Are Church Confessions Safe? Court To Hear Arguments

DETROIT (WWJ/AP) - In a case that could set national precedent, the three-judge Michigan Court of Appeals panel plans to hear arguments Thursday about whether a pastor’s testimony related to a possible confession in a child sexual assault case may be used in court.

detroit.cbslocal.com...

Besides the obvious implications on the surface, what bothers me is the continual "growth" of govt seeking power.
These kind of power grabs have been tried before, but it would seem they are not only succeeding more lately, but becoming more blatant.

Once you've lost a liberty, you don't usually get it back.

Thoughts?

I wonder how many times priests and church elders have used information about their parishoners to blackmail them or to coerce them in some way? Or maybe even to extract money, favors, or engage them in other deeds?

I have a hunch some of the church hierarchy have used "confessions" to their own advantage when it was worthwhile.

As far as reporting a serious incident to another authority, I think they have used the "sovereign immunity" clause so that they do not have to report it to anyone. Apparently their methods of hail marys or disfellowshipping isn't working too well to solve the problems.

reply to post by schadenfreude


Are you kidding me? If someone confesses that they killed someone, then the Church is supposed to let that fly? Listen, I don't know what kind of power you think the government is trying to grab, but it IS their job to catch people who break the law.

reply to post by TsukiLunar

So it's not enough we have big brother on the streets with CCTV, now you want big brother in the church?

Why stop at child molestation? How about income tax fraud? Or better yet how we FEEL about things, like say the govt?

Do you realize how many things the govt has done to "protect the children" that do anything but?

"If you see something, say something."
Indeed.

In older times, (good)priests would go to their deaths before breaking the "seal of confession". Not sure how things are now though.

reply to post by schadenfreude

Why stop at child molestation? How about income tax fraud?

Still all illegal. Why should you be aloud to get away with it?

Or better yet how we FEEL about things, like say the govt?

Not illegal, so no chance of getting arrested.

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by schadenfreude

 

Why stop at child molestation? How about income tax fraud?

Still all illegal. Why should you be aloud to get away with it?

Or better yet how we FEEL about things, like say the govt?

Not illegal, so no chance of getting arrested.

You're either doing some serious trolling, or you'd make a GREAT informant.

As for not getting arrested for saying things, you've obviously never heard the phrase "arrested for contempt of cop".

May I suggest you take the time to look it up so you can educate yourself?

reply to post by schadenfreude

You're either doing some serious trolling, or you'd make a GREAT informant.

You know what dude, go to hell. Your faith does not make you above the law. IF you want to insult me, fine, but dont pretend as if you are so important that a church should be a confidant for your crimes.

Its simple, If you commit a crime dont confess to it.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


I don't recall making any statements endorsing church over anything legal. I believe my statement was more geared toward keeping our liberties rather than giving them away to the govt hand over fist.

Btw, I DID see a video where a young independent journalist was arrested for asking a cop a question, while the cop was slumped over talking to someone in a car, so so much for your "can't get arrested for what you say crap.

As for your goto hell remark, well feel free to attack me, it's obvious you can't debate yourself out of a paper bag.

www.youtube.com...

there's your video showing you can get arrested for what you SAY.

I'm assuming your google-fu is just as weak.

reply to post by schadenfreude

As for your goto hell remark, well feel free to attack me, it's obvious you can't debate yourself out of a paper bag.

you attacked me first by calling me a troll, you hypocrite.

there's your video showing you can get arrested for what you SAY.

And the officer got suspended. Learn to read.

Yet some how Kevin Jennings got away with not telling anybody about pedophilia behavior in schools. The radicals are out of control. It's all part of this administrations attack on the church and traditions.

Originally posted by circlemaker
In older times, (good)priests would go to their deaths before breaking the "seal of confession". Not sure how things are now though.

First off; this guy is a Baptist minister, not a Catholic so I'm not sure this would even apply to them. Most protestant churches that I know of deny that it is even necessary to confess to a priest, so I'm not sure this exemption should even apply to them.

Second, the disclosure was not even done in the course of spititual counseling; The minister was confronting the guy with the girl's accusations and that is when the confession came about.

“The communication was initiated by the pastor – not by the defendant – and was done to ascertain whether the victim was telling the truth, not for the purpose of spiritual guidance,” said Odette.

CBS

In my opinion, neither the seal of the confessional exemption or the physician/ counselor exemption should apply in this matter and the testimony should be allowed.

Imagine how the public would react if the minister had kept this info from the police.

In the Catholic Church, a priest is not allowed to divulge any information he hears in the confessional under pain of excommunication. Most priests however, will not grant absolution in such cases unless the penitent agrees to turn themselves into the police and then the absolution is conditional until the penitent follows through with their promise. They can't divulge the info they hear but, they will strongly encourage, even demand that the penitent turn themselves into the police. A priest would be well within his rights to deny the sacraments to such a person until they complied with his instructions.

Originally posted by FortAnthem
this guy is a Baptist minister, not a Catholic so I'm not sure this would even apply to them. .

In the OJ SImpson case, he had a protestant minister (Rosey Greer) come to his cell and they had a chat. It is said that he confessed during the chat to Rev. Greer but that Greer had no obligation to tell the courts and OJ was protected by his right to talk in confidence to his minister. As it should be.

Most priests and/or ministers will tell the guilty person who is confessing that, in order to set things right with God, they must confess their crimes/sins to those who they have hurt and to make restitution as best they can.

Flame away.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
In the OJ SImpson case, he had a protestant minister (Rosey Greer) come to his cell and they had a chat. It is said that he confessed during the chat to Rev. Greer but that Greer had no obligation to tell the courts and OJ was protected by his right to talk in confidence to his minister. As it should be.

In that case, it could be considered as "spiritual counseling" but in the case before the court, I doubt that is the case.

A defendant cannot turn around and say that every interaction he has with the clergy is protected by the clergy exemption. IMO, it has to be within the course of spiritual counseling or sacramental confession in order for this exemption to count.

If the minister hears an accusation of a crime and decides to investigate on his own to gather more evidence before taking the case to the police, I would hardly count that as "spiritual counseling". If they try to extend the exemption that far, it would be impossible for any member of the clergy to appear as a wittness in court.

The court needs to clearly define what is covered in this exemption and what is not. Every conversation a person has with a member of the clergy does not count as confidential spiritual counseling.

I don't see this case as a threat to the seal of the confessional but rather as an opportunity to formally define which interactions with clergy are covered under this exemption.