Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Catholic Church claims it is above the law

1…3233353738…48

Comments

  • #1022
    Saint Ruth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 143 ✭✭Saint Ruth


    Einhard wrote: »
    I think, given the nature of the tread, that it is pretty obvious what I'm talking about.
    Laws are laws. They have unintended consequences (especially in this country). The law won't just apply to priests (you are hardly advocating that??).
    So you want a law that will result in a legal penalty if someone does not volunteer info about series crimes? (This different from willfully withholding information when asked which is of course a crime).
    Murder and child abuse, sure. Assault? Burglary? Drug smuggling? Selling drugs? Prostitution?
    Einhard wrote: »
    ... Unless you think that acts of wrongdoing shouldn't be made illegal because of difficulties in prosecuting them?
    No, just against unenforceable laws...


  • #1023
    Saint Ruth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 143 ✭✭Saint Ruth


    dvpower wrote: »
    If the confessor has already broken the seal, why the hell can't the priest talk?

    Confessor: "Father, I confess I've raped a child"
    Priest: "I won't ever say a word to anyone about this"
    Confessor: "That's OK Father, I want to come clean. You can say what you want."
    Priest: "No, never. I won't break the seal"
    Confessor: "It's quite alright. I want you to disclose what I've told you."
    Priest: "They can do what they want with me. I'd die before I repeat what you told me."
    Confessor: "What an odd religion" :confused:
    I think the priest can break the seal if the confessor allows it...


  • #1024
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Einhard wrote: »
    Yes...and if it's one person's word against the others, and no other evidence is produced, then the standard of reasonable doubt won't be reached....
    It would only be one persons word against another if the priest was to give evidence. This would require a priest to lie on a bible oath.
    The more likely scenario is that the priest would refuse to give evidence.

    Now we have one persons word and another person not willing to give evidence. Still difficult to persuade a jury beyond reasonable doubt.

    But there may be some corroboration of the persons evidence, for example evidence that that person did attend confession with the priest at the time he says he did. The person may have confided in another at the time that they were going to, or did, confess to the priest. Perhaps the abuser also kept a contemporaneous note of his confession.

    So now its not just one persons word against another. If I was on a jury with evidence like this being given, I might well find that the confession had happened.


  • #1025
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Saint Ruth wrote: »
    I think the priest can break the seal if the confessor allows it...

    In that case, the only think stopping the priest from being convicted of a crime is if he lies to a court or refuses to cooperate.
    The confessional seal has no part in obstructing a prosecution - but a priest knowing he is guilty of an offence and trying to save his own ass.

    I don't think we should shy away from introducing legislation just because some people don't want to be prosecuted.:eek:


  • #1026
    Paparazzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,395 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    Never mind the seal. What the hell was that method of telling lies to police or in court where priests would finish a sentence in their head and therefore giving it a completely different meaning that they used?
    They thought they were above the law long before this latest report.


  • Advertisement
  • #1027
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    If the confessor has already broken the seal, why the hell can't the priest talk?

    Confessor: "Father, I confess I've raped a child"
    Priest: "I won't ever say a word to anyone about this"
    Confessor: "That's OK Father, I want to come clean. You can say what you want."
    Priest: "No, never. I won't break the seal"
    Confessor: "It's quite alright. I want you to disclose what I've told you."
    Priest: "They can do what they want with me. I'd die before I repeat what you told me."
    Confessor: "What an odd religion" :confused:

    In reality the Priest would actually tell the confessor he obliged to report it to the authorities himself, and cease such behaviour, and if he did not do so, repent, and make restitution, any such confession and absolution would be invalid.

    After that how does a Priest report an anonymous confession ?


    Many things are anonymously confessed to Priest, many of them involved breaking the law, how does hereport every he is told in anonymous confessions ?


    Also, how does a Doctor/Solicitor break client confidentiality without being struck off ? Answer - They can't.


  • #1028
    Mickeroo
    Administrators, Computer Games Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 32,669 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Mickeroo


    Suzie Sue wrote: »


    Also, how does a Doctor/Solicitor break client confidentiality without being struck off ? Answer - They can't.

    They're required by law to report serious crimes. Why do people keep saying that....?


  • #1029
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    After that how does a Priest report an anonymous confession ?
    The mandatory reporting rule would only apply if the priest actually had something to report, so many anonymous confessions mightn't come into it. But, as you know, many confessions these days are face to face and in many cases the priest would know the identity of many parishoners.

    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    Also, how does a Doctor/Solicitor break client confidentiality without being struck off ? Answer - They can't.
    These privileged relationships are not without restriction.
    For example, If I go to my doctor and I'm diagnosed with certain reportable infectious diseases, this won't be kept confidential. In the UK at least, certain offences under the Prevention of Terrorism Act are reportable.

    This is of course a red herring. If there is legislation requiring an offence to be reported, the various professional bodies will update their ethical guidelines. No one will be struck off.


  • #1030
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    The mandatory reporting rule would only apply if the priest actually had something to report, so many anonymous confessions mightn't come into it. But, as you know, many confessions these days are face to face and in many cases the priest would know the identity of many parishoners.

    Many ? The vast majority of them are anonymous.
    dvpower wrote: »
    These privileged relationships are not without restriction.
    For example, If I go to my doctor and I'm diagnosed with certain reportable infectious diseases, this won't be kept confidential. In the UK at least, certain offences under the Prevention of Terrorism Act are reportable.

    This is of course a red herring. If there is legislation requiring an offence to be reported, the various professional bodies will update their ethical guidelines. No one will be struck off.

    It's a valid question, a solicitor cannot report his client, that is enshrined in law, and required by the law society of Ireland.

    I for one agree entirely about the law, but the reality of anonymous confessions makes it irrelevant in such a case, that is where red herring is.


  • #1031
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    Paparazzo wrote: »
    Never mind the seal. What the hell was that method of telling lies to police or in court where priests would finish a sentence in their head and therefore giving it a completely different meaning that they used?
    They thought they were above the law long before this latest report.

    Mental reservation. Giving a whole new meaning to the word "Mental"


  • Advertisement
  • #1032
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    philologos wrote: »
    Einhard: How are you going to prove knowledge in every case though?
    Saint Ruth wrote: »
    So if you're mugged and you don't report it, you should go to jail?
    Or if two cars have a bit of a tip, everyone will have to ring the guards?

    Do you really want every citizen to have to report any illegal activity mentioned in any private conversation? If someone mentions they had some dope, you'll be legally obliged to report them?

    Sounds like the USSR, with kids being told to report their parents and the like.

    All the straw men come out to play... tra la la la lala......
    This is not just about the confessional but about general with holding of information of serious crime. The issue is that if this law is passed The RCC think that their magic second hand psychic forgiveness box is immune to the law.


  • #1033
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    Many ? The vast majority of them are anonymous.
    Quite. The law would only apply to confessions where the priest had some reasonable information to report.
    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    It's a valid question, a solicitor cannot report his client, that is enshrined in law.
    1. Aren't you ignoring the information about the current exceptions to lawyer-client privilege?
    2. What is proposed is a change to the law. The current level of privilege would no longer be enshrined in law. :confused:
    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    I for one agree entirely about the law, but reality of anonymous confessions makes it irrelevant in such cases, that is where red herring is.
    Aren't you ignoring the cases where it is relevant?


  • #1034
    Tayla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Tayla


    crucamim wrote: »
    What would be wrong with the priest respecting confidential information?



    What would be wrong with it? oh ffs, You're telling me it would be fine for a priest to keep information from a parent of a child who someone told them they were abusing?:rolleyes: You are trolling for sure.



    crucamim wrote: »
    I feel fustified in suspecting that your support for the law is primarily intended to give offense to Catholics. You are, therefore, guilty of aggression against Catholics.

    Guilty eh? Under what law? I hate the Catholic church because of their disgusting actions, not for being Catholics.:rolleyes:

    How can anyone not hate their actions? surely even devout Catholics would hate the actions of the church, their actions are nothing but hypocritical time and time again. You're implying you can't be a Catholic without accepting the actions of the Catholic church.


    You might as well follow the family international cult, Aggression against catholics........ha....try a bit harder mate!!


  • #1035
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    Quite. The law would only apply to confessions where the priest had some reasonable information to report.

    How does that work in reality then ?

    Priest "A man confessed a crime to me"
    Guard "What did he look like ?"
    Priest "I don't know, he was behind a screen"
    Guard "Did you ask his name ?"
    Priest "No, we don't ask names, thats not the point of confession, nor would they be obliged to give any even if we asked"
    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 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 a possible excommunication to report"


  • #1036
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    How does that work in reality then ?

    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 don't ask names, thats not the point of confession, nor would they be obliged to give any even if we asked"
    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 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 a possible excommunication to report"

    How many of the abusing priests were "behind the screen" when they told of their crimes ?


  • #1037
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    How many of the abusing priests were "behind the screen" when they told of their crimes ?

    I have no idea.

    What % were then ?

    The state has all the evidence and proof in the reports commissioned, yet very few of them have been charged, convicted and sentenced, when is the state going to start doing their job ?


  • #1038
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    I have no idea.

    What % were then ?

    I don't know, but you were the one using the excuse that the screen would prevent the priest from reporting the crime.

    Now you're saying that you don't even know how many were behind the screen ?


  • #1039
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    How does that work in reality then ?

    Priest "A man confessed a crime to me"
    Guard "What did he look like ?"
    Priest "I don't know, he was behind a screen"
    Guard "Did you ask his name ?"
    Priest "No, we don't ask names, thats not the point of confession, nor would they be obliged to give any even if we asked"
    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 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 a possible excommunication to report"

    I've already said it would only apply where there was some reasonably information to report. Why are you ignoring this? Do you not accept than in some cases, the priest may be able to identify the penitent?


  • #1040
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    I've already said it would only apply where there was some reasonably information to report. Why are you ignoring this? Do you not accept than in some cases, the priest may be able to identify the penitent?

    The vast majority of confessions are anonymous.
    Is an anonymous confession reasonable information or not ?


  • #1041
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    The state has all the evidence and proof in the reports commissioned, yet very few of them have been charged, convicted and sentenced, when is the state going to start doing their job ?
    What are you on about? The most recently published report outlined how information wasn't passed to the authorities, despite the child protection policies of the RCC saying that it should have been.


  • Advertisement
  • #1042
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    The vast majority of confessions are anonymous.
    And the rest aren't :confused:
    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    Are you say an anonymous confession is reasonable information or not ?
    I don't know. It depends on the content of the confession. The abuser may not have been identified, but pertinent information may be available (e.g. "Father, I've been raping some kids at the local swimming team").
    A priest should report this even if he doesn't know the identity of the abuser. The authorities may then be able to prevent some kids on the local swimming team from being further raped.


  • #1043
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    What are you on about? The most recently published report outlined how information wasn't passed to the authorities, despite the child protection policies of the RCC saying that it should have been.

    So why no arrests as soon as the state knew about it ?


  • #1044
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    A priest should report this even if he doesn't know the identity of the abuser. The authorities may then be able to prevent some kids on the local swimming team from being further raped.

    So how would this be breaking the seal of confession ?


  • #1045
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Ghost Buster: How is that a strawman? It's very pertinent to the topic to ask how effective the law is going to be.


  • #1046
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    So why no arrests as soon as the state knew about it ?
    Ii don't know if there have been any. I don't know what stage, if any, investigations are at.
    What point are you trying to make? That the RCC should look in to the future and only reveal information that will result in a successful prosecution?
    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    So how would this be breaking the seal of confession ?
    Are you saying that the seal only extends to the identity of the penitent? :confused:

    "Garda, I know of a child rapist. The confessional seal prevents me from telling you his name, but the rapes are taking place at training sessions in the local under 14s swimming team"

    Who knew it was all so simple.:rolleyes:


  • #1047
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    "Garda, I know of a child rapist. The confessional seal prevents me from telling you his name, but the rapes are taking place at training sessions in the local under 14s swimming team"

    When you strip away all the childish sarcasm, it’s quite hard to find any points to your posts, so if you could try to answer without same it might make for a better discussion.


    How does the priest know their identity if the confession was anonymous ?


  • #1048
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Suzie Sue wrote: »
    When you strip away all the childish sarcasm, it’s quite hard to find any points to your posts, so if you could try to answer without same it might make for a better discussion.


    How does the priest know their identity if the confession was anonymous ?

    I've been over this a number of times.
    Read the last few pages of this thread again. If you still don't understand, read them again. Repeat until you have the answer - I don't think I could make it easier for you.


  • #1049
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    dvpower wrote: »
    I've been over this a number of times.
    Read the last few pages of this thread again. If you still don't understand, read them again. Repeat until you have the answer - I don't think I could make it easier for you.

    That proves my point again, thanks.


  • #1050
    Einhard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Saint Ruth wrote: »
    Laws are laws. They have unintended consequences (especially in this country). The law won't just apply to priests (you are hardly advocating that??).

    No, I'm not only advocating that. Which I bet you knew, but it suits your purposes to insinuate into the posts of others that which isn't there. The legislation could be quite easily restricted to certain types of crime, or those against certain victims.

    So you want a law that will result in a legal penalty if someone does not volunteer info about series crimes? (This different from willfully withholding information when asked which is of course a crime).
    Murder and child abuse, sure. Assault? Burglary? Drug smuggling? Selling drugs? Prostitution?

    Will you stop willfully misunderstanding very simple points? I'm not advocating any laws for a start, but stating that, should a law be introduced, then the clergy cannot be exempt.

    However, now that you mention it, I would be in favour of a law which made the failure to report child sexual abuse a crime. There ya go...nice and defined, and restricted. Good luck trying to construct a strawman out of that.
    No, just against unenforceable laws...

    The law isn't necessarily unenforceable. Simply stating that it is, doesn't make it so.


  • Advertisement
  • #1051
    Suzie Sue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 187 ✭✭Suzie Sue


    Einhard wrote: »
    However, now that you mention it, I would be in favour of a law which made the failure to report child sexual abuse a crime.

    Only child abuse ? What about Murder, Rape, terrorism etc. etc. etc. ?
    Should it not be the law to report these as well ?


Advertisement