Australia church abuse: Priests 'must report' confessions

[Ravenshire]

Catholic clerics should face criminal charges if they do not report sexual abuse disclosed to them during confession, an Australian inquiry has recommended

The inquiry had heard harrowing tales of abuse, which were never passed on to the relevant authorities.
The Church has indicated it will oppose altering the rules around confession.  (why???)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-40920714

It's because a big part of confession's defining characteristic is that it remain 100% confidential. If a person confesses a horrible crime they have committed, the priest's responsibility is to guide that person to take ownership with the law, as penance. But they cannot reveal to anyone anything that was said to them in the confessional, no matter how bad it was. The confidentiality of it is part of the sacrement.

And of course, it can also be argued that the people who confess to crimes in a confessional but don't turn themselves over to police, would never have confessed in the first place if they were not promised confidentiality. Making confession not confidential anymore would just mean no one would confess to crimes anyway, defeating the whole purpose of this proposed law.

I've always found this belief in the sovereignty of confession to be more than a little naive. People who commit heinous crimes are not going to turn themselves over to the authorities because their local shaman told them to. That leaves said shaman guilty as an accessory.

Really it's no wonder that protecting the criminal and punishing the victims has been the MO of the church for such a long time now. After all, it's criminals protecting other criminals.

[Anomalocaris]

It's because a big part of confession's defining characteristic is that it remain 100% confidential. If a person confesses a horrible crime they have committed, the priest's responsibility is to guide that person to take ownership with the law, as penance. But they cannot reveal to anyone anything that was said to them in the confessional, no matter how bad it was. The confidentiality of it is part of the sacrement.

And of course, it can also be argued that the people who confess to crimes in a confessional but don't turn themselves over to police, would never have confessed in the first place if they were not promised confidentiality. Making confession not confidential anymore would just mean no one would confess to crimes anyway, defeating the whole purpose of this proposed law.

I've always found this belief in the sovereignty of confession to be more than a little naive. People who commit heinous crimes are not going to turn themselves over to the authorities because their local shaman told them to. That leaves said shaman guilty as an accessory.

Really it's no wonder that protecting the criminal and punishing the victims has been the MO of the church for such a long time now. After all, it's criminals protecting other criminals.

Naive is not the right word for self-serving deception at the expense of those already victimized.

[Fireball]

You mean - the right the church has to protect child rapists.

Are you so foolish to think that only priest commit crimes and confess to other priests? I know you've probably baked most of your brain cells but if you think real hard you might see a broader application that could have very deep and long reaching implications for everyone of that religion.

If Government can undermine a sacrament or interfere with how religion works then you've just given up a core right to believe what you want. Which is all fine and good now, but what happenes in 40 years whe the morality pendul

Now what happens when the gub-ment can force the church to reveal anyone's confessions? People will simply stop confessing.

Good.

So then what happens when soceity swings and these laws are implace and your morality is now what is on the chopping block?

Now at least you have some over site and some disciplinary action taken from with in the church, force the confessions.. you will have nothing.

No - now we have nothing. Pedophiles "disciplining" pedophiles - that's something only brainwashed morons would call justice. F*ck the confessions - the church is going to have to find some other ways to spy on its flock.

Not everyone in the church is a pedophile, and if you remember a little while back pope what's his face defrock like 400 priests world wide, which is all but painting a scarlet A on their faces for society to seek their vengeance...

But I guess blood thirsty douche bags don't remember stuff like that.

"Pendulum of morality"? I'd like to see the hypocritical RCC's alleged "morality pendulum" dragged to a halt by secular law, and the criminal enterprise shut down. Getting away with crimes is something that has to be stopped. The RCC (and any other religious organization, for that matter) is NOT above secular law. They had their run of atrocious behavior.

[Ravenshire]

I've always found this belief in the sovereignty of confession to be more than a little naive. People who commit heinous crimes are not going to turn themselves over to the authorities because their local shaman told them to. That leaves said shaman guilty as an accessory.

Really it's no wonder that protecting the criminal and punishing the victims has been the MO of the church for such a long time now. After all, it's criminals protecting other criminals.

Naive is not the right word for self-serving deception at the expense of those already victimized.

I was talking about the naivety of the average believers, not the bullshit spun by the criminal enterprise that makes up the RCC leadership.

[Succubus]

Sounds like a perfect excuse for priest blackmail.

Or a perfect opportunity to catch the bastards for not complying with the (proposed law). Random bloke walks into a confessional and confesses to doing catholic priest stuff. Wait a few days and then visit plod; 'Has a priest been here in the last few days and reported a disgusting crime'? Nope.

Your fackin nicked me old beauty!

[Minimalist]

Real crimes against real people take precedence over your fucking fairy tales, dripshit.  For once in your life try not being a dumb fuck.

[Fireball]

You mean - the right the church has to protect child rapists.

Are you so foolish to think that only priest commit crimes and confess to other priests? I know you've probably baked most of your brain cells but if you think real hard you might see a broader application that could have very deep and long reaching implications for everyone of that religion.

If Government can undermine a sacrament or interfere with how religion works then you've just given up a core right to believe what you want. Which is all fine and good now, but what happenes in 40 years whe the morality pendul

Now what happens when the gub-ment can force the church to reveal anyone's confessions? People will simply stop confessing.

Good.

So then what happens when soceity swings and these laws are implace and your morality is now what is on the chopping block?

Now at least you have some over site and some disciplinary action taken from with in the church, force the confessions.. you will have nothing.

No - now we have nothing. Pedophiles "disciplining" pedophiles - that's something only brainwashed morons would call justice. F*ck the confessions - the church is going to have to find some other ways to spy on its flock.

Not everyone in the church is a pedophile, and if you remember a little while back pope what's his face defrock like 400 priests world wide, which is all but painting a scarlet A on their faces for society to seek their vengeance...

But I guess blood thirsty douche bags don't remember stuff like that.

OK, not every priest/whatever the position, is a pedophile. Let's move on from that, and I'll ask every religious person on this site a simple question. Your son/daughter comes to you with information about how they were sexually "mistreated" by one of the clergy. Now, tell me how your viscera are not twisted into knots for what your child has gone through, and go forgive the perpetrator. And don't go to the secular authorities, because they don't have authority over your selected clergy. Really? If this is the case, you ought to reconsider reproducing in the first place. Am I only going to get crickets?

ETA- not enough got defrock (sic), obviously.

[Harry Nevis]

You mean - the right the church has to protect child rapists.

Are you so foolish to think that only priest commit crimes and confess to other priests? I know you've probably baked most of your brain cells but if you think real hard you might see a broader application that could have very deep and long reaching implications for everyone of that religion.

If Government can undermine a sacrament or interfere with how religion works then you've just given up a core right to believe what you want. Which is all fine and good now, but what happenes in 40 years whe the morality pendul

Now what happens when the gub-ment can force the church to reveal anyone's confessions? People will simply stop confessing.

Good.

So then what happens when soceity swings and these laws are implace and your morality is now what is on the chopping block?

Now at least you have some over site and some disciplinary action taken from with in the church, force the confessions.. you will have nothing.

No - now we have nothing. Pedophiles "disciplining" pedophiles - that's something only brainwashed morons would call justice. F*ck the confessions - the church is going to have to find some other ways to spy on its flock.

Not everyone in the church is a pedophile, and if you remember a little while back pope what's his face defrock like 400 priests world wide, which is all but painting a scarlet A on their faces for society to seek their vengeance...

But I guess blood thirsty douche bags don't remember stuff like that.

So, if you're not allowed to do whatever you want in the name of religion, you lose the power to believe?

[LastPoet]

The whole issue is nuttery from the start. To confess to a 'priest' that relay to a 'god' the repentance that can never be used to give justice to the victym?

Ha. how many priests confessed to eachother kid-diddling? We will never know.

[vorlon13]

I'll admit my search was not exhaustive but finding specific legal opinions, one way or the other on this from the ACLU is tough. I was a member of the Illinois ACLU at one time and would like to see a definitive statement from them on the subject.


If anyone else has something pertaining I'd really appreciate it.

I'm also aware the ACLU opinion would be inoperative for a case in Australia*.



*Might need another ACLU opinion piece on the legality of SCOTUS associates starting to cite foreign precedents in their opinions . . .