Seal of Confession

FERNHILLROCK

Cannon Law is church law, created to cover their asses, if you pardon the pun. Everybody is subject to the law of the land. Confession was invented by priests to collect private information on their parishoners, so they could control them. Does anyone go to confession nowadays. bad people use confession to save their souls, so they have a clean sheet to start the next crime. Time people in this country copped on, opened their eyes and see the church for what it is, a corrupt organisation of mostly queer men.

Robert ninja

Manach wrote: »

based on ?

My own evaluation. People aren't just innocent of crime because some chap in robes says they are, neither are the remained shamed for the same reason. You may think it's moral... and that's why I see most religions as a serious threat to society.

dvpower

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

There has only been reports in three dioceses to my knowledge, each time declaring at least 90% of Priests to be innocent. Also the guilty were not named. The state must now persue them and enforce the law, if there is all this "proof" out there why have more not been gaoled as they should be ?

The guilt of individual abusers is one thing - the failures of the organisation is another. We don't need a criminal investigation to see the repeated failures of the RCC in covering up and allowing the abuse to go on.

We need the state to respond to the failure of the church to even follow their own child protection framework and that is what they are doing in part by introducing mandatory reporting. If the RCC is worried that mandatory reporting will damage the sacrament of confession they have only themselves to blame.

In The Sticks

alex73 wrote: »

On the right hook this evening there was some politician talking about legislation making it mandatory to report abuse. Including information from confession.

Now I don't think that a person who is so evil as to abuse a child would bother to listen to their conscience and go and confess their sins, but if they did I am sure the priest will never open up the seal of confession to any judge.

Is the state going head to head with faith?

On the other hand I'd say the priest who was taking the confession was probably whacking himself off and listening at the same time, Ya know what they are like!!

raymon

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

There has only been reports in three dioceses to my knowledge, each time declaring at least 90% of Priests to be innocent. Also the guilty were not named. The state must now persue them and enforce the law, if there is all this "proof" out there why have more not been gaoled as they should be ?

If your statistic is true then 10% are possibly guilty.
One in 10 ........ that's a lot of perverts if you ask me.

If you add in apologists, co conspirators, and those who ignored and covered up that sounds like one perverted organisation

PDN

Moderating Instruction

Guys, the majority of posts here are way off-topic.

We already have a thread to discuss clerical child abuse etc. We don't want two of those train-wrecks! This thread is for posts to do with the confessional.

Any more off-topic stuff and the thread will be locked.

FWIW, non-Catholic Christians also have an expectation that stuff divulged during pastoral counselling is confidential, but most of them already operate on the understanding that any confession of child abuse (or any revelation from a child or a third party concerning child abuse) must be reported to the Gardai and Social Services.

I don't know of any other crime where this policy of disclosure applies. For example, I have listened to people confessing to murder with no obligation being on me to report it.

Icepick

chughes wrote: »

I must say that I find it hard to understand the logic that a clerical child abuser isn't ex-communicated but his confessor is if he informs the police.

Religion & Spirituality > Christianity

Onesimus wrote: »

Nope its a serious sacrament with severe penalties of automatic ex-communication for any priest who breaks the seal, its an infallible indefinite sacramentl. The Law of God is above the Law of the Land and obedience to him must be shown should the law of the world contradict it.

But do you eat shellfish?

alex73 wrote: »

Generalisations to the extreme... What we have is a media storm of problems that have already been made public.
Yes some abuse took place.. But those who did it don't represent the 95% of the other good people in the church

The 'good' people who failed to act or covered it up.

alex73

PDN wrote: »

FWIW, non-Catholic Christians also have an expectation that stuff divulged during pastoral counselling is confidential, but most of them already operate on the understanding that any confession of child abuse (or any revelation from a child or a third party concerning child abuse) must be reported to the Gardai and Social Services.

I don't know of any other crime where this policy of disclosure applies. For example, I have listened to people confessing to murder with no obligation being on me to report it.

In the Catholic Church if a priest reveals the seal he is defrocked. Its a very sensitive area.

The Priest is acting "in person Christi"

If a person went to confess the sin of peodofilia the priest can take a number of measures, like Part of penence to go to gards. If a person is going to confession then they know what they are doing is wrong.

Most peodofiles don;t believe what they are doing is wrong, and could not be bothered with confession. the live in denial.

Confession, like counselling is a platform for reform and help.

Regardless of what laws Ireland brings in. Its not going to change the seal of confession which many priests have died to protect.

raymon

alex73 wrote: »

Confession, like counselling is a platform for reform and help.

No it is not , priests are not councillors , and may be abusers themselves.

Priests cannot help abusers. And moving them to another parish doesn't help either

alex73

raymon wrote: »

No it is not , priests are not councillors , and may be abusers themselves.

Priests cannot help abusers. And moving them to another parish doesn't help either

Come on... Read the logic in your post...

Its like say Mothers can't help their children as they may be abusers themselves (like the mother in Galway who abused her children)

Generalisations are petty.

raymon

alex73 wrote: »

Come on... Read the logic in your post...

Its like say Mothers can't help their children as they may be abusers themselves (like the mother in Galway who abused her children)

Generalisations are petty.

Read my post again

My main point is that the sacrament of confession is specifically for the forgiveness of sins , not as a platform for counselling, reform and help.
You are completely wrong in this regard.

Priests should not try to reform or repair a rapist of children.
They are not qualified to do so and will allow the abuser to abuse again

A priest has absolutely no more healing powers than a bricklayer or chimney sweep

I also mentioned that the priest hearing the confession may possibly be an abuser - a fair possibility to keep in mind

georgieporgy

Chavez is beginning to see some merit in sacramental healing. For ignorant readers let me point out that the sacrament of the sick includes the sacrament of penance (confession).

Mr Chavez is guilty of doling out a fair share of abuse but ,being head of state, is the law of the land. Like Enda Kenny he hasn't heretofore had much time for Cross or Crozier

.15-July-2011 -- Catholic World News Brief


Venezuela’s Chávez Receives Sacrament Of Anointing Of The Sick

Hugo Chávez, who has clashed with Venezuela’s hierarchy since becoming the nation’s president in 1999, received the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick during a July 5 Mass. The socialist leader is battling cancer.

“Regardless of what the sickness is, it must be seen with the eyes of faith as a moment of purification,” said Bishop Mario del Valle Moronta Rodríguez, who anointed the president. “The sick person takes advantage of the suffering to purify himself, always according to life, to the fullness of life.”

“This is what we pray for the president and for all those who are sick, that they may take advantage of that moment and remember that it is a moment of purification,” he added.

philologos

I don't know how practical this law is in terms of proving knowledge. I believe that the State needs to take tougher action in respect to child abuse that has taken place in the RCC, but I'm not sure if this is the best action. I don't believe that discussion of expelling the Papal Nuncio is the best action. The best action would have been to prosecute every person who was accused of child abuse in these reports as any other person would have been prosecuted.

Bob Cratchet

philologos wrote: »

The best action would have been to prosecute every person who was accused of child abuse in these reports as any other person would have been prosecuted.

Exactly, along with the Bishops, the state and Guards have got off very lightly in this regard, thus perpetuating the problems. As for the Papal Nuncio, if he isn't prepared to start sacking any weak, vain, or guilty Bishop still in place, then he should be expelled. God knows what kind of protectionist ass covering politics is going on in the between various Cardinals in the Vatican, and what kind of rubbish the Pope is being spun. Truth and lies all mixed in together no doubt.

gimmebroadband

What I don't understand is why those who were accused of abuse and those accused of covering it up haven't been brought in for questioning by the Criminal Justice System??? Is it because of a time lapse???

philologos

gimmebroadband wrote: »

What I don't understand is why those who were accused of abuse and those accused of covering it up haven't been brought in for questioning by the Criminal Justice System??? Is it because of a time lapse???

In 2002 the agreement the State had with the religious orders dictated that those who claimed compensation waive their right to sue the church and the Government.

The agreement also stated that the abusers must remain anonymous.

gimmebroadband

philologos wrote: »

In 2002 the agreement the State had with the religious orders dictated that those who claimed compensation waive their right to sue the church and the Government.

The agreement also stated that the abusers must remain anonymous.

Thank you philogos!

Bob Cratchet

philologos wrote: »

In 2002 the agreement the State had with the religious orders dictated that those who claimed compensation waive their right to sue the church and the Government.

The agreement also stated that the abusers must remain anonymous.

Right to sue the Church and State, that is totally separate though from the state securing criminal convictions and sentences. If there is all this proof, why at least no arrests ? Other than idiotic bluff statements from Enda and Gilmore, What is the state doing ?

gimmebroadband

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Right to sue the Church and State, that is totally separate though from the state securing criminal convictions and sentences. If there is all this proof, why at least no arrests ? Other than idiotic bluff statements from Enda and Gilmore, What is the state doing ?

That's precisely what I was wondering!

dvpower

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

Other than idiotic bluff statements from Enda and Gilmore, What is the state doing ?

They are introducing mandatory reporting

philologos

If I recall correctly the justification for not having an out and out trial was the distress that victims would experience.

Bob Cratchet

philologos wrote: »

If I recall correctly the justification for not having an out and out trial was the distress that victims would experience.

Most victims rightly want justice and convictions. They should be at least given the option in each and every case.

raymon

philologos wrote: »

If I recall correctly the justification for not having an out and out trial was the distress that victims would experience.

Some of these posts are disgraceful.
Why are you trying to insult the victims with comments like this

gimmebroadband

philologos wrote: »

If I recall correctly the justification for not having an out and out trial was the distress that victims would experience.

All rape victims suffer distress when it comes to trial, why should rapes by the clergy be any different?

philologos

raymon: I'm not defending what happened. I'm merely stating what I remember from 2002. It would be considerably better if you read my posts thoroughly first.

gimmebroadband

"For through the law (God's Law) I died to the law (man's law), so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God,* who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification* comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing". (Ga. 2:19-21)

DaveTwenty7

Onesimus wrote: »

If I was a priest I wouldn't give absolution to an offender if he was not willing to report it. Because as you say he really isnt penitent if not willing to report his ''crime'' as well as sin.

I agree completely make reporting the crime part of the absolution terms if it's an abuser.
Unfortunately this falls down if it's an abused person who "confesses"

gimmebroadband

Perhaps Enda Kenny could sit in on one of the Exorcisms as well, now that would be a treat - not!!

gimmebroadband

From a Texan poster in another forum, regards anonymous confession!!



Future Confession scenario:

Preist (walking into police station): I need to report an incident of child abuse as I am required to by law.

Police: Thank you for coming, Father. How did you come to know about this?

Priest: It was confessed to me.

Police: When was this?

Priest: Yesterday; I hear Confessions every Saturday.

Police: Who was the abuser?

Priest: I don't know the name. Confession is anonymous.

Police: What did he look like? Could you pick him out of a mug book?

Priest: I couldn't see the face in the Confessional.

Police: Well, it was a man, right?

Priest: I think so but I couldn't be certain. The voice sounded mostly male.

Police Well, who was the victim?

Priest: The penitent did not say the victim's name?

Police: Didn't you ask?

Priest: No, Confession is about the sinner.

Police: Was the victim a boy or girl?

Priest: I am not sure.

Police: Didn't you ask?

Priest: No, it's just as sinful to abuse a boy as a girl.

Police: When did this crime occur?

Priest I don't really know. The penitent said he last went to Confession five years ago so it was probably sometime in the last five years.

Police: Where did it occur? I need to make sure this is handled by the proper jurisdiction.

Priest: That wasn't mentioned.

Police: Did you excommunicate him for this horrible crime?

Priest: No, I have no authority to excommunicate anyone.

Police: Well, thank you Father. We are so happy that you came to us so we can save the children of Ireland. :pac:

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=580328&page=4

toby08

what about this scenario lock up the pervs and all those who have shielded them then the catholic church might get some new honest leadership and young people may start returning to the church,we may even get a new priest or two instead of having to import them.
What we really need in this country is a miracle that opens the eyes of those brainwashed craw thumpers and get a majority of honest catholics to change this rotten edifice from the inside out...I was speaking with an older gentleman the other day and his attitude was this "ah they were misguided and will have to meet their maker" I may be annoyed but I honestly dont believe in witch hunts but I firmly believe that the people who covered up sex offenders are much more guilty of crimes than even some of the offenders themselves.
just a simple phone call could have saved so much

Fanny Cradock

toby08 wrote: »

what about this scenario lock up the pervs and all those who have shielded them then the catholic church might get some new honest leadership and young people may start returning to the church,we may even get a new priest or two instead of having to import them.
What we really need in this country is a miracle that opens the eyes of those brainwashed craw thumpers and get a majority of honest catholics to change this rotten edifice from the inside out...I was speaking with an older gentleman the other day and his attitude was this "ah they were misguided and will have to meet their maker" I may be annoyed but I honestly dont believe in witch hunts but I firmly believe that the people who covered up sex offenders are much more guilty of crimes than even some of the offenders themselves.
just a simple phone call could have saved so much

Can we keep this on topic, please? The discussion is about the seal of confession. If people want to talk about the sex abuse scandals then there is a rather large thread for that.

toby08

Ok sorry for explaining my point .in short outlaw the criminal act of the confessional which has helped pedophiles continue their crimes. No religion can be above the law of the land break the seal now!!!!

gimmebroadband

toby08 wrote: »

Ok sorry for explaining my point .in short outlaw the criminal act of the confessional which has helped pedophiles continue their crimes. No religion can be above the law of the land break the seal now!!!!

Can you provide a link as to where the confessional is a criminal act as you stated??

Breaking the Seal of Confesson is NOT an option! Priests are prepared to go to jail for as long as it takes or be put to death rather than break that seal.

dvpower

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Can you provide a link as to where the confessional is a criminal act as you stated??

Its not a criminal act of course....

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Breaking the Seal of Confesson is NOT an option! Priests are prepared to go to jail for as long as it takes or be put to death rather than break that seal.

... but you are quite willing to see it become so.

lmaopml

dvpower wrote: »

Yes. All culpable. Every right thinking person knows the harm of abuse. The 'we we on a learning curve' or 'we didn't understand it' stuff are just cheap excuses.

So I presume that parents and those of an era gone by should be just as culpable and 'laws' should be passed to make them so? ...because 'they' knew too! MAd, as it sounds today, they 'knew' and many who 'knew' did something within their remit that will be forever lost in time - and others did 'nothing' - at least nothing that made the 'state' responsible for it's citizens. A state that happily handed on responsibility and apparently thinks it's citizens should buy that same thing today..

I heard church people saying 'lets move on and not repeat mistakes' a decade ago. And now we see that they are repeating the same mistakes. I wonder is the reluctance to accept mandatory reporting just repeating the same mistake yet again.

Yes, it is repeating the 'same' ineffectual simplistic mistakes again...Like some kind of 'witchhunt' for 'bad' people....(because everybody knows that's where they gather ) The daily mail says so.

I agree that it is repeating badly informed mistakes. I'm a Catholic mum, and hell will freeze over before I put my children in jeopardy...but I am vastly more aware that 'danger' doesn't explicitly present itself in a white collar, and sometimes it does, and I will recognise it for what it is and not what popular opinion presents as the 'only' danger to the young, when quite clearly common sense if nothing else tells us it is not! My children go to a Catholic school, a really good one. They are being given an excellent education - I think that's good. I hope others can say the same whatever their worldview, and I would fight for their right to do so..all things being equal.

gimmebroadband

dvpower wrote: »

... but you are quite willing to see it become so.

Early Christians were also martyred for the faith, weren't they. And it's currently happening in China etc.

dvpower

lmaopml wrote: »

e shSo I presume that parents and those of an era gone by should be just as culpable and 'laws' should be passed to make them so? ...because 'they' knew too! MAd, as it sounds today, they 'knew' and many who 'knew' did something within their remit and others did 'nothing' - at least nothing that made the 'state' responsible for it's citizens.

Yes. Parents who knew or stongly suspected that their children were being abused but didn't act should be punished severely. A child depends most on their parents and they have the primary responsibilty for keeping them from danger.

lmaopml wrote: »

Yes, it is repeating the 'same' ineffectual simplistic mistakes again...Like some kind of 'witchhunt' for 'bad' people....(because everybody knows that's where they gather ) The daily mail says so.

I think the mandatory reporting rules will necesarily be complex with different ranges of requirements, reporting structures and sanctions.
I'm not looking for a witchhunt or a punishment of the RCC; I hope they design it well with its purpose in mind, but without favour.

dvpower

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Early Christians were also martyred for the faith, weren't they. And it's currently happening in China etc.

You can exaggerate the proposal as much as you like. Martyrdom!. Have a word with yourself:rolleyes:

gigino

raymon wrote: »

A priest has absolutely no more healing powers than a bricklayer or chimney sweep

I also mentioned that the priest hearing the confession may possibly be an abuser - a fair possibility to keep in mind

+1. If the priest himself who was hearing the confession was not an abuser himself, then certainly he knew some of his colleagues who were abusers.

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Breaking the Seal of Confesson is NOT an option! Priests are prepared to go to jail for as long as it takes or be put to death rather than break that seal.

All it takes for evil to thrive is for "good" men to do nothing.

lmaopml

Well maybe this is a bit of a red herring thread. A whole lot of parents and guards, and members of the judiciary system are passing laws that condemn themselves? Not likely! No, there is only one 'victim' here being suggested as worthy of prosocution! - our ancestors?, actually pretty much every society that puts children into 'care' ?
and not only in Ireland, but worldover, but then again, 'we' as an Irish society are not particularly - and never were subject to what 'laws' western nations decide are 'universal' - we have the opportunity to actually 'think on it'..that's our 'opportunity'!

Imo, much like the red herring tabloid press play on, that diverts attention from 'actual' solutions without the drama of vigilantism. The 'confessional' is an easy and popular target - I'm real sorry that our current Government are so wimpy and unimaginative. Even the Church itself has been more imaginative introducing policy..

I would like to hear the 'value' of the suggested new laws and exactly how effectual they can be, or indeed whether they impede on human rights? I await their 'thoughtful' way forward to protect children in Ireland and whether it is 'populist' and not thought out, or whether it is a 'genuine' way forward that has a real effect in the real world, that doesn't divert and not own policy and very real laws - that's the ultimate. 'They' are sidestepping responsibility, and in doing so, attacking freedom-but the natives are buying it - the deadend solution. Bought.

toby08

gigino wrote: »

+1. If the priest himself who was hearing the confession was not an abuser himself, then certainly he knew some of his colleagues who were abusers.


All it takes for evil to thrive is for "good" men to do nothing.

That is my point exactly. as to the previous point there must be something really wrong with confession if a priest was wìlling as was stated to go to prison rather than do the morally and humanly correct thing break the seal and punish the guilty

alex73

toby08 wrote: »

That is my point exactly. as to the previous point there must be something really wrong with confession if a priest was wìlling as was stated to go to prison rather than do the morally and humanly correct thing break the seal and punish the guilty

Then people will simply not confess...

dvpower

alex73 wrote: »

Then people will simply not confess...

Good. If their confession is empty in the first place, why give them the outlet?

toby08

I gather from this thread that the seal of confession is canon law. Could i be so bold as to suggest that jesus words should be followed
Jesus said, “Temptations, stumbling blocks, enticements are surely to come, but whoever causes one of these little ones to sin, it would be better that a giant millstone would be tied around their neck and they would be thrown into the sea
If these were jesus wordr i for one am sure he would himself break the confessional seal. Maybe he is through the government

lmaopml

..because the 'outlet' provides opportunity to help them and to make them look more inwards? Like no other? ..and provides opportunity to protect and also to advise? - but never advertise?

God, only knows the value of the 'confessional' and it's unique way...the simplicity of tearing it down in Irish law, is to me a bewilderingly 'simple fix' approach....... much like the avoidance of 'good' laws has been categorically ignored with a 'blimp' on the screen that Veronica Guiran made

It seems if it 'sells' that is most important. People 'buy' it. Veronica stood out among her media counterparts for wanting to change 'information' and colouring 'law', but it seems that nothing has actually changed, it's all still populist shyte that sells, even though actual criminals don't inspire changing of 'law' to prosecute, whether a person is Caholic or whether they are just an ordinary citizen paying taxes. Nothing has 'actually' changed. Of course targetting the confessional will fix everything and is a great way to divert from what is 'actually' wrong, and blame is assigned...and bought.

dvpower

lmaopml wrote: »

..because the 'outlet' provides opportunity to help them and to make them look more inwards? Like no other? ..and provides opportunity to protect and also to advise? - but never advertise?

So we give rapists the outlet of attending sham confessions so that they might 'look more inwards' while they continue to rape.
No thanks. Let's just tell the authorities, so they might be apprehended.

lmaopml wrote: »

God, only knows the value of the 'confessional' and it's unique way...the simplicity of tearing it down in Irish law, is to me a bewilderingly 'simple fix' approach

No one is tearing it down - mandatory reporting will only apply to a very small set of offences.

lmaopml wrote: »

Of course targetting the confessional will fix everything and is a great way to divert from what is 'actually' wrong, and blame is assigned...and bought.

There is no targeting of the confessional; mandatory reporting will cover a range of professionals.

Bob Cratchet

gigino wrote: »

+1. If the priest himself who was hearing the confession was not an abuser himself, then certainly he knew some of his colleagues who were abusers.


All it takes for evil to thrive is for "good" men to do nothing.

We would hardly expect you to know the difference between thinking you know something and having any evidence to prove it.

toby08

Bob Cratchet wrote: »

We would hardly expect you to know the difference between thinking you know something and having any evidence to prove it.

A quick question i just noticd the ''we'' does this mean i can publish group comments as opposed to individual ones.as for evidence i do not think boards.ie would allow names do you?

Bob Cratchet

toby08 wrote: »

A quick question i just noticd the ''we'' does this mean i can publish group comments as opposed to individual ones.as for evidence i do not think boards.ie would allow names do you?

The poster in question has considerable form on this forum for making hysterical claims and accusations then not being able to provide a shred of evidence, proof, or supporting links.

toby08

Nite folks i have to attend an early mass. I still firmly believe that change has to come regarding the confessional.ìt will have to be external. Before you comment on my journey you should first walk in my shoes