Posted on 01/27/2006 8:26:48 AM PST by NYer
A bill under consideration by New Hampshire legislators would require Catholic priests and other religious figures to divulge any information they hear regarding child abuse, even if told to them by parishioners in the private act of "confession."
According to the Concord Monitor newspaper, the Granite State currently has a statute requiring anyone in the state who suspects child abuse to report it to authorities. The Child Protection Act, enacted in 1979, also places a mandatory reporting requirement on clergy.
However, the paper said, a separate statute exempts clergymen and women from having to provide court testimony regarding anything told to them in confidence during an act of confession.
The current legislation under consideration would amend state law and require religious figures to provide unqualified reporting of any abuse divulged to them, under any circumstances. It is the second time since 2004 New Hampshire lawmakers have attempted to pass such a measure.
Confession is a sacrament most commonly associated with Catholics, in which the faithful are required to periodically confess sins – generally violations of the Ten Commandments – to priests, who then absolve them of those sins before God. For it to be valid, it must be held in the strictest of confidence, Catholic officials told the paper.
Church hierarchy in New Hampshire, though mindful of the seriousness of child abuse, nevertheless criticized any effort to force clergy to reveal information passed along during confession.
Diane Quinlan, chancellor of the Diocese of Manchester, said that while "there's no question that child abuse is a terrible crime," allowing a "limited exception" for confession was necessary for the uninhibited practice of Catholicism.
"That's how serious this is in our belief," she told the Monitor.
Local police officials – some who are practicing Catholics as well as leaders in the church – still argued for passage of the law.
"We feel it's important that there be no exemptions from the mandatory reporting statute," Northfield Police Chief Scott Hilliard, representing the New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police, said.
Some lawmakers said Catholic priests had told them they would go to prison before divulging any information told them in confession.
Such defiance could make the law moot, some argued.
Others said they were worried about whether such an ordinance would pass constitutional muster. But both sides – pro and con – presented Supreme Court opinions supporting their positions.
He's a Catholic Priest who has committed a sacrilege.
The priest can insist, using the strongest terms, that the person in the confessional should tell the authorities himself; but the priest cannot do so.
Our priests and bishops are sure to give your personal interpretation of Scripture all the consideration it is due. Thank you for weighing in on this matter.
It wil be interesting to see what is left of New Hampshire once this chases the adherent Catholics out. Do these nit wits think the Church would stand for this? Who would go to confession with "yeah but" strings on them?
There is no Biblical support for the seal of the confessional. It is simply a doctrine of the RCC.
A poor case can be made for the Sacrament of Confession, but such a thing is not laid out specifically anywhere in the New Testament. The only passage that even comes close is one in John.
But, the seal of the confessional is purely a doctrinal issue, a tradition of the Catholic Church.
It is very, very unlikely that any law forcing priests to break the seal will be passed, nor would such a law be upheld by the justice system. That's just not going to happen.
Still, there is precedent for our government to override religious beliefs and practices. The case of polygyny in the early LDS church is a good example. A religious group could also not practice human sacrifice, even if it was part of their doctrine.
However, we have a long judicial history of allowing religious organizations to do things that would otherwise be prohibited. Animal sacrifices is one, and refusal to take oaths is another.
I do not see any circumstances where the seal of the confessional will be legislated out of existence.
Per above I stand corrected. What I was trying to express in fewer words was a man of faith would try to bring the criminal to light and protect the child to the best of his ability, however, all that effort might be in vain because of the liberal courts in place.
You know, abuse of Freedom to Worship is the wind beneath ACLU's wings.
Big enough tragedy would give them enough support to assault fifth Ammendment.
You may do as you wish. You'll note that I'm not in favor of laws breaking the seal of confession. Not at all. However, there is no Biblical support for it. If you can find some, I'd be interested in knowing.
"Big enough tragedy would give them enough support to assault fifth Ammendment"
It's not really the Fifth Amendment that's in question here. It's the First. I can't see any circumstances where the seal of the confessional will be broken through legislation. It's just too old a privilege.
Did I defend Islam and attack Catholicsm?
I think its time for you to change your prescription.
What if its not official 'confession'. But something that came up in private conversation?
"What if its not official 'confession'. But something that came up in private conversation?"
Confession in the Catholic Church is a specific thing...a sacrament. Private conversations not in a formal confession are not protected, as far as I know.
However, the seal of the confessional is also available to non-Catholics, if the pastor involved agrees with the principle.
There's lots of case law on this subject.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.