent it and submitted it for a second time. And I understand that it has now been submitted effectively. The petition was signed on a signature-collection website and received more than 13,000 signatures. But it turns out that this is not necessary at all. A petition can be submitted individually; there is no need to collect signatures. It does not need thousands of signatures to be submitted effectively.

The rationale for banning children’s confession

– Rafał, why a ban?

– You know, I would most like the Church itself to reflect on this idiotic, unnecessary and thoroughly harmful ritual to which the entire population of Polish children is subjected. And since it concerns the entire population of Polish children, the matter would have to be resolved systemically. It is not enough to call on parents not to send their children to confession or something like that, because it would achieve little. Most parents, particularly in more remote rural areas, think that without the Church, without all this hocus-pocus, a child will not know what is good and what is bad, will not learn to be a moral person, and so on. Therefore, they at least try to push the child toward First Communion. Even if the child resists, fights back and does not want to, they still try to force them into at least this early form of Catholic conditioning, and then, well, things somehow take their course. Computers take over, with games and entertainment.

– It is quite common for parents to say that all they want is for the child to receive Communion. In my conversations, it often turns out that these are parents who are not particularly pro-Church and do not specifically follow Church recommendations. But traditionally, a child should be sent to Communion, and receiving Communion is connected with the first confession. So what? This ban would in fact also mean that receiving First Communion would be impossible.

– I don’t think so, because the two sacraments, as they are called, are independent of each other. It is not that one sacrament follows from the other. No, it is simply...

– In practice, that connection does exist in Poland, because abroad you do not necessarily have to go to confession to receive Communion. At the beginning there is a kind of general confession at the start of Mass. In Poland, however, it is accepted that there must be confession—at a priest’s ear, not a general one—and only then Communion.

– You know what? Why should we care? If you think about it, why should I or anyone else care what a bishop or some priest came up with? Or what the Church adopted? It is a custom in the Church, but it does not have to remain binding. Customs change, the Church changes, and Church regulations change.

The confession ritual and children’s mental health

– But everyone will say that this is an attack not only on confession itself, but also on Holy Communion.

– It is not. It may simply be an attempt to change an established ritual. Referring also to what you said earlier: why do parents push their children to go at least to Communion? Undoubtedly, it is an attempt to participate in social life, in a rite of passage that is important. It is an important ritual not only for Polish Catholics; generally, all cultures around the world have important rites of passage. The next such rite after Communion will be marriage—entering the adult world, taking on the responsibilities of being a parent, establishing a new home, creating a new family and raising children. But the first important rite of passage is Communion or first confession. I understand parents who try to place their children within it, because it is a visible sign that the child moves from what we might call a completely childish period into adolescence. And that is important. I understand it. It seems to me that this need is deeper than the need to participate in the Catholic Church. That is because it varies. Sometimes these parents do not go to church at all; they do not feel that their child necessarily has to be shaped as a Catholic, believe, and so on. They feel that it will somehow work itself out, but this specific, initiatory ritual is important to them. I understand that. However, it seems to me that we have reached a level of psychological and anthropological knowledge, and knowledge about religion and its function, at which we can say: All right. I understand. Let the children dress up, let them go to church, let them receive Communion, but let’s give up humiliating them in the process. It simply does not have to be there.

– But you know... Not everyone has bad memories of their first confession. Some people say, “It was fine, it wasn’t so bad.”

– That’s true, but the question is what to do with those who do not have those “fine” memories. And how do we distinguish those who will have “fine” memories from those who will not?

– From conversations, although this is obviously not a special statistical study, it seems that most people have bad memories. They say they felt a kind of anxiety.

– Many people have bad memories. But above all, this is not entirely about whether someone has one kind of memory or another, because it would be difficult to decide or predict who will remember the situation in what way. Some people in the Church say, “Maybe we should prepare priests better? Maybe it should be gentler?” The issue is rather the essence of the ritual, which is nevertheless a humiliating ritual. All the trappings that accompany it...

Traumas associated with first confession

– Could you explain what this humiliation consists of? We understand the words, but what does it mean? Why is it bad for a young person’s mental health?

– I have a letter here; I’ll read it to you...

– Please do.

– Emilia writes: “God, how I envy all those parents and children whose parents did not allow them to take part in this circus. Confession was traumatic for me. There were many tears in therapy, and I worked through it for many years afterward. The whole atmosphere of confession and the preparation for it were a nightmare for me. In religious education classes, we were told that if we did not confess all our sins to the confessor, Communion would be received sacrilegiously. Such a person would have no chance of going to heaven and would go straight to hell. I did not sleep for half the night before my first confession. I was afraid that the priest would jump out of the confessional and shout that I was a terrible sinner. Of course, I thought that I alone had sins; the other children were surely good, and the priest would soon find out what a thoroughly bad person I was. Confession itself was a nightmare. When I had to kneel at the confessional, my knees shook so much with fear that I had to hold on to the grating with my hands so I would not fall. The worst thing was that I could not even show my fear. When I told my parents I was afraid, they said that God was good and there was nothing to fear, but I was simply terrified. Let us remember that from an adult perspective, children’s sins seem trivial to us, but a child has only a child’s perspective,” Ms Emilia writes. “Because of the stress, I did not mention all my sins, and then tormented myself with the thought that there would be a big Communion celebration, lots of guests and presents, and I did not deserve it because I had forgotten some sin and my confession was invalid. And in my heart, which I was supposed to receive Jesus into, it was not white and clean but black as tar.”

– Do you receive many letters?

– I will not read the rest of this letter because it does not end here, but I have received several letters of this kind. I received letters about sacrilegious confession, about children who either invented a sin or failed to confess something and were then convinced that they were living in a state of grave sin. This brings us to all the trappings and the ritual itself—that is, the context in which it takes place. It is not a situation in which I go to the confessional, kneel for a moment before a pleasant man and tell him that I was naughty to my mother. It has this entire demonic landscape playing out around it. It involves the idea that beneath the surface of the world that is real, or seems real, there is a deeper hidden reality. That there are two kingdoms: the kingdom of Satan, of some evil demon who may steal our soul and lie in wait for it; and, on the other hand, the kingdom of the great judge who sees everything, from whom nothing can be hidden, and who died for me on the cross. It seems to me that the accumulation of these meanings and symbols, which affect the conscience very deeply—what we call the recognition of good and evil—and position me as a person within some absolute, together with the requirement that I say everything, just as in confession, tell the whole truth and conceal nothing...

The boundaries of intimacy

In other words, the construction of this ritual is deeply disturbing and causes the violation of my intimate world, which should have impassable boundaries. I have the right to lie—notice that, I have the right to lie. It is not the case that when an adult asks me something, I have to tell the truth. Like every person, I have the right to lie. If it is in the name of my safety and my sense of integrity, I have the right to conceal something, because no one has the right simply to demand that I reveal all my secrets. I have the right to my own secret, to my own intimate world, to things I do not share, or share only when I want to and feel that the situation is safe.

– Even in court, an accused or indicted person has the right not to say things that could somehow harm them. The court informs them at the beginning that they have the exact right not to reveal everything. Here, however, there is in fact the message that there is a being above you who knows everything anyway, so now we will see how much you admit to a stranger.

– Exactly. And it seems to me that the structure of this kind of situation forces a person to cross boundaries that they should not cross. Developmental psychology says that this intimate world, or preserving this intimate world, which no one may forcibly enter—neither a parent, nor a doctor, nor a psychiatrist—means that no one can simply demand access to it. They can talk and expect an exchange based on reciprocity, but with respect for the fact that a person has the right to their own barrier. Here that situation is abolished; there is an expectation that everything be said. And, as developmental psychologists say, disturbing this barrier impairs the possibility of developing a strong, distinct and integrated personality. This is where a serious problem begins, because we do not want people to break their personality or develop in some pathological way.

– Have you spoken with politicians who might support the proposal? What is their view of it?

– Have I spoken with them? No. I have no contact with politicians and nothing to do with them. I contact them only when such a situation arises, or when I meet them at some rally or something.

– But they will directly make the decision; the petitions committee will deal with it. Will they support the proposal?

– I have no individual way to influence or pressure them. I believe that the arguments presented in my petition, those 13,000 signatures and a certain common sense and body of knowledge behind it should speak for themselves. If not, then not; too bad. Am I supposed to go to these people and persuade them to vote for the petition? That is impossible. It is fiction.

– I think the Church will do a lot and lobby precisely to make the proposal fail.

– I have no doubt about that.

A social and political initiative

– The second matter is a new political initiative, one that will probably lobby for this kind of thing. Tell us more about it.

– Some time ago I realized that I operate in a certain social and political vacuum. As an artist, writer or social activist, I do not have a support group or a mutual-aid system that could support me in various activities. Perhaps you do not have such an organization either. Perhaps many of our friends and colleagues who work in different cities, trying to achieve certain social or political goals, also do not have this kind of group. I thought it would be good to have one. I resisted for a long time creating institutions that operate in the political sphere. By “political,” I do not mean specifically running for the Sejm or president of Poland, but simply operating in areas and on issues that require political action. I do not have such a group, and I would like to have one; I would like to establish it.

I would like this group not only to be ideologically united around certain ideas about what Poland could look like, but also to have some financial muscle. I will emphasize this and work toward making such muscle available. If you wanted to go to Szczecin to take part in a demonstration or handle some matter, we could simply finance your trip. The same applies to me. If we wanted to translate a book or article, or whatever it might be that we consider important, we should have the means to finance it. It should not be endless work done for free.

– Formalizing all of this is probably also intended to make various people and institutions take the expectations being expressed a little more seriously.

– Absolutely. It is as you said a moment ago. On the right, Terlikowski, Opoka or Deon can now write about the proposal to ban children’s confession: “the invention of some madman; he did other things, so he is not credible.” It is very easy to push aside someone like me, you or anyone else when they act individually.

– Or put a label on them...

– Put a label on them, discredit them somehow. With an organization, however, it is more difficult. If there are some people and some money, if it is an arrangement or structure, that structure has a name, and it is not so easy simply to attach the basic accusation that they are mad. It can be attempted, but it is more difficult.

– If someone wants to find out more, they should probably get information about the initiative on your profile.

– I think so. There is currently an initiative group, a Facebook group, where I am gathering people so that we can later establish an association from it. Because we want to organize ourselves into an association. To be honest, when I look at this group and Facebook in general, I throw up my hands. I think it is a very bad tool, or I do not understand it. It is very easy to get into conflict. Some antagonistic comments can draw you into something completely irrelevant. It is difficult to understand who is there and why, and so on. It is simply the starting point for this activity. I think we will move it to an entirely different setting, probably a website, and ultimately to a real entity, an actual association. So it should simply be treated as a headcount: this many of us are interested. On that basis, we will try to take further steps.

– So, the Rafał Betlejewski Facebook profile. That is where it begins; you can find basic information there, and you will announce on your profile where it will ultimately be located.

– Yes. In fact, I am very pleased, because I know we will cooperate on the initiative: you in Bolesławiec, me in Gdańsk.

– There are people in Wrocław. I saw that they are from all over Poland, even close to the holy city of Wadowice.

– That’s right.

– There will be quite a few people.

– This group has 1,200 people on Facebook, so that is quite a lot. I saw that the list of cities and towns is huge and long. I think that there are people from the Initiative in many places at the moment. That is what it will be called: Initiative Group or Initiative Association. I do not know yet, but Initiative. The idea is for the name to function as a dynamic name—for example, Krzysztof can create Initiative Krzysztof, while I am Initiative Rafał. It can be Initiative Warsaw; it can be a local initiative or a global initiative, and so on. It will simply be a name that functions in specific contexts.

– Rafał, thank you very much for explaining these two matters. And I am keeping my fingers crossed for the success of both initiatives.

Legal dispute with a priest and public support

– But before you leave, Krzysztof, I wanted to ask how your legal dispute with the priest and his colleague is progressing.

– For now, I am only allowed to talk about the priest and the young celebrity, but I cannot say anything about the relationship between them and so on, because until the trial begins, the court does not allow it. I can say that the first hearing has been scheduled for October this year. So it will still take some time. This is a civil case, while the criminal case, which was also brought by both gentlemen, here in Bolesławiec, is not yet known when it will take place. It was supposed to start in February, but the court suddenly decided that it did not feel competent enough and asked for the case to be transferred to the Regional Court in Jelenia Góra, where, according to the judge from Bolesławiec, the judges are more experienced. We will see, because the decision will be made by the Court of Appeal in Wrocław. We will see what decision it makes. I managed to find two lawyers from Warsaw who will defend me. The cost is unfortunately enormous, approximately PLN 20,000. That will be the cost of the defense, which is why I am still running a fundraiser (zrzutka.pl/hb6dc7). Among other things, thanks to you, Rafał, and your people, the amount has grown considerably.

– So, thanks to the Initiative!

– Yes, exactly. And it is very encouraging that there are people who are not just local... I have noticed that locally people do not really want to stick their necks out. They complain a lot about the priest, but when it comes to actual action, such as financial support for the defense, not so much. The priest has moved elsewhere, so they say, “All right, it’s settled.” It is not settled at all, because the priest is now at another parish and I think he has changed little in his conduct there. Support instead comes from outside, from people throughout Poland who see the problem and know that we simply have to respond rather than turn a blind eye to the whole matter. So for now, in Bolesławiec, it is not known what will happen with the case. As for the civil cases in Jelenia Góra, the first one will not begin until October.

– So it is clear that the initiative we are discussing has a real-world application. Right? It has a real dimension.

– Because it really is support. Everything is fine until a court case appears. Then a person usually ends up alone. But it turns out that one is not alone after all, because there are people in Poland who can offer support and do so concretely. It is not just a matter of “like” and “great,” is it? No, it is an actual small transfer—although there are also transfers of PLN 500, even PLN 10 is great. This is concrete support, because thanks to it I can hire two lawyers who will handle the entire case professionally. It also provides some sense of security: you feel that someone is there to look after you and help. So, the initiative...

– You simply feel that you are not alone with these problems. After all, you are suing these priests not because they stole a pencil from you and trampled two cabbage beds, but because you believe there is an important social problem involved.

– I will tell you that the lawsuit includes, for example, a demand that I apologize and say something that is a lie. It is a lie—what is written there. The lawsuit demands that I say it and publish it. To me, it is absurd that a court should order me to tell a lie. But that is the demand. And on the other side there is the entire Church machinery, with money—the Church has unlimited money, after all. To make matters more amusing, it has recently emerged that the priest who brought the case against me had been conducting so-called perpetual Masses without the bishop’s permission. He told people that if they came and made an offering, Masses would be celebrated with that intention until the end of the parish, until the end of that church, at that location. It turns out that this practice is not formally recorded anywhere in the Catholic Church. Some religious orders do it, but they also need a special blessing from the Vatican, and not all of them have one. It works like this: someone comes, submits an intention and pays PLN 10,000–20,000 for it. In reality, they then only trust that the priests in that church will celebrate those Masses. Something like this happened in Bolesławiec; that priest was doing it. The bishop says he knew nothing about it and banned it entirely, but it turns out that the book containing the entries and intentions has disappeared. There is no register, and no one knows who submitted which intentions or how much they paid. There is nothing. And this is the priest who is suing me. It is an official matter, because the bishop sent a letter to that parish instructing them to read out that there would be no more such Masses and that he prohibited them. I read that the Pauline Fathers at Jasna Góra may have something like this, where people can submit perpetual intentions. In my opinion, it is an excellent way to make money: people pay a large sum once, and then, in principle, the intentions should be read out during Mass. But there are probably so many intentions that they introduced a rule that the intentions are not read out; instead, the priests who celebrate the Masses and pray for the intentions are named, and the priest supposedly knows which intentions he is praying for. So 50 intentions are assigned to one priest, 50 to another priest or friar. In the end, you do not even know how many intentions the Mass is being celebrated for. You cannot check it. You have to trust that the priest knows all 50 names he is praying for. It is a tremendous way to make money: you celebrate one Mass and multiply the number of intentions. It is an excellent way to make a great deal of money.

– We should learn from the Church; we should learn from the best.

– Apparently, something like that took place in Bolesławiec.

– How much did you give?

– I have never been involved and never gave anything. Once I heard a priest charge a woman, who had come to order a Mass for her son, perhaps PLN 3,000 for a Gregorian Mass. I happened to be there installing cameras and heard the conversation, including the amount of PLN 3,000, which seemed enormous to me just for mentioning the person’s name for 30 days, and the woman did not look wealthy. But 3,000. She heard it and said, “All right.” So I suspect that perpetual Masses cost much, much more. And suddenly it turns out that the priest was doing it without the bishop’s knowledge. The bishop says it was illegal, that such things must not be done, and banned it. And this is the same priest whom the media also recently reported on: a man came and wanted to order a funeral for his grandmother. He gave PLN 400 as an offering. The priest allegedly told him that for that amount he should find another idiot and demanded PLN 800. That is how a reporter, I think from Wirtualna Polska, described it. Other media then wrote about it as well. We wrote about it too. In a conversation with a journalist, the priest did not deny the PLN 800. He even said that he had to take equipment to the cemetery and that it required... I do not know what equipment. A holy-water sprinkler and a loudspeaker. But PLN 800? In my view, everything about the Catholic Church has been turned upside down. That is the short version of what is happening with the case.

– In that case, we are keeping our fingers crossed. We will follow the matter and provide support if necessary.

– Thanks! Thanks, Rafał, for the conversation, and see you on Facebook, on the profile and in the initiative group.

– Absolutely. Thank you. We invite everyone to the initiative group.