Well, considering that the Aztec religion was no way near as repressive of sexuality as Christianity is.
Advertisement
by Czechanada » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:35 am
by Raeyh » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:38 am
by West Angola » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:36 am
Transhuman Proteus wrote:Very good, so the claim the confession would be invalid was incorrect? And that the person doing the confession may as well not bothered not correct either?
Transhuman Proteus wrote:So the priest being guilty of a mortal sin - that means they must repent and confess to that, correct? And having done so would be saved again? Other than the Church choosing not to allow it.
Transhuman Proteus wrote:Which part of the Bible talks about the confession needing to be a complete secret? Reading more on it, it seems to be a man made seal, with man made penalties given by the Catholic Church.
by Central Slavia » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:51 am
Raeyh wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Their priests weren't sexually repressed and around children all day. so maybe not.
Has there been any proven link between pedophilia and lack of sexual activity or is it just conjecture? I think it's a chicken and egg situation. Pedophiles tend to avoid having sex since having sex with children is illegal, not that avoiding having sex makes you a pedophile.
Glorious Homeland wrote:
You would be wrong. There's something wrong with the Americans, the Japanese are actually insane, the Chinese don't seem capable of free-thought and just defer judgement to the most powerful strong man, the Russians are quite like that, only more aggressive and mad, and Belarus? Hah.
Omnicracy wrote:The Soviet Union did not support pro-Soviet governments, it compleatly controled them. The U.S. did not controle the corrupt regiems it set up against the Soviet Union, it just sugested things and changed leaders if they weer not takeing enough sugestions
Great Nepal wrote:Please stick to OFFICIAL numbers. Why to go to scholars,[cut]
by Saint Jade IV » Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:26 pm
West Angola wrote:Transhuman Proteus wrote:So the priest being guilty of a mortal sin - that means they must repent and confess to that, correct? And having done so would be saved again? Other than the Church choosing not to allow it.
If they are truly sorry for their sin, they may be granted absolution if they confess it. However, there still may be penalties involved, the priest may be defrocked or be punished in other ways.
West Angola wrote:The Roman Catholic faith is not 100% from the Bible. Both Sacred Scripture and Apostolic Tradition go hand in hand in forming our faith. Apostolic tradition would be things like Mary's perpetual virginity, or the Nicene Creed, or the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick.
by Transhuman Proteus » Wed Nov 21, 2012 5:50 pm
Saint Jade IV wrote:West Angola wrote:The Roman Catholic faith is not 100% from the Bible. Both Sacred Scripture and Apostolic Tradition go hand in hand in forming our faith. Apostolic tradition would be things like Mary's perpetual virginity, or the Nicene Creed, or the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick.
None of which should be relevant in determining exceptions to secular law in a secular country. The Church's belief system does not form a basis for law or legal behaviour in a pluralistic nation.
by Elwher » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:37 pm
Transhuman Proteus wrote:Saint Jade IV wrote:
None of which should be relevant in determining exceptions to secular law in a secular country. The Church's belief system does not form a basis for law or legal behaviour in a pluralistic nation.
You're right, though he was answering my question.
I was getting a feel for the strong reactions against such things - why a man made seal is so sacred when it isn't derived from the Bible or a directive from God/Jesus whoever. What makes it so "set in stone".
I have got the sense as well, in a broader setting, that there is some self interest concern as well. While it only deals with a specific offense, pedophilia, there seems to be some belief if that can be reported flood gates could open and priests could be spilling their confessions to everyone. Then of course people wont confess and people will be going to hell etc I wish I knew what it was about our species that makes us so susceptible to coming up with, and believing in, slippery slopes.
by Elwher » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:46 pm
by Wisconsin9 » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:47 pm
Elwher wrote:After reflection, I still t\believe that this is a bad law, as the seal of the Confessional should remain sacrosanct. However, I also realize that, if I understand it correctly, this is a useless law.
Consider the scenario. Fr. Hawk appears before Fr. Silenzo as a penitent. In his confession, he admits to molesting children. Fr. Silenzo, in accordance to his vows to Mother Church, says nothing to the authorities and is therefore in violation of the law. How is he going to be accused, much less convicted? Only two people know what was said in this confession. Fr. Silenzo cannot turn himself in without violating the seal of the confessional, which he has already proven he will not do. Fr. Hawk can not turn in Fr. Silenzo without turning himself in, which he is unlikely to want to do or he would have already done so. Unless the police are going to send in agents to make false confessions and record them, I see no way for this law to be anything but an exercise in feel good politics designed to distract the people from any real solutions to a severs problem.
by Elwher » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:55 pm
Wisconsin9 wrote:Elwher wrote:After reflection, I still t\believe that this is a bad law, as the seal of the Confessional should remain sacrosanct. However, I also realize that, if I understand it correctly, this is a useless law.
Consider the scenario. Fr. Hawk appears before Fr. Silenzo as a penitent. In his confession, he admits to molesting children. Fr. Silenzo, in accordance to his vows to Mother Church, says nothing to the authorities and is therefore in violation of the law. How is he going to be accused, much less convicted? Only two people know what was said in this confession. Fr. Silenzo cannot turn himself in without violating the seal of the confessional, which he has already proven he will not do. Fr. Hawk can not turn in Fr. Silenzo without turning himself in, which he is unlikely to want to do or he would have already done so. Unless the police are going to send in agents to make false confessions and record them, I see no way for this law to be anything but an exercise in feel good politics designed to distract the people from any real solutions to a severs problem.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: bug the confessionals.
by Saint Jade IV » Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:57 pm
Elwher wrote:After reflection, I still t\believe that this is a bad law, as the seal of the Confessional should remain sacrosanct. However, I also realize that, if I understand it correctly, this is a useless law.
Consider the scenario. Fr. Hawk appears before Fr. Silenzo as a penitent. In his confession, he admits to molesting children. Fr. Silenzo, in accordance to his vows to Mother Church, says nothing to the authorities and is therefore in violation of the law. How is he going to be accused, much less convicted? Only two people know what was said in this confession. Fr. Silenzo cannot turn himself in without violating the seal of the confessional, which he has already proven he will not do. Fr. Hawk can not turn in Fr. Silenzo without turning himself in, which he is unlikely to want to do or he would have already done so. Unless the police are going to send in agents to make false confessions and record them, I see no way for this law to be anything but an exercise in feel good politics designed to distract the people from any real solutions to a severs problem.
by Transhuman Proteus » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:07 pm
Elwher wrote:After reflection, I still t\believe that this is a bad law, as the seal of the Confessional should remain sacrosanct. However, I also realize that, if I understand it correctly, this is a useless law.
Consider the scenario. Fr. Hawk appears before Fr. Silenzo as a penitent. In his confession, he admits to molesting children. Fr. Silenzo, in accordance to his vows to Mother Church, says nothing to the authorities and is therefore in violation of the law. How is he going to be accused, much less convicted? Only two people know what was said in this confession. Fr. Silenzo cannot turn himself in without violating the seal of the confessional, which he has already proven he will not do. Fr. Hawk can not turn in Fr. Silenzo without turning himself in, which he is unlikely to want to do or he would have already done so. Unless the police are going to send in agents to make false confessions and record them, I see no way for this law to be anything but an exercise in feel good politics designed to distract the people from any real solutions to a severs problem.
by Elwher » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:16 pm
Saint Jade IV wrote:
Consider the actual real life scenarios which have created the requirement for this law:
Father A confesses to Father B that he has been molesting children in his private chambers. Father B recommends that Father A be moved from this parish to a Catholic Children's home, without explaining why he needs him out of the parish. Or does Father B does not block a requested move, despite his knowledge that Father A has been raping children. It is later uncovered that Father A has abused several hundred children during his 40 year tenure at the children's home.
So if this law was in place, and the same situation occurred, investigation would be conducted as to why the priest was moved. The priest he confessed to would then be charged with failure to report and child endangerment. As he well should be.
Had the Catholic Church removed these priests from contact with the public, and made efforts to discipline them appropriately, this law would not be currently being considered. Fact is, they instead chose to endanger children. These priests knew, as a direct result of the Confessional that these priests had, and were likely to again, molest children. They could have ensured that they were not in a position to do so without breaching the seal. They chose not to. They lose the privilege.
by Emile Zola » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:18 pm
Elwher wrote:After reflection, I still t\believe that this is a bad law, as the seal of the Confessional should remain sacrosanct. However, I also realize that, if I understand it correctly, this is a useless law.
Consider the scenario. Fr. Hawk appears before Fr. Silenzo as a penitent. In his confession, he admits to molesting children. Fr. Silenzo, in accordance to his vows to Mother Church, says nothing to the authorities and is therefore in violation of the law. How is he going to be accused, much less convicted? Only two people know what was said in this confession. Fr. Silenzo cannot turn himself in without violating the seal of the confessional, which he has already proven he will not do. Fr. Hawk can not turn in Fr. Silenzo without turning himself in, which he is unlikely to want to do or he would have already done so. Unless the police are going to send in agents to make false confessions and record them, I see no way for this law to be anything but an exercise in feel good politics designed to distract the people from any real solutions to a severs problem.
by Saint Jade IV » Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:43 pm
Elwher wrote:Saint Jade IV wrote:
Consider the actual real life scenarios which have created the requirement for this law:
Father A confesses to Father B that he has been molesting children in his private chambers. Father B recommends that Father A be moved from this parish to a Catholic Children's home, without explaining why he needs him out of the parish. Or does Father B does not block a requested move, despite his knowledge that Father A has been raping children. It is later uncovered that Father A has abused several hundred children during his 40 year tenure at the children's home.
So if this law was in place, and the same situation occurred, investigation would be conducted as to why the priest was moved. The priest he confessed to would then be charged with failure to report and child endangerment. As he well should be.
Had the Catholic Church removed these priests from contact with the public, and made efforts to discipline them appropriately, this law would not be currently being considered. Fact is, they instead chose to endanger children. These priests knew, as a direct result of the Confessional that these priests had, and were likely to again, molest children. They could have ensured that they were not in a position to do so without breaching the seal. They chose not to. They lose the privilege.
First, I agree completely with the major point you made in the last paragraph. The Church, in many countries around the world, failed miserably in its duty to protect its members and any bishop who knowingly transferred a pedophile priest rather than ensuring his treatment or non-contact with the public should be prosecuted.
As to this law, I admit ignorance to Australian law, but under US rules of evidence the fact that Father B was the confessor of Father A and failed to block his transfer would be insufficient grounds for conviction. If he requested the transfer, a jury might be allowed to consider that as evidence but a good defense attorney could probably get it thrown out on the basis that there is no direct evidence as to what was confessed. Perhaps that is not the case in Australia; if so then I withdraw my objection to the usefulness of the law under these particular circumstances.
by Dyakovo » Thu Nov 22, 2012 12:20 pm
Saint Jade IV wrote:Why should children who are not Catholic have to put up with their abusers being protected by a religion they do not share?
by Saint Jade IV » Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:21 pm
by Ganos Lao » Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:24 pm
Saint Jade IV wrote:Had the Catholic Church removed these priests from contact with the public, and made efforts to discipline them appropriately, this law would not be currently being considered.
by Srboslavija » Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:48 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Cyptopir, Foxyshire, Ineva, Keltionialang, Kostane, Shrillland, Totoy Brown, Tungstan, Umeria
Advertisement