Posted on 03/01/2016 6:39:54 PM PST by marshmallow
A Louisiana judge has ruled unconstitutional a new state law requiring priests to report sexual abuse that is mentioned in a sacramental confession.
Judge Mike Caldwell made his ruling in a long-running and complicated case in which Father Jeff Bayhi had been directed to testify about what a young woman reportedly told him in a confession. The young woman has said that she told Father Bayhi about being molested by a member of his parish. Father Bayhi had refused to testify, citing the inviolability of the confessional seal.
Judge Caldwell ruled that the state law making priests mandated reporters of sexual abuse was unconstitutional insofar as it applied to confessions, since it violated religious freedom.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...
Take your anti-Catholic hate someplace else.
This has nothing to do with any particular sin. It has to do with a Sacrament instituted by Jesus Christ when he gave the apostles the power to forgive sins.
No priest can reveal anything he has heard in confession—no matter what the sin. Murder, adultery, theft, etc.
In this case, there is nothing that could be learned from the priest. The young woman who talked to him can reveal everything she said.
Subornation of perjury. Very common. Good luck finding a lawyer prosecuted for it
After receiving three responses which basically said she mentioned her abuse in the confessional, then I don’t understand why anyone thinks the priests involvement is necessary. The young lady can go tell the police and the judge what happened herself. What insight is there to be gained from the priest? Did he hear the confession from the abuser? I’m not sure why the authorities have gone to court to compel his testimony. Does anyone else understand why? I’m sure I’m missing something that the article simply isn’t mentioning.
She is civilly suing the diocese for damages for what he allegedly told her, to my understanding. Which is something like, ‘you shouldn’t tell anyone, too many people will be hurt’ according to her. The actual abuser has since died, the abuse happened years ago.
I’ve heard several things about this case going back one or two years now, and there are still points I don’t get. One is if it was an actual confession where he told her the actionable advice. Two, is if the Church is trying to not let HER testify because they know the priest can’t defend himself no matter if he is innocent or not. Three, why hasn’t this been hashed out before now if the law was changed in the 90s?
Freegards
Thank you! I knew there had to be more to the story.
What reason to go after the priest?
To expand government power. To attack the Church.
IIRC, two gay ex-Catholic legislators in Connecticut kept coming back again and again with a bill to destroy the Seal of Confession, using the abuse scandal as their wedge.
I had not thought about that, but I think you have a good point. There are so many who hate the Church.
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.