Thank you - an excellent example. I was not aware of priests that serve in a country outside of their political nationality/citizenship. This however makes my "embassy" example even more pertinent.
Using your priest-with-a-visa example, lets assume that said priest has committed a crime (according to the host country) inside parish walls. Whose laws do you believe he should be subject to, if he steps outside of those walls? What if the crime itself was committed outside of those walls, i.e. on host country soil? What country issued him the visa - the Vatican, or some other entity? Is he subject to the laws of that entity, should he step onto that soil?
FWIW, I'm assuming the crime will not be claimed to be a "sacred practice" according to his religious order (i.e. as smoking peyote is, in some American Indian religious traditions).
Well I believe that if a foreign national commits a crime and the crime is proven, that the foreign national should be deported.
Calling them Embassies, sets a bad precedent because Henry VIII took over many of the parishes in England (including St. Paul’s). If they were in fact embassies, than they would be inviolate.
As for crimes ‘as defined by the host country’, this is a bad precedent again in the UK, where the laws once said that a priest could not perform any of the sacraments legally. This is why many were executed under Elizabeth I.
The same is true now of China, where it is effectively illegal for the Catholic church to exist as they have a ‘government church’, so everything must be done underground.