"California Lawmakers Threaten To Break Confidentiality Of Confession To Find Abusers"

[Skwim]

@Skwim

Once more, for the road:

• QUOTE="Skwim, post: 6133230, member: 23688" was posted at 12:30 A.M.
• QUOTE="Skwim, post: 6133237, member: 23688" was posted at 12:35 A.M.
• View attachment 29624
• QED.

Interesting the you find all this so intriguing. In any case this is what happened.

When I went to post

"Breaking with a long tradition of clerical privilege, California is edging toward requiring priests and other church employees to inform authorities if they learn of a case of child sex abuse during the sacrament of confession.

On Thursday (May 31), the California State Senate passed a bill that would require priests to report child abuse if they learn about it while hearing the confession of a fellow priest or colleague. The bill — which passed overwhelmingly with a 30-4 vote, with 4 not voting at all . . . ."​

for some unknown reason after hitting the "Post Reply" button the formatting came out widely spaced:

"Breaking with a long tradition of clerical privilege, California is edging toward requiring priests and other church

employees to inform authorities if they learn of a case of child sex abuse during the sacrament of confession.


On Thursday (May 31), the California State Senate passed a bill that would require priests to report child abuse if

they learn about it while hearing the confession of a fellow priest or colleague. The bill — which passed

overwhelmingly with a 30-4 vote, with 4 not voting at all

​

After several attempts to rectify the ugly formatting and failing, I copied the whole thing to my notepad and started a brand new post, forgetting the old bastardized post was still alive. Hence the double post.

.

​

 

[Terry Sampson]

Interesting the you find all this so intriguing.

I should not be intrigued by anything you write??? Okay, ...how do I go about ignoring/blocking you?

In any case this is what happened.

I figured there was a rational, reasonable explanation for what you did.

Just checking to see if you could figure out how you did what you did yourself. Think of it as kind of a "sanity check".
Congratulations! you passed... today.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

But even the altered version of the bill is sparking outrage among Catholic leaders who see it as forcing priests and other clergy either to comply with the law and violate the sacramental seal of confession or defy authorities and risk arrest.

C'mon, Catholics, I thought Jesus WANTED you to be punished for your "stand".

Anyway, as an RN, if I have to report it, so should others. Allowing harm to occur again and again and again is far worse than tattling it.

On the one hand, there is an important reason for the Seal of the Confessional. Clergy are not law enforcement. They aren't supposed to be, they aren't trained for it.

That's why 911 is so important.

I don't know what is best to do, and I'm sure glad that I don't have to decide. But if the state goes forward with breaking the Seal, I would put it down as a result of massive ethical failures on the part of The Church. Both the priestly abuse itself, but more importantly, the bishops that covered it up and enabled the nasty behavior to go unchecked so widely and for so long. The Seal of the Confessional will be just another victim of the cowardly bishops, putting their own interests ahead of vulnerable children.
Tom

Indeed. They brought this on themselves. If one can't handle a privilege, it should be taken away until more mature decisions can be made.

When someone keeps running over schoolchildren, you take away their stupid car.

 

[Stevicus]

Isn't part of the confession having to do something about what is confessed. So say a serial killer confesses, the community is being terrorized does the priest simply remain silent on that regardless? And if the killer then kills and the priest knows who it is aren't they automatically implicated in the crime?

I understand confession, but confession without repentence is nonsense. Somewhere in all this what may have started as sensible has turned into nonsense .Church is not a sanctuary for criminals and they have violated the community and the church if Justice is not served. Situational ethics can be difficult.

The thing is, no one would actually know if the killer confesses, since the priest has taken a vow to not reveal what is told to him in confession. In his eyes, he has no choice, since it's a vow to God. Strictly speaking, he couldn't even call it in as an "anonymous tip." This also implies a belief that God would most certainly punish any unrepentant transgressor, even if they could not be punished by the secular authorities.

Also, given the nature of confession, the priest would not know the actual identity of the person making the confession. It's been a long time since I've been to confession, but they don't ask for your ID or anything when you go into the confessional. The priest doesn't see your face or know who you are (unless you're a regular at the church, and then he might know).

 

[Skwim]

I should not be intrigued by anything you write??? Okay, ...how do I go about ignoring/blocking you?

Not "anything," just this particular subject. To block my posts, put me on ignore. Go to my picture

at the left of any of my posts. Left click, and then click on "ignore" when you see it.

I figured there was a rational, reasonable explanation for what you did.

It was a frustrating two or three minutes.

Just checking to see if you could figure out how you did what you did yourself. Think of it as kind of a "sanity check".
Congratulations! you passed... today.

To hell with the congratulations! Where's my prize? I want my prize!!

 

[stvdv]

The California Catholic Conference decried the bill in a statement, describing it as an “attack on the sanctity of the confessional” and noting that under church law, any priest who violates the seal of confession is automatically excommunicated.

Excommunication would be a "blessing in disguise". Finally the priest can "speak out the truth" ... that would be the "real sanctity" IMHO

 

[stvdv]

Gee, the Catholic clergy in California is upset because it looks like it will no longer be able to safely sexually abuse children and then be forgiven by the Big Guy by going to confession. BOO HOO! And they feel this little sexual perk they operate under is protected by the First Amendment. If this is what the "sanctity of the confessional" was designed to do for the Catholic clergy then it's no wonder so many of its priests. bishops, and whatever are now mired in its child sex abuse scandal. And with its Get out Of Jail Free card about to be taken away it looks even bleaker for Catholic pedophiles and such, at least those in California.

 

[stvdv]

Of course, if you feel priests should be able continue to sexually abuse children under the protection of the sacramental seal of confession I'd be happy to hear your argument.

Love is the Greatest commandment
Is degraded into "Have sex with little boys and threaten those who want to come clean"

Does the Pope and all other villains have no shame at all?
For sure they have no "feeling of Love" (wanting to protect this)

My verdict would be "excommunicate" the whole church if they continue to protect this rubbish

 

[David T]

The thing is, no one would actually know if the killer confesses, since the priest has taken a vow to not reveal what is told to him in confession. In his eyes, he has no choice, since it's a vow to God. Strictly speaking, he couldn't even call it in as an "anonymous tip." This also implies a belief that God would most certainly punish any unrepentant transgressor, even if they could not be punished by the secular authorities.

Also, given the nature of confession, the priest would not know the actual identity of the person making the confession. It's been a long time since I've been to confession, but they don't ask for your ID or anything when you go into the confessional. The priest doesn't see your face or know who you are (unless you're a regular at the church, and then he might know).

"The thing is, no one would actually know if the killer confesses, since the priest has taken a vow to not reveal what is told to him in confession"

A prime example of something healthy in iys origination gone psycho. And what this has never happened?

So your understanding of confession while totally aligns with the church, i am emphatically going to say that when a killer speaks and the church does zero is not related at all to the bible, is not remotely textual its just pure infantile nonsense. Just because christians say "this is christian" doesnt automatically make it textual regardless it just is stupidity in regards the text. Hell you are supporting executions of heresy a thousand years ago because the church says so.

 

[David T]

Any real repentance would include turning ones self into the authorities and if they dont they should be turned in by the priest

It ends up in actuallity no longer about repentence but control. And i would say as soon as the legal athorities have to step in on this, its not nazis telling the church they must turn over jews for extermination, no matter how the church wants to approach it. Situational ethics be damned orthodoxy is god become the delusional mantra. Now situational ethics is difficult and clearly the could stand to read a non catholic named ditriech bonhoeffers text cost of discipleship. Which btw is very profound a rare gem in the massive garbage heap of theology.

 

[pearl]

This is part of what makes this a difficult issue for me.
On the one hand, there is an important reason for the Seal of the Confessional. Clergy are not law enforcement. They aren't supposed to be, they aren't trained for it. They're intended the be spiritual and ethical guidance counselors. They cannot perform that role without absolute trust by the penitent.

That's an excellent point. The law would be making the priest an agent of the state.