New Australian Law Requires Priests to Break Seal of Confession to Report Admissions of Child Abuse

  • Thread starter Thread starter hmikell7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
However, you do understand that your opinion is contrary to the teaching of Holy Mother Church, right? You have free will, you are okay to believe in whatever you wish, but, realize that there is a line where our free will takes us from the truth into the error of consequentialism.
 
TheLittleLady said:
However, you do understand that your opinion is contrary to the teaching of Holy Mother Church, right? You have free will, you are okay to believe in whatever you wish, but, realize that there is a line where our free will takes us from the truth into the error of consequentialism.
Click to expand...
Yup. But I don’t think this falls under consequentialism.
 
It’s the very definition of it. Actions are not to be judged by their consequences, but by what they are.
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
It’s the very definition of it. Actions are not to be judged by their consequences, but by what they are.
Click to expand...
Cool. But I’m talking about stopping people who intend to do harm to themself or others. That’s not judging by the consequences; whether the person seeking to stop them succeeds or fails I still believe they did the right thing, it is not reliant on the consequences.
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
It’s the very definition of it. Actions are not to be judged by their consequences, but by what they are.
Click to expand...
To be clear, the Church does not forbid making moral decisions on the basis of consequences, in some cases. Not all, but some.

You cannot prove someone wrong by saying that they are appealing to consequences.
 
You’re judging the morality of the action based on what it’s meant to do, not what it is. That is consequentialism.
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
You’re judging the morality of the action based on what it’s meant to do, not what it is. That is consequentialism.
Click to expand...
Now I will admit that it has been a wee time since I studied the different moral philosophies but I do recall consequentialism requiring the actual consequences to define whether an action were good or bad. If not then the act of confession itself, an action which is meant to bring good, is a form of consequentialist philosophy.
 
Consequentialism is only morally permissible if the means by which consequences are derived aren’t sinful. Breaking the seal is a very grave sin and nothing can justify it.
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
Consequentialism is only morally permissible if the means by which consequences are derived aren’t sinful. Breaking the seal is a very grave sin and nothing can justify it.
Click to expand...
That’s cool, in this scenario to me it would seem that the consequence is sinful either way. And I see no reason for the seal of confession to cover future acts.
 
People don’t confess future sins. Besides, not reporting a confessed crime isn’t a sin. The sinfulness of actions is not for you to decide.
 
Last edited:
It still can’t be condoned for people to sin for some perceived “good.”
 
Well that’s just fine and dandy. However, the Church is not subject to you or what you think is right. Sinful actions are not justified, ever.
 
Last edited:
joeybaggz said:
And I wonder: what is to stop a government official from going into the confessional, lying about having abused someone and then turning the priest in for not turning him?
Click to expand...
Presumably entrapment of that kind has been outlawed in Australia as it has been in other countries.
 
The Archbishop of Canberra and Goulburn, the archdiocese that covers the Australian Capital Territory, warns of the likely consequences. His byline simply names him as Christopher Prowse. Newspaper readers in the ACT presumably don’t need to be reminded who he is.

www.canberratimes.com.au

Reporting scheme shouldn't ignore Catholic community's concerns

The Barr Government's plans to expand the Reportable Conduct Scheme to include religious organisations shouldn't ignore Catholic concerns.
www.canberratimes.com.au www.canberratimes.com.au
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top