Delaware judge: priest-penitent privilege may be unconstitutional [CWN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CWN_News

Guest
A Delaware superior court judge has questioned the constitutionality of a state law that protects the secrecy of sacramental confession.State law mandates the reporting of suspected …

More…
 
That’s interesting…

Also, my home state! Whoohooo!
 
CWN_News said:
A Delaware superior court judge has questioned the constitutionality of a state law that protects the secrecy of sacramental confession.State law mandates the reporting of suspected …

More…
Click to expand...
Priests have been murdered since antiquity for keeping the seal of confession. Good luck wringing it out of them.
 
What?!?! Surely any religion which specifically has enjoined secrecy for sacramental confession to a priest is included in the statute? If a person were merely getting counseling from a Catholic priest, the priest would be bound by laws applying to counselors, wouldn’t they?
 
CWN_News said:
A Delaware superior court judge has questioned the constitutionality of a state law that protects the secrecy of sacramental confession.State law mandates the reporting of suspected …

More…
Click to expand...
Another attack on the Catholic Church. Don’t they know they are fighting GOD!! God Bless, Memaw
 
If I am reading the story correctly, the judges is only saying it could be unconstitutional if it is only interpreted as applying to religions that consider penitent to religious confessions to be a sacrament. So if the law only applies to Catholics and Orthodox, but not to say a Presbyterian confiding their sorrow and contrition to their pastor then it is giving one religion preference in conversations over others.I don’t think she is saying that the confidentiality of Catholic confession should be removed so much as the law should apply to any confession in a religious setting, regardless of the belief in the sacramental nature of said confession.
 
In practice, should state ever attempt to strip the priest-penitent privilege, I wonder if the American Church could simply take steps to hide the identity of the penitent so that the state would have no interest in pursuing that information since it’s effectively useless. Hopefully it doesn’t come to that though.
 
Religions are different and have different requirements. I don’t know why it would necessarily be unconstitutional, and an “advancement” of one religion over another, for the secular government to acknowledge those different requirements and so not hinder the free exercise of (that) religion…

Dan
 
The point that this has brought up is legitimate. The main argument seems to be that if the priest-penitent privilege was only extended to a few religions, say Catholicism, Anglicanism, etc… and not to all religions, then it would be an unconstitutional endorsement of one religion over another. I’d say it’s a legitimate argument. It would seem rather than the priest-penitent privilege should rightly be applied to all religions equally regardless of the sacramental nature of the acts it protects in a few religions (namely Catholicism and Anglicanism).
 
MacBP said:
In practice, should state ever attempt to strip the priest-penitent privilege, I wonder if the American Church could simply take steps to hide the identity of the penitent so that the state would have no interest in pursuing that information since it’s effectively useless. Hopefully it doesn’t come to that though.
Click to expand...
It’s yet another reason for anonymous confessionals.
 
Doctors, lawyers and clergy have the right to confidentiality in what they are told under their circumstances, in this case a priest who hears a person’s confession.

Will this judge seek to over turn confidentiality of doctors and lawyers as well ?

Jim
 
zz912 said:
Bingo! Time to go back to the traditional confessional setup so the priest isn’t put in this situation.
Click to expand...
I never really got used to face to face confession. Not that I mind face to face that much but where I go it’s almost always behind a screen.

I’m wondering if it can extend to all religions. Since the state can’t make distinctions between religions you could simply start a church and claim the priest-penitent privilege. Could be a bit tricky. Hopefully they do extend the privilege instead of getting rid of it but I’m not sure how that will work. It’s only a matter of time before a spaghetti monster person tries to claim it just to be funny.
 
zz912 said:
Bingo! Time to go back to the traditional confessional setup so the priest isn’t put in this situation.
Click to expand...
Anonymous confession hasn’t gone away.

Confession face to face is optional.

I’d like to see general absolution at the penitential rite of the beginning of Mass.

Those individuals who feel the need to speak to a priest, could do so privately at another time.

The current situation isn’t working, as most Catholics aren’t going to Confession, but are receiving Holy Communion.

General Absolution will rectify the problem.

Jim
 
It seems to me such an approach will only create another problem, lack of Sacramental Confession. The practice in Anglicanism and some Orthodox Churches prove that this only further reduces the interest in the Sacrament of Penance.
 
Cases evolve from many different sets of circumstances. Anonymous confessionals are absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that this issue could not arise.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Doctors, lawyers and clergy have the right to confidentiality in what they are told under their circumstances, in this case a priest who hears a person’s confession.

Will this judge seek to over turn confidentiality of doctors and lawyers as well ?

Jim
Click to expand...
I dont think this applies to doctors anymore, as I personally know the Govt kept track of which patients were receiving what prescriptions…if they have access to this information, its likely they access to other medical info as well. However, I believe this started in 2012.

It was interesting the DEA was able to ‘finagle’ their way into the doctor/ patient relationship.

It would not be a surprise to me if Govt tried to throw a wrench into the clergy/ parishioner relationship, they want total control.
 
mikekle said:
I dont think this applies to doctors anymore, as I personally know the Govt kept track of which patients were receiving what prescriptions…if they have access to this information, its likely they access to other medical info as well. However, I believe this started in 2012.

It was interesting the DEA was able to ‘finagle’ their way into the doctor/ patient relationship.

It would not be a surprise to me if Govt tried to throw a wrench into the clergy/ parishioner relationship, they want total control.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it seems as though we are turning into a Big Brother nation of mandated personal spying on one another. I think that not only the priest/penitent privilege should be protected, but the doctor/patient and other professional relationships, as well as personal conferences between pastors and parishioners of any religion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top