Posted on 08/14/2017 7:41:56 PM PDT by marshmallow
The report called for legislation to criminalise priests who fail to break the seal of the confessional
Priests who do not inform the police after learning about child abuse in confession should face criminal charges, an Australian inquiry has said.
The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse recommended all states and territories in the country should introduce legislation to punish priests for not breaking the seal of the confessional.
“The right to practice one’s religious beliefs must accommodate civil society’s obligation to provide for the safety of all and, in particular, children’s safety from sexual abuse,” the commission wrote.
“Institutions directed to caring for and providing services for children, including religious institutions, must provide an environment where children are safe from sexual abuse. Reporting information relevant to child sexual abuse to the police is critical to ensuring the safety of children.”
The recommendation will likely be strongly resisted by the Church, which has always guarded the absolute confidentiality of confession.
Under canon law, priests may never break the seal of the confessional, even under threat of death. Any priest who breaks the seal faces automatic excommunication.
Archbishop of Melbourne Denis J Hart said in a statement: “Confession in the Catholic Church is a spiritual encounter with God through the priest. It is a fundamental part of the freedom of religion, and it is recognised in the Law of Australia and many other countries. It must remain so here in Australia.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicherald.co.uk ...
Priests and therapists should report all crimes.
What about thought crimes?
There is no excuse for not reporting crimes against children.
None.
L
>Any priest who breaks the seal faces automatic excommunication.
Any “Priest” who allows kid diddlers to go free should face much worse than that.
How about lawyers? If a lawyer learns his client committed a crime should he report what he found out to authorities?
That, I think, gets to the heart of the matter.
Priests are NOT part of the justice system. Not Earthly justice, anyway. Priests are specifically ordered not to reveal what is confessed to them.
Lawyers, on the other hand, ARE part of the justice system. I say, if a lawyer knows (is told) that his client committed a crime, he should be required to go straight to the judge and say, “Your Honor, my client is guilty as hell.”
Or, perhaps, we can keep things the way they are.
Given that penitents have a right to have their confessions in a way that allows them to remain anonymous, who is the priest supposed to report? Somebody confessed x to me and I’m guessing that it was Mr. Y?
Then lawyers must report when clients admit criminal guilt. Psychologists and Psychiatrist must yield confidential records to enquiry as must other medical professionals. It should go without saying that this standard must be applied to all clergy not just priests. There must also be a suspension of any civil right that interferes with prosecution of such matters. Trial by jury comes to mind.
The priest is not a law enforcement officer.
“The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest recognized privileges for confidential communications.[2] The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality, the privilege encourages clients to make “full and frank” disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation.[3]”
Some things are excluded...
From Wiki
That’s why confession should be behind the screen as is traditional. Today, they sit face to face in the confessional.
This comes up in one or more of the Civilized Nations every few years. It would accomplish nothing except to end the Confessional. Who is going to confess to a priest who is required to tell the government? You get a law like this in the technological present and a requirement for recording of everything in a confessional will come shortly. If a priest “obeys” such a law even if passed and enforced, he will have his faculties as a priest stripped from him.
We have a choice. Behind the screen or face to face.
Excellent post. The sanctity of The Church nor the sanctity of lawyer client privilege most not be broken. If the priest or lawyer violates this sacred and legal trust, he is a bad man just as bad if not worse than his confessor or client. When the santity of confession in the church is gone or that of the legal system their will no be no justice in or out of court.
Sadly both my church and the legal profession are corrupt today. I am not optimistic.
Canon 964 gives both the penitent and the priest the right to have the sacrament given with screen in place if either prefers it that way.
Most places around here still have the screen.
Well, if age of the instituton is a determining factor then the Church is older than English law. Anyway, as long as we are upending institutions, why not go all the way. Think of the efficiency...
Why just child abuse? Why not jay walking? Voting for Trump? Insulting Mohammed?
In my opinion, that's the whole point of this silly idea. The people who push this stuff aren't really trying to get "more justice". They are just trying to weaken the Catholic Church by making people avoid one of the sacraments.
I say that, and I'm not Catholic. But I see "do-gooders" trying to dilute a very old religious practice and it bothers me, even if it isn't my religious practice.
Canon law:
Can. 983 §1. The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason.
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.