I was raised Catholic, and will remain so in my heart,
but I have always agreed with this in principal.
If there is a severe and horrible crime that has been committed, a crime that will continue to endanger more and more people, I think the priest owes it to humanity to tell authorities. I do.
Decades ago, I read a book about Albert DeSalvo; aka The Boston Strangler. Many years before he was finally arrested on those charges, he is said to have confessed to many of the killings. He spoke to a cellmate of the time, not a priest, so the confessions were not deemed appropriate for use in court. But what if he had spoken to a priest, one assigned to speak to prisoners. Should such a priest never have said anything, leaving multiple murder cases forever unsolved?
Hmmm..so much to say here.
Well,to cite a work of fiction:
There was an episode of MASH in which a patient confessed to Father Mulcahey a particular serious sin (can't recall the exact sin).Father Mulcahey said something like "well,restitution is certainly in order here" and the patient said something like "no,I can't do that Father".His response was "well,I certainly cannot grant you absolution given what you've just said".
IMO this isn't an effort to bring about justice.You know as well as I do that if this passes the next law will require priests to turn in those who confess to tax fraud,violations of gun laws and belief that homosexuality is abnormal as well as sinful.
This is an attack on the Catholic Church and has nothing to do with "justice".
And we all know that there's no way that a Rat politician would ever want a lawyer to be required to make such a report...and priests,as imperfect as some of them are (almost as imperfect as me) are far better men than the typical lawyer. Well,most priests at least.
I believe the Catholic Church maintains excommunication as the punishment for discussing any aspect of a confession to anyone outside the confessional, including the penitent. This law puts a Catholic priest in the position of choosing between the law and his religion. If someone would violate the basic tenets of their professed beliefs why would we give them credibility in reporting a crime?
How are we to know that someone reported a crime in confession? Spy on the confessionals? Trust the statement of the accused molester? If the priest is the only witness of the penitent’s confession and is bound to never mention it again then those are the only ways to know something was confessed.
A law like this is pointless except to make scapegoats of ministers of all sects. That goes right to the heart of freedom of religion.
It would be better if you remained one in Church.
If there is a severe and horrible crime that has been committed, a crime that will continue to endanger more and more people, I think the priest owes it to humanity to tell authorities
How would he know who is speaking? Watch "I Confess" again to see what would happen. Libs would send plants into the confessional and eliminate priests one by one.
If murderers do not face justice in this life, they will in the next.