Bishop says "I will go to jail before I will obey," as California proposes law requiring priests to report to police what they heard in confession

[Loud-living-dogma]

Hmmm. That doesn’t say that the priest MUST absolve the the penitent, if he is involved in covering up, say, murder. The priest could withhold absolution, yes? Can’t a priest ask questions for further information about sins, to understand the circumstances? Wouldn’t it come out that the penitent is actively covering up child abuse, murder, etc?

 

[TheLittleLady]

You may read the Canons, they are clear about when absolution may be withheld.

Even if absolution is not granted, the priest is bound by the seal.

Honestly, I am flabbergasted that Catholics would want the priest to be able to force penitents to reveal their sins publicly.

 

[JimG]

Then the sting operations will start

Yes, I think that sting operations would be quite likely. Child molesters are not in the habit of confessing their sins, and such laws would not cause them to start. Priests who have never heard such a confession in their lifetime would suddenly begin to hear them, from sting operations who would of course go face to face and even announce their name. Then they could nail the priest for not reporting them.

If such a law were passed, bishops should require that all confessions be behind a screen, anonymously, and bring back the standard confessional.

 

[Dracarys]

More government overreach. The fiendish power hungry politicians and government administrators will never stop their lust for control. Vote libertarian.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

I am flabbergasted that Catholics think that it’s not a sin to cover up murder and child abuse. No wonder our Church has a little problem with crime and cover-ups…

 

[TheLittleLady]

It is not an unforgivable sin.

Nor is it the must be published sin.

 

[whatistrue]

I am flabbergasted that Catholics think that it’s not a sin to cover up murder and child abuse

Where did you get that notion? “Not volunteering or forcing a confession to law enforcement” and “covering up a crime” are NOT the same thing.

 

[Gorgias]

JoeShlabotnik:

I just do not see how a priest could absolve a child abuser or a murder, or someone else who has committed a horrible offense, without that person being willing to admit to the offense to the authorities and to be punished accordingly.

It has been stated before that the priest is forbidden by canon law from making confession to civil law enforcement or anyone else a condition of absolution. Why is that so hard to understand?

Well, let’s take it from a different perspective, as well. Essentially, what Joe is asking for is an absolution that is conditional on a future event. Think about it: the only way to do this is to say “I absolve you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, if you turn yourself in to the police at some point.” That is manifestly impossible.

(Alternately, the priest can withhold absolution, or promise to give absolution from the person’s jail cell, once they’re in custody. That’s a non-starter for a few reasons – not the least of which are the canonical prohibitions that have been stated in this thread!)

The priest could withhold absolution, yes?

Sure, if he’s convinced that the person isn’t penitent. Generally speaking, the person’s presence in the confessional kinda implies penitence… don’t you think?

Can’t a priest ask questions for further information about sins, to understand the circumstances?

Yes, but generally only to understand the nature or the gravity or the frequency of the sin being confessed.

Wouldn’t it come out that the penitent is actively covering up child abuse, murder, etc?

Not sure I’m following you. If the penitent committed these sins, then he’s already confessed them, so no. On the other hand, are you saying that the penitent is deliberately choosing to not confess mortal sins? In that case, the absolution is invalid, even if given by the priest.

Honestly, I am flabbergasted that Catholics would want the priest to be able to force penitents to reveal their sins publicly.

This!

I am flabbergasted that Catholics think that it’s not a sin to cover up murder and child abuse.

I am flabbergasted that Americans think it is illegal / immoral / unacceptable to “take the 5th”.

 

[JoeShlabotnik]

I understand. I just don’t agree.
As I stated before, if a person is not truly penitent, how can they be forgiven?
“I am sorry for having broken the law, because I was to be forgiven for the sin. But not honest enough to own up to punishment for the crime.”
I believe what is stated in a confessional should stay there.
What I have said is that the priest can absolve or not.

 

[Padres1969]

Taking the 5th is a right, doesn’t make it a moral right…

 

[Gorgias]

I’m thinking they don’t move; but rather go to a Church in Nevada to confess.

I’ve read of people going on shopping sprees in Nevada to escape California State taxes; so it’s not out of the ordinary. They’d likely come back.

Heck, we can’t convince people to go to confession at their own parish church on a weekday evening or a Saturday morning! I’m not so sure that folks would drive to the next state to go to confession…

 

[whatistrue]

I just don’t agree.
As I stated before, if a person is not truly penitent, how can they be forgiven?

So you are saying that the Church (canon law) is wrong. Good luck with that.

And the priest absolves sins, not crimes. The only thing that matters in the confessional is whether something is a sin and whether the penitent is truly sorry for doing the sin. Whether they are willing to risk going to prison for a related crime is irrelevant to that situation.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

JoeShlabotnik:

I just don’t agree.
As I stated before, if a person is not truly penitent, how can they be forgiven?

So you are saying that the Church (canon law) is wrong. Good luck with that.

And the priest absolves sins, not crimes. The only thing that matters in the confessional is whether something is a sin and whether the penitent is truly sorry for doing the sin. Whether they are willing to risk going to prison for a related crime is irrelevant to that situation.

But sometimes crimes and sins overlap. Don’t you agree that covering up a crime is also a sin?
Just because someone LEGALLY may plead the fifth, doesn’t mean that is morally correct, in my opinion.

 

[whatistrue]

Don’t you agree that covering up a crime is also a sin?

Depends. Staying silent and covering up are not equivalent. Also depends on whether the crime under discussion is actually a sin, but that is a bit of a stretch within the current scope of discussion.

My main point is not that someone who does these things is not a horrible and reprehensible human being, but that you cannot use the confessional to do law enforcement’s job in any way.

 

[TheLittleLady]

I can be completely sorrowful for the murder I committed. I may have prefect contrition (confessing because I have sinned against God instead of out of fear of hell). I will never murder another person again. Firmly resolve.

That does not mean that I want to go, or I am willing to go, to the electric chair or to life in prison. Perhaps the penitent is the sole means of support for their children or elderly family member. They will carry the guilt forever, but, they would harm more people by confessing.

We can come up with all sorts of scenarios, thing is, bottom line, God’s forgiveness is not contingent on civil punishment.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

I can be completely sorrowful for the murder I committed. I may have prefect contrition (confessing because I have sinned against God instead of out of fear of hell). I will never murder another person again. Firmly resolve.

That does not mean that I want to go, or I am willing to go, to the electric chair or to life in prison. Perhaps the penitent is the sole means of support for their children or elderly family member. They will carry the guilt forever, but, they would harm more people by confessing.

We can come up with all sorts of scenarios, thing is, bottom line, God’s forgiveness is not contingent on civil punishment.

What about any innocent people that are accused / suspected of the murder (that is a major theme of Agatha Christie’s fiction, that is important to find the murderer so the innocent can be free of implied guilt)?
What about the squander of public resources when you know you are the murderer?
What about the peace of mind (“closure”) for the family of knowing who the killer is?

Covering those up doesn’t qualify as a sin in your mind? Maybe God is okay with a murderer hiding out. Or a child molestor. I don’t know. What surprises me is that after all these years of news about the Catholic Church and child abuse, that people don’t see covering up crime as a sin. A separate sin, different from the original crime.

 

[tafan2]

They should do that now. Changing that policy after the fact will also lead to legal problems.

As to my scenario, I said there would be a few (or more) priests following the popular winds and actually supporting these laws. I should have included lay people. That is obvious by reading this thread.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

CCC
1491 The sacrament of Penance is a whole consisting in three actions of the penitent and the priest’s absolution. The penitent’s acts are repentance, confession or disclosure of sins to the priest, and the intention to make reparation and do works of reparation.

 

[tafan2]

Covering those up doesn’t qualify as a sin in your mind? Maybe God is okay with a murderer hiding out. Or a child molestor. I don’t know. What surprises me is that after all these years of news about the Catholic Church and child abuse, that people don’t see covering up crime as a sin. A separate sin, different from the original crime.

Just to be absolutely clear, do you believe the absolute confessional seal is one means by which the Church covers up these crimes?

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

I have no idea what Catholics, priests or otherwise, confess to. I have no idea how people knew about these crimes.