Comments on Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)TypePad2011-07-25T22:36:02ZRick Garnetthttps://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2011/07/ireland-to-compel-priests-to-break-seal-of-confession/comments/atom.xml/Douglas R. commented on 'Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20153913f36d3970b2011-09-02T17:48:31Z2011-09-02T17:48:31ZDouglas R.http://www.tongkat-ali-extract-erections.comOf course it is grandstanding. No law can compel someone to speak if they don't want to. Priests obey a...<p>Of course it is grandstanding. No law can compel someone to speak if they don't want to. Priests obey a higher law than man's law.</p>Fr. J commented on 'Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2015390320ad8970b2011-07-27T00:01:07Z2011-07-27T00:01:07ZFr. JI will not ever violate the seal of confession regardless of what any government says or does.<p>I will not ever violate the seal of confession regardless of what any government says or does. </p>Andrew MacKie-Mason commented on 'Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2015434047c18970c2011-07-26T20:13:53Z2011-07-26T20:13:53ZAndrew MacKie-Masonhttp://source4politics.blogspot.com/Joel, ultimately there has to be some authority deciding what is moral, even if that decision is that various different...<p>Joel, ultimately there has to be some authority deciding what is moral, even if that decision is that various different types of morality will be accepted. The state isn't always the best at making that decision, of course, but they're far more better suited to it than an unelected and exclusive group such as the church.</p>Joel Clarke Gibbons commented on 'Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20154340234ba970c2011-07-26T12:50:37Z2011-07-26T12:50:37ZJoel Clarke Gibbonshttp://www.logisticresearch.comThe point of the law is to drive home the point that it is the civil authorities who are the...<p>The point of the law is to drive home the point that it is the civil authorities who are the supreme moral authority in Ireland. Now, one might want to ask if that proposition is in fact true. </p>
<p>Let's see. There is nothing special about Irish government, so let's cast a wider net. Do we believe that the Stalin government in the Soviet Union was the supreme moral authority there? How about the Reichs government in the 1930's that sent Saint Edith Stein on her way to Auschwitz (she died on the way)? </p>
<p>It is truly said that "Guilt is a thief that steals the conscience." These governments, whose hands are dripping in blood, cannot absolve themselves with the blood of the innocent. </p>David Nickol commented on 'Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2014e8a1f0c74970d2011-07-26T00:09:03Z2011-07-26T00:09:03ZDavid Nickolhttp://www.religiousleftlaw.comIn theory, at least, a number of states in the US do not recognize the priest-penitent privilege when it comes...<p>In theory, at least, a number of states in the US do not recognize the priest-penitent privilege when it comes to mandatory reporting of child abuse. See here:<br />
<a href="http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/clergymandated.cfm" rel="nofollow">http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/clergymandated.cfm</a></p>
<p>Isn't it rather difficult to imagine a situation where the state would know that a priest knew something and didn't report it? I have not been following the events in Ireland too closely, but I will hazard the guess that the government wants it known that it wants to "get tough" with the Church, and nobody expects this particular statement to have any practical effects. </p>
<p>Let me make it clear, first, that child abuse is a terrible thing, and I don't want to minimize it in any way. But I would have to say that there has been a certain amount of overreaction, with this being only one example. Opening "windows" in the statute of limitations is another. I think it is just wrong. Residency requirements for convicted sex offenders that leave them with no place to live are yet another example. While I have no doubt that some children who are abused suffer consequences for life, I also wonder if there isn't at least some suggestion to victims who were abused in mild ways that they *ought* to be suffering consequences for life, and they *ought* to seek some kind of revenge, and that they are owed as much money by the Church as lawyers can get for them. I would not for a moment let the Church off the hook for what happened, and I would not for a minute maintain that the press shouldn't have reported it or that it should have been covered up in any way. But I think there has been overreaction in some quarters, and some of it, I would argue, is not helpful even to the victims.</p>Evan Georgeson commented on 'Ireland to compel priests to break seal of confession(?)'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2014e8a1eabd0970d2011-07-25T22:43:12Z2011-07-25T22:43:12ZEvan GeorgesonThis might help (http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/note-on-proposals-to-require-priests-to.html)<p>This might help (<a href="http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/note-on-proposals-to-require-priests-to.html)" rel="nofollow">http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/note-on-proposals-to-require-priests-to.html)</a></p>