Controversy over mandatory reporting of confession (priest did not report sex abuser to police)

CathNews ^ | February 28, 2008

[NYer]

Controversy has erupted once again over whether priests and religious leaders are subject to mandatory reporting laws after a "priest" at an evangelic Christian church in Melbourne did not report a child sex abuse confession.

The Herald Sun reports the priest will not be charged over not reporting the assault despite the pentinent striking again.

The case has stirred debate over the role of the churches in handling confessions by lawbreakers and raised questions about whether religious leaders should be subject to mandatory reporting obligations.

Teachers, doctors, nurses and other professionals are legally bound to report suspected sex abuse cases.

Social commentator Fr Bob McGuire (pictured) said in theory a priest offering his own help would be the right course of action.

However, in practice, this was relinquishing responsibility.

"Priests are not qualified to handle such sensitive matters," Fr McGuire said

"It may not be legally mandatory reporting (for priests), but it would be morally mandatory reporting - even if it was my brother.

"It's a civil society's expectation," he said.

Child abuse prevention group Childwise's Bernadette McMenamin said priests should be covered by the same mandatory reporting rules.

"With all good intentions, offenders have been protected by churches," she said.

"I believe everyone should report abuse. It's their moral duty. If it takes mandatory reporting to make sure, that's how it will have to be."

SOURCE

Priest can't be prosecuted for failing to report abuse (Herald Sun 28/02/08)

[NYer]

Ping!

[SoothingDave]

They can pass all the laws they want. Won't change the sanctity of the confessional.

A priest, of course, can withold absolution until a penitent confesses to civil authorities.

[weegee]

Meanwhile abortionists destroy the DNA evidence of sexual congress and it is considered a protection of “privacy”.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

[narses]

A real priest can.

[Dominick]

This is an Aussie case, in the US case law recognizes the seal.

[B-Chan]

No real priest would ever violate the seal of the confessional.

I do know some priests that would “take out the trash” themselves, so to speak, if faced with a “penitent” that they knew would strike again.

What a horrible position to be in. Priests carry such a burden. We should all pray for them and support them in every way.

[Cicero]

In the Catholic Church, the seal of the confessional is inviolate. That fight has been fought for two thousand years against the secular authorities, sometimes leading to martyrdom, and the Church has held firmly to it.

As SoothingDave points out, however, a priest is not obliged to absolve a sinner regardless. If the case justifies it, he can withhold absolution until the culprit makes good, by confessing to the authorities. That is a matter of prudential judgment and justice for the priest to prayerfully decide.

In order for a confession to be legitimate according to Catholic teaching, the sinner must be genuinely penitent and sincerely determined not to go out and do it again. In addition, some secular amendment or balancing may be called for, such as returning goods that were stolen or paying an equivalent price.

But violating the seal of confession will not be agreed to by the Catholic Church under any circumstances, and I imagine the same thinking would apply to other churches that practice auricular confession. (For instance, Martin Luther advocated annual auricular confession for sins against the community; and the Book of Common Prayer of the Anglican Church allows, although it does not require, auricular confession before communion and before death.)

[Mrs. Don-o]

Strangely, this is a "priest" at an evangelic Christian church in Melbourne. I wonder what that's all about?

[B-Chan]

Another schism of a schism. This guy was not a priest at all.

Deep down, all Christians know the Catholic Church is the Real Thing. They long for the authority of the Pope and the comforts of the Sacraments. They are simply too proud to admit that 500 years of Protestantism (et al) was a huge mistake.

[Salvation]

The priest is right. He can lose his priesthood over such an offense.

[SQUID]

You act as if the Catholic Church is the only one who is able to provide Christians with true salvation. Prove it.

[B-Chan]

I don’t have to prove anything to you, my friend. Our Lord founded one Church, and that Church still exists, its authority handed down in an unbroken line from Christ to Saint Peter to your local Catholic and Orthodox bishops. All your logic, your reasoning, your synods, your 96 theses, your personal feelings, and your detailed knowledge of history will not change this fact. If you choose to believe otherwise, that is your prerogative.

God knows your heart. If you are truly united with Christ, you are already Catholic, even if you refuse to accept the Church. Someday, either here on Earth or in Heaven, you will realize that the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church is the only path to Christ, Who is the Way to Salvation.

[sandyeggo]

As Tertullian said,

"Emulation of the episcopate is the mother of schisms."

[It's me]

A priest, of course, can withhold absolution until a penitent confesses to civil authorities.

Can and should and most likely do.

The priest in the story is a priest of a "evangelic Christian" church, not a Catholic priest.

[Mrs. Don-o]

B-Chan can, of course, answer more than adequately for himself, but let me throw this in here: No Catholic can in good conscience believe that only signed-up, card-carrying Catholics will be saved, because that view is specifically forbidden by Catholic doctrine:

Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements. Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Go ahead and click. It's even grander when read in context.

[SQUID]

Thanks Mrs. D, I think you have made a good point.

[mckenzie7]

You constantly amaze me. Please keep up the good work!

[magisterium]

A priest, of course, can withold absolution until a penitent confesses to civil authorities.

I'm not so sure about that. The priest only needs to see signs of repentance and a firm purpose of amendment. With mortal sins, the liability for God's eternal punishment is what is removed. It is not required that the penitent "turn himself in" to secular authorities, and absolution cannot be denied on the basis that the penitent cannot/will not do this. Certainly, it seems to me a good thing if, for serious crimes of violence (such as sexual abuse), the priest might recommend that the penitent seek professional help or turn himself in, but, as far as I know, this cannot be a condition for absolution. If you have information to the contrary, I'd be glad if you could post it. I have never heard of this. Thanks.