Break the Seal said Baton Rouge Court

[Rico_S]

The same way if a crime happens in the confessional can be looked at.

Since canon law clearly spells out a scenario where a punishment is metered out for misconduct in the confessional. (e.g – Can. 1387 A priest who in confession, or on the occasion or under the pretext of confession, solicits a penitent to commit a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue, is to be punished, according to the gravity of the offence, with suspension, prohibitions and deprivations; in the more serious cases he is to be dismissed from the clerical state. ), how do church authorities go about “looking into” such a case. Does it usually comedown to the word of the accuser vs a priest who is unable to defend himself? Is this not just as unfair as what would happen in a civil case?

 

[CarolNoel]

The Church would call the seal required. If the priest was in a session which is not sealed and the priest did not give good advice, then yes it would be negligent.

But let’s not make this more complicated than needed. This is the SD and confessor being the same person. If the topic of this case was brought into both the confession and SD, it is required the priest keep it under seal. He cannot even defend himself against accusations of negligence by the penitent. So in the hypothetical you bring up we will never know anything else but what the girl is claiming, or her parents and lawyers. You and I will not get any info from the priest as he is required to keep the seal.

Just want to say thank you for your posts!

 

[Hopey]

This is the best that I could do that reaffirms what I understood one priest to tell me.
This is part of Dr. Peters Response to Christopher Hitchens and the Great Catholic Coverup:

“Virtually all of Crimen Sollicitationis concerned the investigation and prosecution of complaints of sexual solicitation of penitents by priests in confession.10 Such procedures are difficult and sensitive because the seal of confession cannot be violated; a priest cannot break the seal even to defend himself against an accusation.11 The same policies and procedures were to be adapted and applied to the “worst crimes,” including sexual aggression against minors.12”

catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0325.htm#011

 

[BernadetteM]

None of this makes any sense to me. How old was the girl? I have had personal experience with a very young child who told me what happened when molested. Why in the world would this girl tell a priest in confession and not have told her mother or parent? Also I don’t believe that any one would tell her not to report it.

I really think that the parents could not get any financial gain from the abuser, so they decided to make up this story so they could sue the priest and Church. They wouldn’t be the first to do this.

It is well known that the secular government and media are out to destroy the Catholic Church and that it doesn’t matter if one is Catholic or protestant, there are sinners in every church and many who will so or say anything to obtain financial gain. This action is just one of many for the government to destroy the Church as the sex scandal is no longer relevant as it was recently in the media.

This is my opinion and I haven’t really read that many of the posts and don’t have the complete story of who the abuser was, how old was the girl and what her family background is.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[Atisor207]

One has to be careful of the enemy within.
At least before they left the Church now they are trying to destroy it from within.

The bottom line is that there are too many so-called Catholics who love it when a priest is persecuted. They will twist facts and hide behind semantics. They would even bring other nonsensical and unrelated trivial matters.

Notice how they never say anything good about the Church, won’t defend it, and hardly know any catechism.

Just feel bad for them and pray for this priest who is being persecuted.

 

[Atisor207]

None of this makes any sense to me. How old was the girl? I have had personal experience with a very young child who told me what happened when molested. Why in the world would this girl tell a priest in confession and not have told her mother or parent? Also I don’t believe that any one would tell her not to report it.

I really think that the parents could not get any financial gain from the abuser, so they decided to make up this story so they could sue the priest and Church. They wouldn’t be the first to do this.

It is well known that the secular government and media are out to destroy the Catholic Church and that it doesn’t matter if one is Catholic or protestant, there are sinners in every church and many who will so or say anything to obtain financial gain. This action is just one of many for the government to destroy the Church as the sex scandal is no longer relevant as it was recently in the media.

This is my opinion and I haven’t really read that many of the posts and don’t have the complete story of who the abuser was, how old was the girl and what her family background is.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

You hit the nail in the head. It’s an attack.
The girl knew the confidentiality of confession.
They are just attacking the Church.
But it won’t work. There is absolutely no way the Church will compromise the salvation of souls.

 

[Hopey]

None of this makes any sense to me. How old was the girl? I have had personal experience with a very young child who told me what happened when molested. Why in the world would this girl tell a priest in confession and not have told her mother or parent? Also I don’t believe that any one would tell her not to report it.

I really think that the parents could not get any financial gain from the abuser, so they decided to make up this story so they could sue the priest and Church. They wouldn’t be the first to do this.

It is well known that the secular government and media are out to destroy the Catholic Church and that it doesn’t matter if one is Catholic or protestant, there are sinners in every church and many who will so or say anything to obtain financial gain. This action is just one of many for the government to destroy the Church as the sex scandal is no longer relevant as it was recently in the media.

This is my opinion and I haven’t really read that many of the posts and don’t have the complete story of who the abuser was, how old was the girl and what her family background is.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

The young girl was 14.
The defendants are: alleged perp, funeral home, priest and diocese. It was filed in 09 by her parents.

As to why she said something in the confession, it isn’t surprising to me.

Her parents, when they found out, reported it to the police. Alleged perp died before investigation could be finished.

 

[Atisor207]

So it makes perfect sense that the Church will fight that to the end. Louisiana seems to have decided that its mandatory reporting law supersedes the Seal (or they wouldn’t even be asking the priest what he knew when). The Church is explicitly clear that priests cannot reveal that information even to report crimes, or defend their reputations or even their very lives.

I wish more so-called Catholics saw it like it really is as you put it.
Some even had the audacity that they agree with the court’s decision and still call themselves Catholics.
They are going directly against Christ.

 

[Rico_S]

One has to be careful of the enemy within.
At least before they left the Church now they are trying to destroy it from within.

The bottom line is that there are too many so-called Catholics who love it when a priest is persecuted. They will twist facts and hide behind semantics. They would even bring other nonsensical and unrelated trivial matters.

Notice how they never say anything good about the Church, won’t defend it, and hardly know any catechism.

Just feel bad for them and pray for this priest who is being persecuted.

Classic. Someone disagrees with you or sees things differently, and you vilify them as the enemy of the church and attach sinister motives to them. I will have to remember that I am trying to destroy the church next week at mass as I write my weekly check to the parish, volunteer my time to the various marriage programs in the diocese as I’ve done for a dozen years, finalize registration for my 4 kids in catholic school.

 

[Hopey]

I wish more so-called Catholics saw it like it really is as you put it.
Some even had the audacity that they agree with the court’s decision and still call themselves Catholics.
They are going directly against Christ.

LOL!

 

[Atisor207]

Classic. Someone disagrees with you or sees things differently, and you vilify them as the enemy of the church and attach sinister motives to them. I will have to remember that I am trying to destroy the church next week at mass as I write my weekly check to the parish, volunteer my time to the various marriage programs in the diocese as I’ve done for a dozen years, finalize registration for my 4 kids in catholic school.

Why would you feel attacked if you are not one of those?
I was not talking about you or anyone in particular. I am talking about those within who stoop to ad hominem attacks quickly enough. And then talk about morality and ethics, some are certainly willing to assume the worst and to libel someone they’ve never met quickly enough.

If you are not like that then why worry…

 

[Atisor207]

LOL!

I wonder why notice that one in particular… hmmmm

lol

 

[Hopey]

Atisor, a piece of advice. Address directly and clearly. Broad statements are just that, broad. They don’t help anyone. If you agree, state why. If others don’t, then they get to state why also.

 

[Atisor207]

Atisor, a piece of advice. Address directly and clearly. Broad statements are just that, broad. They don’t help anyone. If you agree, state why. If others don’t, then they get to state why also.

I wonder why you feel guilty. I wasn’t addressing you. I already addressed you.
I was merely make a broad statement of my views and reflections. My feelings if you will.

 

[billcu1]

I understand the Church’s position, but it is clearly wrong.

It is objectively evil to protect the rights of a rapist over the rights of his victims, particularly if the perpetrator is continuing to offend. If this offender is continuing his attacks, the priest and the diocese are legal accomplices for sure, and I would argue moral accomplices as well.

The perpetrator can still confess and receive absolution, but he shouldn’t be able to hide from criminal responsibility with complicity of the church.

Clearly there are competing interests here, but how the church can lift those of the perpetrator over the victim, I’ll never know.

Rights of the rapist? What legal right of the rapist are being protected here? The right to counsel? No charges have been filed. If this event occurred, He will be brought to justice, but free exercise rights are in question.

 

[Rico_S]

Why would you feel attacked if you are not one of those?
I was not talking about you or anyone in particular. I am talking about those within who stoop to ad hominem attacks quickly enough. And then talk about morality and ethics, some are certainly willing to assume the worst and to libel someone they’ve never met quickly enough.

If you are not like that then why worry…

There are only a couple in this thread whom you have taken issue with you, I was one of them. And frankly Hopey has been fantastic in putting things into prospective. No one has assumed the worst or in any way guilty of libel against this priest. To claim so is laughable. You are simply reading through the prism of your misplaced religious fervor. If you find a post where it has happened, please notify a moderator bc that is most certainly against forum rules. They are generally pretty strict on that sort of thing.

Talk about ad hominem attacks. …

I

 

[Hopey]

I wonder why you feel guilty. I wasn’t addressing you. I already addressed you.
I was merely make a broad statement of my views and reflections. My feelings if you will.

I don’t feel guilty. I have stated why I agree.

If you do so strongly feel that people are guilty of this or that, report them.

I am always open to correction, valid correction that is - moderator.

 

[Atisor207]

There are only a couple in this thread whom you have taken issue with you, I was one of them. And frankly Hopey has been fantastic in putting things into prospective. No one has assumed the worst or in any way guilty of libel against this priest. To claim so is laughable. You are simply reading through the prism of your misplaced religious fervor. If you find a post where it has happened, please notify a moderator bc that is most certainly against forum rules. They are generally pretty strict on that sort of thing.

Talk about ad hominem attacks. …

I

Oh I did report and that person got banned already.
That person called for Rome to be nuked.

Talk about ad hominem assumptions

 

[zab]

One has to be careful of the enemy within.
At least before they left the Church now they are trying to destroy it from within.

The bottom line is that there are too many so-called Catholics who love it when a priest is persecuted. They will twist facts and hide behind semantics. They would even bring other nonsensical and unrelated trivial matters.

Notice how they never say anything good about the Church, won’t defend it, and hardly know any catechism.

Just feel bad for them and pray for this priest who is being persecuted.

How sad but true.

 

[glendab]

Hello Hopey. Me again.

My understanding is it would depend on what it was, in the confession, as these can be looked at by the Church.

Me again. No the Church cannot look into any Confession. EVER. No one can. Get it?

You’re Catholic, so how is it you don’t know the basics about Confession? No one gets to question the Priest about anything that goes on from the time he dons his stole, to the time he closes the Confessional door from the outside and every Catholic knows that. Why don’t you? Why do you think that there are ways the Church can look into it? They don’t. They aren’t allowed. It is a black and white issue, yet you keep seeing grey areas.

And Spiritual Direction is the same and sometimes if time was permitting I’d make a Confession with the Monsignor shortly after my sessions. Didn’t matter. Everything was under the Seal and that is the way he introduced me to Spiritual Direction. In our very first session he explained to me what it was, what it wasn’t, what we would try to accomplish, why this was, (at the request of my Religious Superior at the time) and he made sure I understood that everything was under the Seal. Why don’t you accept this as truth? Do you think I made it up? How about Deacon Gary? He made it up too? And why aren’t you answering some of the questions asked you? You ignore the ones that might show others you’re wrong. That’s what I think. This thread isn’t about Spiritual Direction anyway. But I think you’ve been on the defensive too long.

Glenda