He would be following canon law which to him is a higher authority than state law. Following the law of religion you made vows under is hardly an “arsehole” move.
It isn’t correct to say, “So in the state of Virginia we should never see any such confessions to Catholic priests.”
I disagree, but since “arsehole,” is a matter of opinion, I cannot gainsay the truth of your belief.
But since the priest is bound by both canon law and secular law, and in this case the two do not conflict, he is able to conform to both. Canon law requires his silence; secular law permits him to remain silent.
Ok, well, good luck with that.
Oh I think it is entirely an arsehole move. Your responsibility to the greater good of society should surely be more important than adherence to a religion. You’d hope that the religion would make that clear.
Someone confesses to a priest that they are raping children and are continuing to do so.
You think that not reporting this to police is…what…admirable?..noble?..helpful?
I think he is a reckless arsehole and a church that demands he keeps quiet about it is morally bankrupt. But then, we know that keeping quiet about it is SOP for the catholic church.
If they are intent on “continuing to do so”, they have no actual “contrition”, which is required for the sacrament to be valid. The priest would tell them that they have to make a sincere intention of NOT doing this again, and if they can not/will not do so, the priest will not grant them absolution (forgiveness) for their sins.
Furthermore, if the pries did absolve their sins, part of the penance would be a requirement to either turn himself in to the secular authorities or to seek the assistance of a medical or psychiatric counselor. (And those people ARE mandated reporters, with no sacramental exception , so they would report him eventually.)
But I believe that even if the penitent dose not receive absolution because of an intent to continue his sin; or if the penitent fails to perform the required penance, the priest is still forbidden from telling anyone what he heard under the sacramental seal.
I’m sure that the biggest comfort to those being abused or murdered is that the priest gets to say that they did their job and didn’t break a confidence.
All of the above just amounts to “do the right thing Mr. Offender or I’ll…I’ll…be very disappointed”. It is cowardly and immoral position to take.
Someone confesses to a lawyer that they have been raping children. You think that not reporting this to police is … what … admirable? … noble? …helpful?
Do you want to answer my question first?
Just an anecedote.
Back when I was in the Army a good friend of mine went AWOL. He’d been supposed to be the best man at me and my fiancee’s wedding.
He came back before the wedding but was confined to barracks, although not in the brig, so he couldn’t attend.
This guy was Catholic, and made confession to the Catholic chaplain. Military authorities wanted the chaplain to tell them what had been confessed, perhaps hoping to use it against him during disciplinary procedures. The chaplain would not tell them anything, even though pressure was put on him, being a military officer and all. What happened after that I’m not sure, but the chaplain/priest would not break the silence of the confessional.
Just to be clear on the implications of a Catholic priest deciding to reveal something horrible he has heard during confession, see Seal of the Confessional in the Catholic Church. He is automatically excommunicated and the excommunication can’t be lifted by anyone other than the pope. I’m not saying that there are no circumstances where a priest might decide to reveal something heard during confession, just that doing so has very serious consequences.
Admirable and helpful.
Now you.
I believe the priest is following the tenets of his religion which will sometimes collide with society, and that his religion and vocation are a higher calling than society.
If someone is truly coming to Confession in the right spirit, they have every intention of not committing the sin again. The priest would make every effort to convince the person to turn himself in. But Confession is between the person and God and not society.
It’s important to remember that priests are not statues that just absorb this information. Any good, ethical priest knows to advise the confessor that he or she will not find divine pardon from sin unless they accept social opprobrium and turn themselves in.
Penance, in the modern interpretation, typically does not begin and end within the confines of the church walls.
Just a note that “confessor” refers to the priest hearing the confession, not the person saying it (the penitent).
bolding mine
As Bricker said earlier, absolution still takes place so sins are pardoned even if the person then doesn’t turn themselves in. (Or Bricker correct me 
)
What a lovely semantic tangle. Confessors both confess and hear confession, depending on context. Thanks Obama.
That’s correct, although as you quote from my earlier post, that failure to turn oneself in may be a separate sin.
None of the things you mentioned…legally sanctioned behaviour is the most I’d allow but as you mentioned elsewhere. Lawyers have exceptions and limitations to their client confidentiality, Priests do not and that seems wholly unacceptable to me and yet somehow their unwillingness to break confession under any circumstances is “admirable and helpful” to you.
I’m afraid I see this as an insurmountable moral and ethical difference between us, maybe you are a catholic or lawyer and that is clouding your objectivity on this but
if I knew that someone was going to commit a horrendous crime I couldn’t live with myself if I didn’t do all in my power to prevent it even if it meant risking my own career.
And I can’t find too much admirable in anyone who wouldn’t.
I think that is a truly horrifying (though not surprising) thing to say.
And if a renegade maverick priest did do his own thing, and nark to the coppers every time someone confessed to a bank robbery, it’s not much use without evidence.
Unless you feel the police and community should agree to fit the purported transgressor up and sentence him anyway.
Yes, I am.