The Catholic Church has issued a warning to its clergy in Washington state: Any priest who complies with a new law requiring the reporting of child abuse confessions to authorities will be excommunicated.
https://www.newsweek.com/catholic-church-excommunicate-priests-following-new-us-state-law-2069039
This isn’t really news. This has always been their stance. Priests will always urge the person to turn them self in for true repentance but they won’t ever break the confidentiality of confession.
Take away their tax exempt status and tax them as the huge profitable businesses that they are.
The legit response. And continue to arrest members of this self aggrandized gang for the crimes they commit.
To be fair and if we consider Catholic lore and dogma technically any kind of breach of the confessional seal is a major breach in Catholic law or whatever. So I understand this from a faith based perspective.
On the other hand, I’m an atheist so fuck the confessional seal and report major crimes. Especially fucking child abuse! Any kind of child abuse!
Catholics and all christians by extension are also bound to do good and protect those who can’t defend themselves.
I’m going to risk that denouncing and delivering to secular authoroties those who practice one of the most heinous acts we can think of falls under that responsibility.
Or because the church has lost its power to deliver “justice” of their accord (read inquisition and the follow up torture and mutilation) it has also lost the will to persecute evil deeds?
Catholics are enablers and they are disgusting. Nothing like Christian love. We all have to follow the laws…why do catholics think they are above this? Stop diddling children and providing cover for pedos. I grew up and became a man when I left Christianity. There is a reason why people burn down catholic churches. What a cancer on the spirit of the human soul. The Catholic church is a major land owner. Charity is tyranny. Fair wages NOW. Justice for the global soul. No more missionaries of any christian variety.
Let’s do the thought experiment where this is about muslims instead of christians…
How does that play out?
Call me crazy, but I don’t think any religion should be molesting children or hiding it for others.
A priest is substantially closer to a therapist in function than to a lawyer.
: reads headline
Woo! Good for them! Stick it to The Man!
: reads article body
ahhhh fuck these guys
It’s funny, the post above this one on my feed is a bunch of people crowing about how you’d have to be a “tankie” to not support the new head of this organization.
I do think it’s funny that Republicans are attacking the Pope for being “woke” and other nonsense, but are leaving out calling him a pedo. They do it for just about everyone else they call “woke”.
Gee, I wonder why this one is different. Lol.
?
From what I’ve heard he doesn’t like Trump, and the tankie label is commonly and incorrectly equated with MAGA.
I was really hoping they’d be refusing to comply with unjust laws. If they wanted ways to look like the good guys, these days we’ve got plenty.
The worlds largest pedophile ring doing gods work I guess.
Teaching has the most pedophiles, followed by music tutor, and priests/clerics are 3rd.
Teaching might have the most reported pedophiles. (Might because there’s no citations)
This comment below the post about how the Catholic Church will excommunicate those who report pedophiles may be… not as supportive for your argument as you might think.
Could be more like they give children a safe space they can trust to confess, but I’m more on team they just want to cover up their own diddling.
Is parenting no longer a job? Because that’s top by far.
By straight numbers I’m sure that’s the case, but i doubt its true by percentage. But to be honest I’m not sure if the study included parents.
Yeah but is there a central leader for for teachers?
There is for Catholics. They’re all pederasts. Or at least comfortable with pederasts
It’s not like the pope or the catholic leadership is encouraging pedophiles. They’ve covered things up that happened, but it’s pretty wild to act like it’s some kind of pedo ring.
Covering thins like that up, is encouraging pedophiles. It let’s pedos know that it’s safe for them on the church.
There is a difference between wanting to deal with things internally without involving authorities, and actively promoting pedophilia. But I’m not here to go to bat for Catholics, I’m just pointing out the difference.
Hahahaha yeah ok.
Hundreds of millions of dollars spent to silence the countless victims of their systematic abuse but they’re not a pedo ring. lol
😂
I guess I would define a pedophile ring as an organization whose purpose is to abuse children.
Bingo! You described Catholicism!!! And all religions. Actually!!!
Religion is child abuse. Catholics actually systematically rape the kids too.
Not sure if you are just being an edge lord or if you are a moron.
Do you really think a pedophile ring would publicly advertise as such?
Hold on, you seriously believe that the purpose of the catholic church is to promote pedophilia?
That dumbass really isn’t living up to the username.
Fuck. Religion.
Agreed its a cancer on humanity. Fake ass shit.
Geez… I never thought I would see so much support for religious bullshit on this site. I’d rather see fewer children harmed than preserve the “sanctity” of confession, and every excommunicated priest is a priest with actual integrity.
The Catholic church is hardly going to allow priests to be forced to go to the police and admit crimes.
Separation of church and state goes both ways.
Confession is a religious rite. Try to legislate that rite is a violation of that separation.
Priests are bound by their office to maintain absolute confidentiality of confessed sins. Otherwise people are not likely to confess their sins.
It doesn’t matter how you, personally, feel about this or their religion or the value of confession as a sacrament, that’s their religion. The state doesn’t get to intervene.
The church should stay out of state affairs, and the state should stay out of church affairs. Exceptions exist, like when practices are outright criminal in themselves. But the state cannot compel a priest to violate their office. This is long accepted. You cannot compel a priest to testify about confession, for example.
Priests can encourage people to go to the police, but that’s it. Their role in confession is between the sinner and their god.
There’s a Christian duty to follow laws that are just as well. From a very Christian perspective, the right thing to do would be convincing them to confess outright at least.
I’m no priest and I was definitely never catholic, but that’s how I see it as someone who grew up in a protestant house.
I can tell you that that’s also what I got. The way confessions work, the priest gives you… “penance” is what it might be called? What you need to do to repent for your sins and be absolved of them. Usually that’s some prayer, but they can tell you that you have to turn yourself in and admit to your crimes to the police.
I have no idea if priests actually do that, and I imagine with the secrecy it’d be hard to get any information.
Yeah religion is a great cover for abusing kids.
This isn’t about priests abusing kids (though that’s definitely a recurring issue as well), it’s about people who have done so confessing such to a priest.
I’m not religious so don’t really have any stake in this, but it’s interesting that it is specifically about child sex abuse and not other major crimes such as rape, murder etc. That makes me worried as “for children” is often used as a testing ground for stuff that will be expanded upon later, and there’s a lot of stuff people likely confess - supposedly under strict confidence - to their religious figures.
Along with the laity, priests must also go to confession. So it does provide cover for priests abusing kids.
Confession is about reconciliation with god and anyone that comes to ask forgiveness from their deity should be willing to make it right with the people they hurt by taking responsibility and accepting the consequences in a tangible way rather than thoughts and prayers.
I agree - and I would hope any advice given by a priest would cover this - but if it becomes a mandatory thing where does it end. Should priests report abortions in states that have made then illegal? How about sheltering an undocumented immigrant, or any number of things that the current administration might decide they don’t like?
You can’t make diddling a child right, ever. But man, so glad diddy had something named after him…
This is disgusting, doctors need to report the same thing. Its child abuse its basically saying you support pedofilia. Unless that’s what you’re covering up in your thinly veiled argument. The Catholic church should not be a safe haven for pedophiles.
Therapists are allowed to maintain confidentiality.
Is this true? I thought with things like danger to oneself or others they’re mandated reporters.
They have some obligations in cases of child endangerment or suicide, direct threats to others. I’m not sure of the details, if it’s similar expectations or what.
You’re right, that commenter doesn’t know what they’re talking about
That’s an interesting point. Maybe priests should have similar requirements, licensing, oversight, and malpractice liability.
More the point is that therapists don’t have the same obligations as doctors. Therapists can keep confidentiality of things that doctors aren’t allowed to. The guy i responded to was comparing priests to doctors, but a better comparison would be comparing them to therapists.
Are therapists not mandatory reporters in your jurisdiction?
They have more patient confidentiality than doctors, but I’m not sure of the specifics.
If you don’t mind my asking, which country are you in? Therapists are mandatory reporters for child abuse everywhere in Canada/USA.
Yep
This is disgusting, doctors need to report the same thing.
Doctors are not religious figures. Doctor patient confidentiality is not an absolute protected by the first amendment (with legal precedent).
Its child abuse its basically saying you support pedofilia. Unless that’s what you’re covering up in your thinly veiled argument.
That’s a nice false equivalence. I’m impressed that you managed to get from “priests cannot be compelled by the state to violate their religious office” to supporting pedophilia.
The Catholic church should not be a safe haven for pedophiles.
I agree. That’s a larger problem though.
A larger problem addressed by bills just like this.
Exceptions exist, like when practices are outright criminal in themselves
Aiding and abetting criminals is a crime.
Cool, break that down for us.
I was wrong, the priest is an accessory to the crime.
In the United States, a person who learns of the crime and gives some form of assistance before the crime is committed is known as an “accessory before the fact”. A person who learns of the crime after it is committed and helps the criminal to conceal it, or aids the criminal in escaping, or simply fails to report the crime, is known as an “accessory after the fact”. A person who does both is sometimes referred to as an “accessory before and after the fact”, but this usage is less common.
How does receiving a confession aid or abet the perpetrator?
If a child says my dad touches me at night and you do nothing you belong in jail
Pretty much describing how we ended up with the Satanic Panic
There’s two sides to this coin. Getting children - particularly young children who don’t understand what they’re being asked - to confess and accuse people of crimes is trivially easy.
You’re right, having done some light wikipedia-ing, emotional support such that a priest provides would make him an accessory.
Psychiatrists are legally obligated to report knowledge of certain crimes that would otherwise be protected by confidentiality laws, I don’t see why priests should be any different.
emotional support such that a priest provides would make him an accessory
That does not appear to be true, unless the crime is being planned or in progress.
But even if it somehow did, you’d effectively be demanding a priest self-incriminate by admitting to the contents of a confession.
It’s called “accessory after the fact”, and they wouldn’t be guilty of it if they report it, that’s the whole point of reporting it.
An accessory must generally have knowledge that a crime is being committed, will be committed, or has been committed. A person with such knowledge may become an accessory by helping or encouraging the criminal in some way. The assistance to the criminal may be of any type, including emotional or financial assistance as well as physical assistance or concealment.
Psychiatrists
Thank you, this was the comparison I was looking for and the standard I would hold for this. I agree with your assessment.
What if the priest doest’t provide emotional support
Then they won’t know about the crime to begin with. The very act of listening to the confession and advising spiritual penance provides emotional support.
«Bless me father for I have sinned: I have a sex slave in my basement. I rape him every day because I cannot control myself."
You don’t report that and you’re siding the continue commission of a crime.
Overall you’re right about the first amendment, but it feels like that separating only goes one way, and I’m tired of religion getting the better side of it.
It’s also so selective. I can’t kill a live chicken to practice Santeria but it’s fine for orthodox jews on Kaporos? We can’t compel a priest to report a murder or testify but they can tell their constituents to vote for the candidate that bans women’s healthcare?
It doesn’t, there’s just stupid people out there who find X so abhorrent that can’t possibly have a rational thought regarding it.
But you’ve been on Lemmy before, so I’m sure you know all about it.
Typical lemmy, finding X abhorrent*.
^*for child-rape values of X^
You know what that’s fair. This is the “just” thing to do.
I still do hope priests will try to fix it in their own communities tho.
Mixed feelings
Obviously the clergy have absolute values which they believe come from god, so obviously they’re not equipped to make exceptions such as this as individuals. You would have to appeal the to pope and cardinals directly to change the rules.
How does the state intend to enforce this? Is there a priest registry in washington state, and does it account for all recognized religions for tax purposes? Are they going to take away peoples license to preach?
During the investigation of child sexual abuse, if the perpetrator is a Catholic, they’ll ask if the abuser confessed. If so, the priest is liable to be prosecuted.
Honestly, my biggest problem with the law is how unlikely it is to ever be prosecuted. Proving that an abuser confessed would be impossible. They are infringing on the First Amendment and ensuring that no abuser ever talks to their priest, but in practice priests probably won’t follow the law and if they don’t the state is unlikely to actually enforce the law.
If they only ask Catholics that sounds like it also infringes freedom of religion first amendment rights. They either have to ask every perp which church/temple/mosque/etc they go to and if they ever told a clergy member or none of the perps.
Aiding child abuse isnt a first amendment right. You are only allowed freedom to practice religion and the government can’t force you to practice anything else. Confession isn’t protected by this.
If the law specifically targeted Catholics then that denomination would not have equal rights to religion. However, I went and looked up the definition just to put the issue to rest:
(18) “Member of the clergy” means any regularly licensed,27 accredited, or ordained minister, priest, rabbi, imam, elder, or28 similarly situated religious or spiritual leader of any church,29 religious denomination, religious body, spiritual community, or sect,30 or person performing official duties that are recognized as the31 duties of a member of the clergy under the discipline, tenets,32 doctrine, or custom of the person’s church, religious denomination,33 religious body, spiritual community, or sect, whether acting in an34 individual capacity or as an employee, agent, or official of any35 public or private organization or institution.
This is wildly outside of the mainstream interpretation of the first amendment. Whether the law would be upheld by the court is basically a toss up.
Bro it’s breaking Catholic canon. They can change that shit that’s what the Pope is for.
Maybe God would be chill with revealing child abuse even if it comes from confession. Just carve a little exception out there. Crazy that the clergy would rather protect pedophiles than reinterpreting some doctrine.
First off, adapting religion to secular laws is not how that works. There’s the separation of church an state and the state should have no say in any religion. The country was based on religious freedom and escaping what the English kings were trying to do to Christianity in their realms (controlling religion).
But second you shouldn’t take that way since you don’t seem to grasp the role reconciliation has for Catholics and Orthodox (and others). It’s a sacrament (or sacred mystery for Orthodox). That’s dogma and the practice/form is in large part a matter of unchangeable doctrine. That kind of doctrine never gets changed, ever, and never has. It’s an essential part of Catholics’ beliefs. Parts of format are just regular teaching which can get changed, but that’s not a matter of interpretation, it’s a matter of practice (in this case canon law) guided by the foundatinal dogma and unchanging doctrine. The seal of confessing is so fundamental, so sacred that there have been numerous martyrs whose status comes from having been willing to die rather than break it. It’s would be less grave to lie about believing in Christ to save your life than to break the seal (and most martyrs died for refusing to reject their faith when Christianity was prohibited).
Oh, well my bad, I didn’t realize mumbo jumbo God land gets a fucking wave off for protecting pedophiles because it’s been that way for a long time.
The state saying, “hey you can’t hide behind the veil of religion to protect the people doing horrible things to children,” is definitely something to argue in court regarding the first amendment.
I’d argue it’s not a restriction of the practice of religion to compell someone with knowledge of child abuse or similarly heinous crimes to share that with an authority (the state) that can take action to protect people.
Setting all that aside. How is it not just wrong on some fundamental level to have the power to halt but still let abuse and pedophilia occur? It just seems wrong.
Maybe that’s why religious participation has been declining. Because they’re busy telling you that it’s sacred to protect pedophiles.
Quick edit:
That’s dogma and the practice/form is in large part a matter of unchangeable doctrine
Emphasis mine. Ok so you’re saying that there is a possibility that dogma and the practice/form can change and has changed. So… Let’s do that.
