Skip to comments.
Priests Could be Ordered to Report Confessions of Sex Abuse to Police [Australia]
The Herald Sun ^
| 7/18/12
| Ashley Gardiner
Posted on 07/18/2012 6:56:52 AM PDT by marshmallow
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
Note that this is in one Australian state (Victoria).
To: marshmallow
What, when they talk to each other?
2
posted on
07/18/2012 7:01:49 AM PDT
by
Past Your Eyes
(What if there is no tomorrow? There wasn't one today.)
To: marshmallow
3
posted on
07/18/2012 7:14:40 AM PDT
by
stormer
To: Past Your Eyes; marshmallow
This is just stupid grandstanding on the part of the Victoria government.
- First, if offenders knew that Sacramental confessions would be revealed, they would certainly not go to Confession.
- Second, I don't know if a single case where it as even been alleged that the offender revealed his crime in a Sacramental confession.
- Third, it would be impossible to enforce: Who'd tell that the priest had failed to alert the police? The Penitent? or the Confessor?
- Fourth, are they going to record confessions, so some Police Detective can sift through thousands of hours of "Father, I ate a hamburger on a Friday in Lent" in order to detect some probably-nonexistent criminal confession?
- Fifth, what a priest can do, and is supposed to do, if a person confesses a felony, is instruct the penitent to contact the police, and withhold absolution until the penitent self-reports his crime.
The political authorities surely realize all this. Which is why I can't see it as anything other than making a show of pointlessly bullying clergy in order to score politically with the bigot constituency.
4
posted on
07/18/2012 7:16:49 AM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
To: marshmallow
Pretty sure....
The parson will tell the constable to go pound sand...
(polite words to that effect)
5
posted on
07/18/2012 7:18:31 AM PDT
by
Wings-n-Wind
(The main things are the plain things!)
To: marshmallow
What is the official direction given to priests that receive confessions that are criminal?
6
posted on
07/18/2012 7:31:34 AM PDT
by
stuartcr
("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
To: Past Your Eyes
First the police came for the people who rape children, and I did not speak up because I was not a child rapist.
Then the police came for the people that covered for the child rapists, and I...
Nope. Can't come up with a scenario where I see any reason to make religious exceptions on criminal accessory laws.
7
posted on
07/18/2012 7:50:39 AM PDT
by
MrEdd
(Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
To: stuartcr
If it’s a real crime, they are supposed to refuse absolution until after the penitent turns himself in to the authorities.
8
posted on
07/18/2012 7:51:05 AM PDT
by
wideawake
To: MrEdd
So on the list of advocates for abolishing the First Amendment today:
MrEdd
Chuck Schumer
. . .
9
posted on
07/18/2012 7:53:13 AM PDT
by
wideawake
To: MrEdd
You are wrong. You ignore the Truth that is the Catholic Church. The Church that Christ founded. No priest can be required to report this.
10
posted on
07/18/2012 8:00:52 AM PDT
by
impimp
To: wideawake
So on the list of advocates for abolishing age of consent today:
Jerry Sandusky
wideawake
...
11
posted on
07/18/2012 8:07:28 AM PDT
by
MrEdd
(Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
To: marshmallow
Read this book. The Seal of Confession will remain intact.
12
posted on
07/18/2012 8:08:01 AM PDT
by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
To: Mrs. Don-o
Excellent analysis.
I'd add one more point to your bulleted list.
The seal of confession allows those who are tempted towards sexual crimes or have entertained thoughts of them but have not yet physically committed one, to be spiritually helped and counseled in complete confidence. Confession therefore becomes a source of help and crime prevention for those who otherwise might not avail themselves of such an opportunity due to the fear of police being alerted.
To: MrEdd
14
posted on
07/18/2012 8:12:54 AM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
To: MrEdd
Nope. Can't come up with a scenario where I see any reason to make religious exceptions on criminal accessory laws. I can.
Read post #4.
"Criminal accessory laws", as they apply to the confessional are counterproductive, unenforceable (absent wiretapping) and entirely unnecessary.
To: MrEdd
Confesors don't cover up for child rapists. Name one case in, oh, the last 100 years in which that was even alleged to have happened.
Confessors are canonically required, in the case of a confessed felony, to tell the penitent that he can't be absolved unless he confesses to the police. Under ordinary circumstances, the priest wouldn't even know who the offender is anyway, since confessions are anonymous.
You knew that, right?
16
posted on
07/18/2012 8:19:30 AM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
Comment #17 Removed by Moderator
To: MrEdd; marshmallow
"Govenrment properly enforcing order" is not synonymous with "Government forbidding the valid administration of a Sacrament" --- which is exactly what violating the Seal of Confession would be.
A priest should rather die, than do that.
18
posted on
07/18/2012 8:25:20 AM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
("You can observe a lot just by watchin'." - Yogi Berra)
To: MrEdd
Note that the edict in question also does not address people who have not physically committed a crime. Not yet. But it will. Eventually. Prevention is better than cure, right?
Therefore, in the interests of preventing crime and to help the children, we feel it has now become necessary to not only identify those who have previously committed such crimes but also to identify and monitor those who have an admitted inclination towards such actions.
Do I hear an "Amen"?
To: Mrs. Don-o
If it doesn’t and hasn’t happened, then the edict is merely stating the obvious for effect and there would be zero reason to think much about it.
You knew that, right?
20
posted on
07/18/2012 8:27:25 AM PDT
by
MrEdd
(Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson