Posted on 02/05/2016 5:55:33 PM PST by marshmallow
A Delaware superior court judge has questioned the constitutionality of a state law that protects the secrecy of sacramental confession.
State law mandates the reporting of suspected child abuse except in cases covered by the attorney-client privilege and conversations "between priest and penitent in sacramental confession."
Ruling in a case involving the failure of elders of the Jehovah's Witnesses to report child abuse, Judge Mary M. Johnston said that if "priest," "penitent," and "sacramental confession" are interpreted narrowly, then the law is unconstitutional because its "effect would be to advance certain religions over others."
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...
If you are diddling kids, go to jail. No law should ever protect you.
All that will happen is that you will have a lot of priests in jail for refusing to break the seal of the confessional. You won’t get the info from them, and society will be short of priests.
But that will probably be just fine with our Brave New World agendistas...
(If we had better judges who understood where our freedoms come from, and how hard it was to obtain them, and how easy it is to fritter them away, we wouldn’t have such crackpot decisions. )
If the Catholic religion is the only one with “sacramental confession” it is unfair to others who confess to their clergymen.
.
I don’t want the seal broken, I just want kid diddlers, islamos, dindus and gibsmedat to go to jail. Leak it, don’t break it.
It's a pattern oft repeated.
1) Situation exists
2) State passes law to codify situation
3) State repeals law effectively nullifying the pre-existing situation
They did the same thing with gays in the military.
1) Gays are not allowed to serve
2) Ok. Gays can serve, but not openly (don't ask, don't tell)
3) Repeal law. Gays can serve openly.
Fools don’t know what they’re messing with. This isn’t some minor issue of fairness.
Church law would never permit that to happen.
I assume you hold that attorney-client privilege should not exist, either. Likewise, spousal privilege. All of these potentially stand in the way of your objective.
If you’re concerned about pedophilia you need to bark up another tree. I believe Mrs. Don-o has the info on all the other religions that have a bigger problem with it.
His vows are one of silence when it comes to things said to him in confession.
..If the Catholic religion is the only one with “sacramental confession†it is unfair to others who confess to their clergymen...
Priest has been broadly construed over the years under most jurisdictions as also being a Pastor, Clergyman, Rabbi, other heads of local churches, and even an Imam.
.
Crime needs to be exposed. But pastors hear some pretty scalp-losing stuff. Lives sometimes depend on keeping a lid on family secrets.
This isn’t about that. The judge is stating that laws protecting the seal of the confessional favor religions that practice formalized confession over those that don’t.
The judge is an idiot. The reason that formal confessions are protected is precisely because there is an expectation of privacy which is inherent to a formal confession as an integral part of certain faiths.
If the Jehovah’s Witness’s want the same protection then they will have to formalize confession.
Also note, any evidence obtained from a minister in confession would be considered hearsay unless recorded- which is absolutely prohibited in all faiths with sacramental confession that I know of.
Finally, even if there was no confession of child abuse, a priest would still not be able to defend himself by revealing what went on.
Was the seal of confession what this case was all about, or did an activist judge decide she was going to attach the Catholic Church using this case to try and undo something she considered wrong?
Wasn’t the issue in this case whether the elders in the church of latter day saints knew of some abuse? What, pray tell, does that have to do with the confessional?
I know it’s complicated. That why I side with simplicity...diddle kids, spread islam, be a Dindu or Gibsmedat and you are guilty.
It can’t be hidden. You do it and you get locked up.
One who won't make a peep if the abuser confesses to molesting thirty kids. Instead, said court appointed lawyer will do his best to get the abuser off on the one incident he's charged with.
Jenkins said there has been no formal study comparing denominations for rates of child abuse. However, insurers have been assessing the risks since they began offering riders on liability policies in the 1980s. Two of the largest insurers report no higher risks in covering Catholic churches than Protestant denominations (Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests).
The idea that there's some nutty "doctrine" among priests that results in sexual abuse, has been debunked time and time again.
It may, however, explain some people's motivation in tirelessly trumpeting every allegation, proven or unproven, made about Catholic clergy, while maintaining a tight-lipped silence about every other category of clergy offender.
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.