Okay, let me put other scenario that comes from another thread within this board:
Trinichic:
QUOTE |
LDS: When a Catholic breaks any of the commandments, including your examples, they must of course, commit to not doing it anymore - and they must use the sacrament of reconciliation, in which they confess their sin to a priest. |
QUOTE |
He is vowed to secrecy, so there is no shame in talking out your problems with him, as in this role he represents Christ. |
My grandmother is a devout catholic. She says a priest should not ever have to be in the position to give that information in the first place. The reconciliation starts with confession, but if he has committed a crime, part of the reconciliation would be to turn your self over to the law. This puts it in perspective.
However, some crimes the priest should turn them in if they don't. He should give them the chance first. However, in cases of murder or child molestation or rape, someone should not be able to just confess to a priest and get away with it, he should have to face his victims in court and suffer the penalty for his crimes, confession or no. My grandmother disagrees and feels that since the priest is an intermediatory between the confession giver and god, that it doesn't involve the law and god will take care of it. I of course completely disagree.
QUOTE (LDS_forever @ 12-Aug 06, 11:25 AM) |
1) Now, it may seem to me that confession should be only a part of the process of reconciliation... 2) Do the Catholic Priests ask these people who have commit serious offenses for some sort of restitution besides just praying? 3) Let's put an example: a guy goes to his Priest and confesses that he is sexually molesting his own daughter.... Now, since the Priest have vowed secrecy, how does he handle issues of that nature taking in consideration that a young child is suffering abuse and that the guy seem not to stop the behavior? |
QUOTE |
A person going to confession, obviously wants forgiveness. |
QUOTE |
If this person is coming in repeatedly, month after month with the same sin, it's highly likely that he's also making an attempt at doing his penance |
QUOTE |
f his penance involves family counseling (and it's highly likely it would) then there are also trained professionals involved - whose job would include reporting a continued unhealthy situation to the police. |
LDS, what I think confuses people is this:
If a priest realizes that the person coming to him is not doing their required 'penance' - therefore they are not receiving absolution from God - he can refuse to hear the person's confession within the framework of the sacrament of reconciliation. If he spoke to the person outside of the sacrament - he is not bound by any oath.
If for example, he insisted as penance that the person join a support group or seek psychological or pschychiatric help, but the person neglects to do so - not doing it is a sin as well.
Believe me LDS, going to a priest (who is still a man) to admit your deepest failings is not easy... I've been doing it since I was 7 and it's still not easy for me - I don't see how it could be for a person with a major problem.
Let's think about it. If a person is abusing another - be the other person adult or child - and knows they are doing wrong to the point where they want to talk to someone about it, then they are already making a step in the right direction if they have gone to a priest to confess it as a sin. If they do not do their instructed penance, they have a further burden of guilt... would they keep coming back if they have no intention of following through?
I think alot of the times, abusive people rationalize these things somehow so they don't think they're doing anything wrong at all - so they wouldn't bother to mention it as a sin to a priest anyway, would they?
Edited: trinichic on 14th Aug, 2006 - 2:30am
Trinichick, I think you are missing the point I am trying to make. My whole issue in the example given is the poor little girl who is a victim of sexual abuse by his own father on a daily basis. You are just focusing on the guy, I am focusing on the real victim who is in danger of losing her life every single day, even though an adult (the Priest) knows exactly the situation yet indirectly allows this abuse to continue by not reporting to the authorities. It seems like the vows are more important than the real Christian act of saving the little girl's life. I do not wish to be disrespectful but the Pharisees at the time of Jesus were similar, focusing in the strict law yet missing the whole point.
Unfortunately LDS, I really think that you are missing my point.
Simply put - an abuser is hardly likely to confess in the first place. People don't go to confession, just for a chat. People with major sins generally avoid it like the plague... or go to a church where the confessional is screened - adding anonymity to the mix (ie. the priest doesn't even know who he's speaking to).
This is why most churches include outreach programmes, children's and youth groups, free counselling, legal aid, etc. for anyone in the community who needs it.
Looking for a scapegoat in the priest is highly unfair, since if the same man confided in a lawyer, that lawyer would very likely still defend him in court. I'll say it again - if the priest were to break his vows, nobody would respect or ever go to confession with him in the first place.
I have to agree with trinchic, what happens in confession stays there and if this were to change in ANY WAY it would render the sacrament useless.The argument That LDS is using is heartbreaking and the idea that the priest would keep such a fact to himself seems inhuman.This must tear the priest in half and put him in a position that nobody would envy but the fact remains that he has taken his oath and cannot disclose it.If we start changing what the priest can and cannot keep secret in confession it will lose all meaning.