Seal of Confession

Suzie Sue

Manach wrote: »

Pardon my forgetfullness, but did we not already have this debate in another thread about the "wealth" of the Church and gigino was given a link to the latest Vatican accounts?

He seems to like bringing up off topic subjects and then when confronted with things as annoying as facts demand it goes back on topic.

gigino

Suzie Sue wrote: »

He seems to like bringing up off topic subjects and then when confronted with things as annoying as facts demand it goes back on topic.

The latest vatican accounts tells as much about the wealth of the worldwide RC church as Bertie Aherns manchester slush fund did about the state of the Irish economy. Of the 5,500,000 google results for vatican wealth you get interesting insights from practically all reputable news organisations worldwide etc

georgieporgy

gigino wrote: »

The latest vatican accounts tells as much about the wealth of the worldwide RC church as Bertie Aherns manchester slush fund did about the state of the Irish economy. Of the 5,500,000 google results for vatican wealth you get interesting insights from practically all reputable news organisations worldwide etc

including News of the World?:D

Fanny Cradock

Again, I feel compelled to warn people to stay on topic.

"Seal of Confession" yeah...

georgieporgy

wonderfulname wrote: »

So he was a new age pagan satanist? You do realise those are three different things? At any rate what point does this story make?

What point? It shows the the power of the sacrament of confession in enabling Bartolo to change his life completly from indulging in satanic rituals, sexual orgies, etc to the exact opposite. He became a very good man. He regained his physical health too and lived another 55 years. Since his death the locals have revered him as a saint.

It would be a pity to let ignorant people tamper with this or any sacrament. When a politician finally gets his hands on the reins of power it can often go to his head.

wonderfulname

Best not to offend your beliefs, I'll let you run with that... So lets call it all fact, statistically, logically, and rationally, it bears no relevance, even at that. Before I waste my time going further, are you equating satanic ritual and adult group sex with child molestation?

raymon

georgieporgy wrote: »

What point? It shows the the power of the sacrament of confession in enabling Bartolo to change his life completly from indulging in satanic rituals, sexual orgies, etc to the exact opposite. He became a very good man. He regained his physical health too and lived another 55 years. Since his death the locals have revered him as a saint.

It would be a pity to let ignorant people tamper with this or any sacrament. When a politician finally gets his hands on the reins of power it can often go to his head.

This folk tale of gobbledygook tells me nothing

Confession does not heal child abusers. To imply it does by this unconvincing parable is ridiculous

Reesy

The problem I see with the seal of the confession is that it can easily be used to protect paedo priests.

If any priest is going to confess to his boss that he's been raping little boys and girls then all he has to do is ensure the conversation's a 'confession' and bingo! the boss is absolved of the need to follow the law of the land.

alex73

Reesy wrote: »

The problem I see with the seal of the confession is that it can easily be used to protect paedo priests.

If any priest is going to confess to his boss that he's been raping little boys and girls then all he has to do is ensure the conversation's a 'confession' and bingo! the boss is absolved of the need to follow the law of the land.

If the law of the land says that the priest has to report what is said in confession then people won't confess. The law is self defeating.

Suzie Sue

alex73 wrote: »

If the law of the land says that the priest has to report what is said in confession then people won't confess. The law is self defeating.

It won't bother most people, they know its just another dunbelievables codology stunt by enda kenny.
99% of confessions are totally anonymous.

Priest "A man confessed a crime to me"
Guard "What did he look like ?"
Priest "I don't know, he was behind the screen"
Guard "Did you ask his name ?"
Priest "No, we never ask names, thats not the point of confession"
Guard "Would you be able to identify him again from his voice"
Priest "I would guess he was a middle aged male, but other than that I have no idea, I heard at least 40 confessions that afternoon"
Guard "Did he give you any particulars about the crime ?"
Priest "No, we don't ever ask details, that’s not the point of confession"
Guard "okay dokey, I've da snack box to get back to, will there be anything else Father, would you like a chicken wing ?"
Priest "No tanks, I've an excommunication appointment"

Manach

As well, there are other sources of law: European (EU) or UN treaty requirements, which in essence address religious concerns might be breached by any strictly "Irish law of the land" legislation. This would also need to pass muster on the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, which at a guess might prove an issue. Finally, as a historian I'd point, there is the folk memorys of the Penal laws passed against the Catholic laity, which this would be. Thus, to pass a law to force the breaking the seal of confession between Priest/Penitant would expand major political capital on behalf of the ruling parties.

raymon

alex73 wrote: »

If the law of the land says that the priest has to report what is said in confession then people won't confess. The law is self defeating.

Not really , let them not confess. Then everyone is ok.

It's a matter between the justice system and the offender

alex73

Manach wrote: »

As well, there are other sources of law: European (EU) or UN treaty requirements, which in essence address religious concerns might be breached by any strictly "Irish law of the land" legislation. This would also need to pass muster on the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, which at a guess might prove an issue. Finally, as a historian I'd point, there is the folk memorys of the Penal laws passed against the Catholic laity, which this would be. Thus, to pass a law to force the breaking the seal of confession between Priest/Penitant would expand major political capital on behalf of the ruling parties.

It's not the first time in history there is an attack on the seal of confession and it won't be the last.. People have short memories.

alex73

raymon wrote: »

Not really , let them not confess. Then everyone is ok.

Really.... How many organisations offer confidential counselling?

Try drawing up a law and getting it passed and you will see the pitfalls.

Suzie Sue

alex73 wrote: »

It's not the first time in history there is an attack on the seal of confession and it won't be the last.. People have short memories.

Caesar couldn't break it 2000 years ago, Cromwell and the English couldn't break it for 800 years, so Enda will hardly be the man.

alex73

Off topic.

Suzie Sue

alex73 wrote: »

Off topic.

Actually the politics of this STUNT are very on topic

gigino

Reesy wrote: »

If any priest is going to confess to his boss that he's been raping little boys and girls then all he has to do is ensure the conversation's a 'confession' and bingo! the boss is absolved of the need to follow the law of the land.

good point, well said.

alex73 wrote: »

It's not the first time in history there is an attack on the seal of confession

which is more important to the roman catholic church - protecting paedo priests and keeping the stats on clerical sex abuse lower than they would otherwise be, or protecting the "seal of confession" ?

alex73

gigino wrote: »

which is more important to the roman catholic church - protecting paedo priests and keeping the stats on clerical sex abuse lower than they would otherwise be, or protecting the "seal of confession" ?

your post denotes a seriouls lack of understanding. ... The seal of confession was not invented by the Roman catholic church. Don't be so narrow minded.

gigino

alex73 wrote: »

. The seal of confession was not invented by the Roman catholic church.

see what wicki says on it so;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_of_Confession

Suzie Sue

gigino wrote: »

see what wicki says on it so;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_of_Confession

Since when did Jesus and the Disciples go around divulging to the Roman authorities, or anyone else, what was confessed to them ?

gigino

Yip, it was not just things like celibacy or indulgences which the RCC introduced / changed after hundreds of years.

Suzie Sue

gigino wrote: »

Yip, it was not just things like celibacy or indulgences which the RCC introduced / changed after hundreds of years.

Indulgences go back as far as the old testament. Celibacy since the Children of Adam an Eve. Jesus also practiced celibacy. You are strangely obsessed by it and have been able to prove not one of your claims about it. Quick you should declare its off topic before you get caught out again.

AhSureTisGrand

alex73 wrote: »

If the law of the land says that the priest has to report what is said in confession then people won't confess. The law is self defeating.

The law doesn't specifically target confession. Rather, it will be a criminal offence to withhold information relating to child abuse, with the only exception being if the victim does not wish for the information to be passed on

gigino

Suzie Sue wrote: »

Celibacy since the Children of Adam an Eve. Jesus also practiced celibacy. You are strangely obsessed by it and have been able to prove not one of your claims about it.

not one of my claims about it ? I showed you the wiki link. Here is another link. http://www.futurechurch.org/fpm/history.htm Like many other RC practices it was not the tradition in the early centuries of the Christian church. Since when did Jesus and the Disciples set up a confessional ?

Suzie Sue

gigino wrote: »

not one of my claims about it ? I showed you the wiki link. Here is another link. http://www.futurechurch.org/fpm/history.htm Like many other RC practices it was not the tradition in the early centuries of the Christian church.

You've tried and failed to claim celibacy was a factor in child abuse.
You've tried and failed to claim the Catholic Church invented celibacy.

gigino

Suzie Sue wrote: »

You've tried and failed to claim celibacy was a factor in child abuse.

Sexual and emotional frustration has been a well documented factor in some people who were celibate comitting abuse....abuse on those in society who were vulnerable and least likely to report / be abused.

Even a Cardinal in the RC church acknowledges the factor - now that takes some guts to question your bosses stance on the matter
"A senior cardinal has called for priestly celibacy to be re-examined in the light of sex scandals sweeping the Roman Catholic Church. Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, conservative Archbishop of Vienna and a protégé of the Pope, shocked the Vatican by suggesting that it should carry out an “unflinching examination” of causes of the scandal."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7058065.ece

Swiss theologian Father Hans Kung says clerical sex abuse across the globe is linked to priestly celibacy and the Church's "uptight" views on sex.

"Why is it so prevalent in the Catholic Church under celibate leadership?" He said that celibacy was not the only cause of the misconduct but described it as "the most important and structurally the most decisive" expression of the Church's uptight attitude to sex.

Citing the New Testament, he says that Jesus and St Paul practised celibacy but "allowed full freedom in this matter to each individual".

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=19913

Suzie Sue wrote: »

You've tried and failed to claim the Catholic Church invented celibacy.

I did not try to say the RCC invented celibacy...there could have been the odd human being who was celibate before the RCC.

Suzie Sue

gigino wrote: »

"A senior cardinal has called for priestly celibacy to be re-examined in the light of sex scandals sweeping the Roman Catholic Church. Cardinal Christoph Schönborn,

Oh lord oh, the word "re-examined" doesn't = "cause"

As for Hans Kruger, LOL, on December 18, 1979, he was stripped of his licence to teach as a Roman Catholic theologian. What a source to quote. LOL

I'll put it nice and simple this time, can you show us a properly qualified medical opinion that celibacy is a factor in Child abuse ?

wonderfulname

It is severely off topic but I have to counter that a lack of sex does not a child abuser make, the reason celibacy in the priesthood poses a problem is that it gives a certain attraction to the post for those who were never interested in marriage in the first place, some of whom this was true for as their interests lay in children. This is surely less of a problem now that priests are no longer directly over large numbers of children, in fact if the church were more open it would pose little more difficulty than in making the position less attractive for young men.

AhSureTisGrand

Suzie Sue wrote: »

Caesar couldn't break it 2000 years ago

AFAIK his being dead before Jesus' birth was a severe impediment to his attempts at breaking the seal