US churches do not have to report child rapes.

[Zoii]

I think it is most important to follow God's procedure with these things for it leads to the best and most just outcome invariably, contrary to the world's procedures. If you want to protect the innocent then the Lord's way is the best way for that.

Investigations across the world have found that what you purport to be most untrue - the opposite has been found to be true.

 

[Zoii]

Amen. If a person has no Contrition in them and fully intends to do the sin again after Confessing then it does not work, they are not forgiven. God is not mocked.

Although I do note: knowing that it is likely you will sin again does not mean you intend to sin again, a person can reasonably think "considering my life and what has happened before, I will likely do this again" while also fully intending to not do it again. Those are forgiven.

I couldn't care less if the oh so wonderful repentant paedophile is sorry. He is to be punished under the full weight of the law, and the child afforded protection from the slime-ball, and he is to be forbidden any further contact with children.

 

[Zoii]

he Supreme court of the US did no such thing

You didn't read correctly - I said "ä supreme court in the US" which is accurate - and I really don't care what state this occurred in - that's not the issue - pointing a finger at a particular state is irrelevant.

the RCC has always maintained the sanctity of the Confessional

The Royal Commission in Australia has found that sadly wanting

it is not something that any secular law would cause a priest to abandon

Well too bad - by law in Australia, that priest will be criminally prosecuted if his actions ie failing to report child sexual abuse - whether disclosed in the confessional or not, become known.

 

[Larniavc]

It is a very common judgment by parents themselves, and when I have children should I marry I will make the same judgment.

Then I fear for any children you may have.

 

[Larniavc]

Don't forget protection from Atheists. I suspect many molesters never mention those sins at confession if they bother to go to confession. Those who repent and go to confession can just choose a priest they don't know and go to confession anonymously. And the priests take a holy vow. So such a law does no good and a lot of harm.

I really can’t understand why people in this thread are supporting an institution that covers up child molestation.

 

[Paidiske]

I really can’t understand why people in this thread are supporting an institution that covers up child molestation.

It's common for people in churches to feel that people outside churches use abuse as an excuse to attack the church (or particular groups within the church). While I personally don't feel that way, and by and large I welcome government child safety standards etc as a positive thing, I do understand the resistance to people who don't share our beliefs, telling us how we should live our faith.

That said, saying that mandatory reporting laws don't actually work isn't necessarily supporting child abuse or the covering up of child abuse. I'm of the opinion that mandatory reporting laws don't work well, and I'm just about as far from supporting child abuse as you could get.

 

[Larniavc]

That said, saying that mandatory reporting laws don't actually work isn't necessarily supporting child abuse or the covering up of child abuse. I'm of the opinion that mandatory reporting laws don't work well, and I'm just about as far from supporting child abuse as you could get.

I do see what you mean and I fully accept that lawbreakers are not the best at following laws so it will never be ideal but the tone of some of the responses in this thread seems to place ritual and institution above the safety of a child.

 

[Abaxvahl]

Investigations across the world have found that what you purport to be most untrue - the opposite has been found to be true.

So you say. I of course would disagree outright and know in advance such is not the case. For as it says in the 18th Psalm (19th in Hebrew numbering):

"The law of the Lord is unspotted, converting souls: the testimony of the Lord is faithful, giving wisdom to little ones. The justices of the Lord are right, rejoicing hearts: the commandment of the Lord is lightsome, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is holy, enduring for ever and ever: the judgments of the Lord are true, justified in themselves. More to be desired than gold and many precious stones: and sweeter than honey and the honeycomb."

 

[Valletta]

I really can’t understand why people in this thread are supporting an institution that covers up child molestation.

How easy it is to blame others while ignoring our own sins. In the United States the last numbers I saw were in the single digits for verified cases of sexual misconduct in the Catholic Church within the most recent years reported. How many involved children or pornography I don't know. In our archdiocese the rules are to report even something we SUSPECT may be going on. Meanwhile, in the rest of the country sexual abuse is rampant, teachers unions fight to conceal the records in public schools, the current administration aids sexual trafficking by giving rides to children who cross at the southern border to be with adults without bothering to check out the background of adults. Boy scouts, athletic programs, you name it. I sure wish you and the rest of the world would not be in such denial about what is happening TODAY and speak out and take action. See how the infiltrating predators covered up their crimes, look at the programs that made such improvements and see that those programs or similar ones are implemented throughout society.

 

[Larniavc]

I sure wish you and the rest of the world would not be in such denial about what is happening

Nowhere have I denied this.

The catholic church has for years covered up and protected its paedophile priests. Pointing out that there are non priestly paedophiles out there does not alter the fact that the catholic church has been unable or unwilling to take action to stop it in it's own ranks.

Even in this tread people are basically saying 'it's worth the risk'.

 

[Valletta]

Yes, t

Nowhere have I denied this.

The catholic church has for years covered up and protected its paedophile priests. Pointing out that there are non priestly paedophiles out there does not alter the fact that the catholic church has been unable or unwilling to take action to stop it in it's own ranks.

Even in this tread people are basically saying 'it's worth the risk'.[/QUOTE

Nowhere have I denied this.

The catholic church has for years covered up and protected its paedophile priests. Pointing out that there are non priestly paedophiles out there does not alter the fact that the catholic church has been unable or unwilling to take action to stop it in it's own ranks.

Even in this tread people are basically saying 'it's worth the risk'.

That's a lie, the Catholic Church has taken action. Please don't spread bigotry. As I said, the number in the United States is down into the single digits, although we strive for zero. There is no question about what happened in the past, and today we know that they predators, despite psychological treatment, so often re-offend. I think they should be jailed and we must all be vigilant, it is just your kind of attitude that allows such sexual abuse to be so prevalent in society.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Well, I prefer the way Jesus set it up--it seems quite wise.

What Jesus said was to His apostles, to go beyond that is based on assumption. Furthermore the requirement for atonement is repentance not confession.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The answer is yes - In my country a doctor or nurse is compelled to report the matter to police or face prosecution and discipline from the Australian Health Professional Regulation Authority.

Yes I have heard that it is required to be reported in Australia and I completely agree with that idea. Unfortunately in America that’s not the case.

 

[Valletta]

What Jesus said was to His apostles, to go beyond that is based on assumption. Furthermore the requirement for atonement is repentance not confession.

So Jesus gave them the power to forgive sin and the sin would be retained or forgiven in heaven as well but they were never supposed to use such a power? That's a far out assumption. Repentance is part of the sacrament, your sins cannot be forgiven without repentance--if the priest judges you not to be repentant there is no forgiveness.

 

[partinobodycular]

Repentance is part of the sacrament, your sins cannot be forgiven without repentance--if the priest judges you not to be repentant there is no forgiveness.

So in other words if you can learn to fake sincerity then you're fine. The priest will believe that you're repentant, even if you aren't, and your sins will be forgiven. But if the priest doesn't believe that you're sincere then your sins won't be forgiven, no matter how repentant you are.

Man psychopaths must really like this system.

 

[Paidiske]

So in other words if you can learn to fake sincerity then you're fine. The priest will believe that you're repentant, even if you aren't, and your sins will be forgiven. But if the priest doesn't believe that you're sincere then your sins won't be forgiven, no matter how repentant you are.

That's really not a fair representation.

It's not the priest who forgives, it's God, and God knows whether you're faking sincerity or not.

While there can be problems around confession and reporting, misrepresentation doesn't help us work through those issues.

 

[partinobodycular]

It's not the priest who forgives, it's God, and God knows whether you're faking sincerity or not.

But then we're back to the original problem, if the priest really can't bind or loose anything, then what was the point of telling the apostles that they could, why do we need the priest for the forgiveness of sins? Why don't we just confess our sins directly to God Himself?

I mean, just as an outsider looking in, it would seem as though the Catholic church was simply making a power grab by claiming that they were the only ones with the power to forgive sins. You either go through them, or you go to hell. It just doesn't seem all that Christian to me to be honest. Not that I'm an expert on Christianity.

It just doesn't make much sense to me. I assume that it makes sense to you though, but I don't see it.

 

[Hans Blaster]

So in other words if you can learn to fake sincerity then you're fine. The priest will believe that you're repentant, even if you aren't, and your sins will be forgiven. But if the priest doesn't believe that you're sincere then your sins won't be forgiven, no matter how repentant you are.

Man psychopaths must really like this system.

Part of the trick, psychopath or not, is coming up with a plausible list of sins. That was always the hard part when I was a kid. What of the "bad" things that I'd done were actually "sins"? Not to mention how many times, because sometimes the priest would ask "how many times?" So you were always guessing (at best). Things got trickier near the end when most of my sins involved teenage girls, but I wasn't about to detail my "unclean thoughts". Thankfully, our parish went to some sort "communal" pennence service where talking to the priest (even in his darkened creepy box) was optional. (Apparently he was too busy, but doing what I could not perceive.) Confession was the 3rd "required" practice I abandoned (when I left home) after (1) meal prayers away from home when I started elementary school and daily prayers a few years prior when my mom stopped asking about them.

Back to the main topic: The confession booth should have one of those warnings like call centers: "This confession may be recorded for quality assurance purposes and documentation of crimes." It would be good for priests to be a net positive on society. They should be obligatory reporters.

 

[Paidiske]

But then we're back to the original problem, if the priest really can't bind or loose anything, then what was the point of telling the apostles that they could, why do we need the priest for the forgiveness of sins? Why don't we just confess our sins directly to God Himself?

Well, two things.

1. The priest is not doing the binding or loosing. He is declaring what God has already bound or loosed. (The Greek of the NT puts this very clearly; if we were to translate it accurately it would say, "whatever you bind will have been bound in heaven...").

2. For many people, the impact of being personally reassured of their forgiveness by someone who's heard their sin, and their guilt, and their shame, and who can still assure them that God forgives them is far more meaningful than an abstract general assurance of forgiveness, or of speaking directly to God, where they may or may not feel reassured. The benefit is pastoral, but it is profound.

I mean, just as an outsider looking in, it would seem as though the Catholic church was simply making a power grab by claiming that they were the only ones with the power to forgive sins. You either go through them, or you go to hell. It just doesn't seem all that Christian to me to be honest. Not that I'm an expert on Christianity.

I do not believe this accurately represents even a Catholic understanding. Reconciliation might be the place where you can be assured of forgiveness, but it does not mean that God does not forgive outside that context.

As someone who is a mandatory reporter - even for what is disclosed in confession - my comment about mandatory reporting would be that it inhibits people (mostly victims) from making disclosures. It can take someone a long time and a lot of support to be ready to face the onslaught of official reporting and the trauma that comes with it, but now it is harder for them to access that support and it takes them longer to be ready to disclose and report. And I have heard similar from people in other professions, such as social workers and mental health professionals. I think such measures have ended up being counter-productive in their actual impact on the ground.

 

[Valletta]

But then we're back to the original problem, if the priest really can't bind or loose anything, then what was the point of telling the apostles that they could, why do we need the priest for the forgiveness of sins? Why don't we just confess our sins directly to God Himself?

I mean, just as an outsider looking in, it would seem as though the Catholic church was simply making a power grab by claiming that they were the only ones with the power to forgive sins. You either go through them, or you go to hell. It just doesn't seem all that Christian to me to be honest. Not that I'm an expert on Christianity.

It just doesn't make much sense to me. I assume that it makes sense to you though, but I don't see it.

Try not to think of God has giving us some "system" or gimmick to get around sin. As Paidiske explained, forgiveness comes from God. Certainly you can and should ask God directly for forgiveness of sins, catch the first part of a Sunday mass on television and you will hear Catholics ask God to forgive their sins.
God, in his great mercy, gave us this beautiful sacrament. So important was it that God breathed upon the Apostles when He gave them this power, recall Genesis 2:7: The LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being." It is much harder to go before a man and confess your sins, perhaps be queried in some detail when necessary, than to say a quick "Sorry God" over the shoulder for even the most heinous of sins. What wisdom God has. Of course if you lie about repenting God is not going to forgive you, God cannot be conned.