Roman Catholic Priests to be violated in Australia

[Thisbia]

No secular law can compel them to betray the penitent.

Didn't your Jesus have something to say about the traditions of man, and didn't he use the Pharisees as an example?

[Northwest Slobovia]

You know, there's a very simple solution to all of this: bug the confessionals, and if something illegal is overheard, give the priest a week to come clean. If he doesn't, lock him and the confessor away. They don't have to break the seal and the public is still protected.

That is violating the Seal.

Oh. There it is. A natural rights arguement

It's not "inviolable". It's completly able to be violated. It's just a matter of doing it. That being said, the law can't force a priest to turn his fellow priest in. They can, however, prosecute him for withholding evidence. However, they just can't charge him for such a crime. They have to prosecute him after an investigation.

However, I don't really like this law. Not for religious reasons, as I think whatever the secular law is it should be applied to every institution, even the religious.I just feel that it might be a slippery slope for the idea that the state can more or less legally make you give up a compulsory confession... even if that person never commited a crime.

But perhaps I'm just slightly paranoid.

It is inviolable. The Seal will not be violated.

There seems to be an unstated assumption here, so let me bring it into the open:

Abatael, do you believe that Catholic priests are incapable of sin?

[Great Nepal]

No. I don't care what the dictionary says about it, as I do not need a dictionary to give me the meaning of the inviolability of the Seal of the Confessional.

Nothing to do with your contest to original claim about state being supreme power though, now is it?

The State do think they can get the confession from the confessor, but the State cannot extract the betrayal they so dearly want.

Because, priests have clearly never acted in self interest and will go to prison to protect child molesters. Obviously.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Good, any organization that, on any level, allows for child predators to live freely must be gouged, bled, beaten, bullied, and bruised until it is hammered into a position where it can no longer allow harm. Religion is not grounds for protection against secular law.

[Abatael]

It isn't, but, of course, "worse" and its superlative is a relative term.

I am not posting to look "good."

You're posting to make yourself look like an asshole? Because that's what you're managing. In what way is it more important to protect the sinner than the child?

No, I am posting to defend what is right. As I have said before, I do not care what others think of me, when it comes to this.

It more important to the Seal, because violating the Seal is not acceptable under any circumstance.

[Central Slavia]

Do whatever you want; they won't violate the Seal.



Exactly. And no government will ever get anything out of this; it is futile.

Sure they will.
The catholic church has demonstrated that it is infuriatingly immoral and adaptable.
They WILL obey this law, because the priests are all shits out for themselves, and won't risk jail.

Dog's arse will they, even if they're self-interested
Anyone acting in such way would be excommunicated, and of course , if anyone were to interpret church doctrine so as to allow it, that'd be a textbook example of heresy, and they'd get officially excommunicated by the Pope.
The law, given the central role this tenet has, is pretty much the same as banning Catholicism. The lawmakers should have the guts to state it directly.

[Thisbia]

You're posting to make yourself look like an asshole? Because that's what you're managing. In what way is it more important to protect the sinner than the child?

No, I am posting to defend what is right. As I have said before, I do not care what others think of me, when it comes to this.

It more important to the Seal, because violating the Seal is not acceptable under any circumstance.

But you contradict the teachings of your Savior??

[The Emerald Dawn]

You're posting to make yourself look like an asshole? Because that's what you're managing. In what way is it more important to protect the sinner than the child?

No, I am posting to defend what is right. As I have said before, I do not care what others think of me, when it comes to this.

It more important to the Seal, because violating the Seal is not acceptable under any circumstance.

Jesus would weep, man. To hear such things, he would weep.

[Wisconsin9]

You're posting to make yourself look like an asshole? Because that's what you're managing. In what way is it more important to protect the sinner than the child?

No, I am posting to defend what is right. As I have said before, I do not care what others think of me, when it comes to this.

It seems we're all on the same level, then. We can't possibly change your opinion. You can't possibly change ours. We don't give half a fuck what you think is moral. You don't give half a fuck what we think is moral. This is going to keep spiraling until one side ends up going nuclear on the other and the banhammer gets swung. So let's all just admit that this argument is absolutely fucking futile for all parties and go our separate ways, alright?

[Abatael]

That is violating the Seal.



It is inviolable. The Seal will not be violated.

There seems to be an unstated assumption here, so let me bring it into the open:

Abatael, do you believe that Catholic priests are incapable of sin?

No.

No. I don't care what the dictionary says about it, as I do not need a dictionary to give me the meaning of the inviolability of the Seal of the Confessional.

Nothing to do with your contest to original claim about state being supreme power though, now is it?

I have already addressed that. You, however, ignored it.

The State do think they can get the confession from the confessor, but the State cannot extract the betrayal they so dearly want.

Because, priests have clearly never acted in self interest and will go to prison to protect child molesters. Obviously.

No, they go to prison and are persecuted to protect the Seal.

[The Emerald Dawn]

No, I am posting to defend what is right. As I have said before, I do not care what others think of me, when it comes to this.

It seems we're all on the same level, then. We can't possibly change your opinion. You can't possibly change ours. We don't give half a fuck what you think is moral. You don't give half a fuck what we think is moral. This is going to keep spiraling until one side ends up going nuclear on the other and the banhammer gets swung. So let's all just admit that this argument is absolutely fucking futile for all parties and go our separate ways, alright?

What the fuck? Voice of reason from a Cheese-head? ....It's a sign of the end-times.

[Ganos Lao]

The right thing is not violating the Seal of the Confessional. Violating the seal of the confessional, what you call the "right thing," is not right.

But I haven't said anything about violating it being the "right thing."

Care to show me where I did?

I have only been saying that had the Catholic Church done the right thing - report all sex crimes to police and not send priests who committed them to other churches as if nothing ever happened - we would not be discussing bypassing the seal of the confessional.

That has been my only point here on this thread. The Catholic Church shouldn't have had to be told "sorry, guys, we're going to have to get you to hand over everything those people have told you in their confessions" in the first place. They should've been since day one documenting incidents, telling the authorities, defrocking the perverts, and helping out victims with counseling.

Jesus said that it would be better to have a millstone tied around your neck and cast into the sea, correct? The Catholic Church should've applied the millstone and thrown the bastards into the sea, but they chose not to do so, and they have no one else to blame for any of this sacramental seal stuff then themselves.

[Abatael]

No, I am posting to defend what is right. As I have said before, I do not care what others think of me, when it comes to this.

It more important to the Seal, because violating the Seal is not acceptable under any circumstance.

But you contradict the teachings of your Savior??

I don't know what you mean, but that is between me and the Lord.

[Wisconsin9]

It seems we're all on the same level, then. We can't possibly change your opinion. You can't possibly change ours. We don't give half a fuck what you think is moral. You don't give half a fuck what we think is moral. This is going to keep spiraling until one side ends up going nuclear on the other and the banhammer gets swung. So let's all just admit that this argument is absolutely fucking futile for all parties and go our separate ways, alright?

What the fuck? Voice of reason from a Cheese-head? ....It's a sign of the end-times.

Yup. Next thing you know, Detroit'll look halfway decent.

[Central Slavia]

Have you stumbled on time machine around fifteenth century?
This is twenty first century, we trend to do things differently around here than in your century.

For any faithful believer, the laws of God do trump the laws of man. Morality is not a temporal or relative affair. I understand why the Catholic Church is unwilling to budge on this particular issue, though I do not necessarily agree with the doctrine of individual, private confession as part of someone's salvation.

Honestly, the problem is the celibacy imposed on Catholic Clergy. If priests were allowed to marry, lust, and the things that sometimes grow out of lust (pedophilia, for example) would be less of a problem. Although the historical reasons for said vow of celibacy, I do appreciate, it still needs to change.

As to the comments that priests are all out for themselves: I call shenanigans! Do you honestly believe someone would foreswear sex (or even marriage) and significant wealth (most priests do lead comfortable lives...but not excessive) to perform ancient rituals and listen to people's sins because they are...in it for themselves? Are you that blind? People do do things out of sincere religious conviction, whether or not you happen to believe as they do.

This.

[Abatael]

The right thing is not violating the Seal of the Confessional. Violating the seal of the confessional, what you call the "right thing," is not right.

But I haven't said anything about violating it being the "right thing."

Care to show me where I did?

I have only been saying that had the Catholic Church done the right thing - report all sex crimes to police and not send priests who committed them to other churches as if nothing ever happened - we would not be discussing bypassing the seal of the confessional.

That has been my only point here on this thread. The Catholic Church shouldn't have had to be told "sorry, guys, we're going to have to get you to hand over everything those people have told you in their confessions" in the first place. They should've been since day one documenting incidents, telling the authorities, defrocking the perverts, and helping out victims with counseling.

Jesus said that it would be better to have a millstone tied around your neck and cast into the sea, correct? The Catholic Church should've applied the millstone and thrown the bastards into the sea, but they chose not to do so, and they have no one else to blame for any of this sacramental seal stuff then themselves.

The "right" thing to do is to report all sex crimes to police and not send priests, who committed them to other churches as if nothing ever happened, regardless if they are protected by the Seal or not, correct?

[Great Nepal]

I have already addressed that. You, however, ignored it.

No, because this series of quotes lead back to this post and is only posts regarding the topic.

Because, priests have clearly never acted in self interest and will go to prison to protect child molesters. Obviously.

No, they go to prison and

Or, do logical thing and stop protecting child rapists.

are persecuted to protect the Seal.

Being subject to same law as everyone else is not persecution.

[Northwest Slobovia]

There seems to be an unstated assumption here, so let me bring it into the open:

Abatael, do you believe that Catholic priests are incapable of sin?

No.

Then on what basis do you say that secular law can't compel priests to break confession? If they can sin, then they can commit the sin of breaking confession, and thus some penalty or reward (or a combination of both) may suffice to compel them to do so.

If you're saying you don't think that should happen, that's a different story.

[Abatael]

I have already addressed that. You, however, ignored it.

No, because this series of quotes lead back to this post and is only posts regarding the topic.

This is what I said concerning that, "It has supreme, independent authority over the geographic area."

No, they go to prison and

Or, do logical thing and stop protecting child rapists.

That seems rather illogical.

are persecuted to protect the Seal.

Being subject to same law as everyone else is not persecution.

Being sent to prison and punished for doing the right thing is persecution. They are being mistreated, because they refuse to disobey God.

[Abatael]

No.

Then on what basis do you say that secular law can't compel priests to break confession? If they can sin, then they can commit the sin of breaking confession, and thus some penalty or reward (or a combination of both) may suffice to compel them to do so.

If you're saying you don't think that should happen, that's a different story.

I say that, because under no circumstances will secular law compel a confessor to betray the penitent.

They can sin, but it does not mean they will commit this specific sin. No penalty or reward can do such a thing.

[Ganos Lao]

But I haven't said anything about violating it being the "right thing."

Care to show me where I did?

I have only been saying that had the Catholic Church done the right thing - report all sex crimes to police and not send priests who committed them to other churches as if nothing ever happened - we would not be discussing bypassing the seal of the confessional.

That has been my only point here on this thread. The Catholic Church shouldn't have had to be told "sorry, guys, we're going to have to get you to hand over everything those people have told you in their confessions" in the first place. They should've been since day one documenting incidents, telling the authorities, defrocking the perverts, and helping out victims with counseling.

Jesus said that it would be better to have a millstone tied around your neck and cast into the sea, correct? The Catholic Church should've applied the millstone and thrown the bastards into the sea, but they chose not to do so, and they have no one else to blame for any of this sacramental seal stuff then themselves.

The "right" thing to do is to report all sex crimes to police and not send priests, who committed them to other churches as if nothing ever happened, regardless if they are protected by the Seal or not, correct?

If the Catholic Church listened to guys like Gerald Fitzgerald, we wouldn't be in this problem.

[Thisbia]

]

I say that, because under no circumstances will secular law compel a confessor to betray the penitent.

They can sin, but it does not mean they will commit this specific sin. No penalty or reward can do such a thing.

Penitent:
Disagrees with science.
Disagrees with morality.
Betrays the very foundation it is based on.

What good is the penitent, again???

[Abatael]

The "right" thing to do is to report all sex crimes to police and not send priests, who committed them to other churches as if nothing ever happened, regardless if they are protected by the Seal or not, correct?

If the Catholic Church listened to guys like Gerald Fitzgerald, we wouldn't be in this problem.

Please, just say if that is incorrect or correct, according to your beliefs.

[Abatael]

]

I say that, because under no circumstances will secular law compel a confessor to betray the penitent.

They can sin, but it does not mean they will commit this specific sin. No penalty or reward can do such a thing.

Penitent:
Disagrees with science.
Disagrees with morality.
Betrays the very foundation it is based on.

What good is the penitent, again???

Where do you get these definitions from?

[Wisconsin9]

Penitent:
Disagrees with science.
Disagrees with morality.
Betrays the very foundation it is based on.

What good is the penitent, again???

Where do you get these definitions from?

You're one to talk, you freely admit you've been pulling them out of your ass.