Confession

Originally posted by Devil King
Then there is no rational reason for a priest to be granted some freedom from obligation under the laws of the United States. To do otherwise represents an obvious and blatant consideration of a religion's validity, and thus can be interpreted as a subscription to its validity under some measure of inherent patiality. Fortunately for many dishonest catholics, their priests bend knee to a Pope over their own nation's governement. (coupled with the idea that by saying aloud the wrongs of which you're guilty will some how free from their reality) I suppose, there should not legally be a reasonable excuse to explain away a priests obligation to report the offense. But, as the catholic church often exhibits in it's appalling submission to the laws of Rome and the feeble image of the Roman Catholic Church, over the laws of actual morals and justice as set forth by the excessivly rational laws of the men who had the foresight to cast off the burden of the lazy, self-imposed ideology of organized religion, such things do not matter.

The excommunication actually happens just as disbarment or loss of license could happen to a lawyer or phychiatrist. You could even go run experiments. Validity of the Catholic faith doesn't enter the picture.

Confession does not free a person from the crime. First of all, technically speaking, Confession cannot be given unless the person actually does not intend to repeat the offense. Secondly there is usually some penance required and I'm pretty sure priests are supposed to tell people to admit their crime to the law of the land as well.

Why would the Catholic church not look to Rome? That's like asking a government to simply ignore its own legal system.

Everything else there is rhetoric though I do agree with the basic premise.

Originally posted by Transfinitum
I assume that the defendant would need a witness to clear his name.

But on the question, no the priest should never break the seal of confession. It is far holier for a man to suffer through injustice, for his reward in heaven would be greater than the latter, in which a soul is cast out of salvation. In such cases, God's will be done.

But the priest wouldn't be a witness. He'd just be a dude that heard the defendants story. But GMG cleared it up. Get it now.

Also, not everyone believes in heaven...and it might just be bullshit.

So, from the Priests POV, I'd break confession, even if that would mean excommunication, as you said, suffering injustice is good in his opinion, so he should be the one suffering it.

I'm not sure why DK looks to Rome as if its some sort of sinister operation...

Disneyland Paris bosses will look to the company board in the US.

McDonald's employees in in Australia will look to the company bosses in the United States aswell...

Just because the HQ of the RCC is in Rome shouldn't matter...

Also, the authority of the Pope is far greater than that of the President of the United States.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I'm not sure why DK looks to Rome as if its some sort of sinister operation...

Disneyland Paris bosses will look to the company board in the US.

McDonald's employees in in Australia will look to the company bosses in the United States aswell...

Just because the HQ of the RCC is in Rome shouldn't matter...

Also, the authority of the Pope is far greater than that of the President of the United States.

Well, he must have seen the South Park episode last night. 😂

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Well, he must have seen the South Park episode last night. 😂

The Great Spider!

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
The Great Spider!

😆 Yes.

I would trust Benedict more than Bush anyday.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why would the Catholic church not look to Rome? That's like asking a government to simply ignore its own legal system.

I didn't say the church shouldn't look to Rome. I said the law and consideration by the US government need not.

And I'm familiar with Catholicism. I was raised a Catholic and attended 13 years of Catholic schools.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I'm not sure why DK looks to Rome as if its some sort of sinister operation...

Disneyland Paris bosses will look to the company board in the US.

McDonald's employees in in Australia will look to the company bosses in the United States aswell...

Just because the HQ of the RCC is in Rome shouldn't matter...

Also, the authority of the Pope is far greater than that of the President of the United States.

I did not say it was sinister, I said it was self-serving and self-preserving, at any expense. Be that the current Pope ordering the cover-up of thousands of cases of child molestation when he was John Paul the 2nd's #2 man or Wendy's paying off a guy that found a hypodermic needle in his french fries.

Sure, the Pope has a billion people bending knee to him, but actual authority is up for debate.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I would trust Benedict more than Bush anyday.

I wouldn't trust either of them.

Originally posted by Devil King
Wendy's paying off a guy that found a hypodermic needle in his french fries.

That was a conspiracy by the Catholic church?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That was a conspiracy by the Catholic church?

It clearly says Wendy's in the sentence. Read Gav's post and then apply my response.

Oh, lawlz.

Why confess if god is all knowing. According to the scriptures, god know what your heart asks even before you say it. So why confess.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Why confess if god is all knowing. According to the scriptures, god know what your heart asks even before you say it. So why confess.

21Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. if you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven. "

And so, when Jesus said this to the disciples, he in essence instituted the sacrament of confession, for the disciples were the first clergymen of the Church.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Now, you may know that in Roman Catholicism a Priest who has heard confession can not under any circumstances repeat what he has heard to anyone other than the confessor.

However, consider this situation.

A man is being accused of murder but he is innocent- a local priest knows the trial is going on and the real murder came to him in confession and admitted to the crime. Should the Priest go forward to the Court?

Is it right that US Law allows for Priest's not to reveal things they have learned in confession?

It should be noted that a Priest who breaks the Seal of Confession incurs automatic excommunication from the Church.

Originally posted by Bardock42
But the priest wouldn't be a witness. He'd just be a dude that heard the defendants story. But GMG cleared it up. Get it now.

Still the fact that the priest should never break the confidentiality of the confessional holds.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Also, not everyone believes in heaven...and it might just be bullshit.

Originally posted by Bardock42
So, from the Priests POV, I'd break confession, even if that would mean excommunication,

Originally posted by Bardock42
as you said, suffering injustice is good in his opinion, so he should be the one suffering it.

You're answering a false dilemmia

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Why confess if god is all knowing. According to the scriptures, god know what your heart asks even before you say it. So why confess.

It is less a matter of God hearing if for the first time and more a matter of the sinner being willing to admit to his own human frailty...

and continuing to remember their place and perpetuate the bent-knee subserivence of their human soul to the idea of a divinely-inspired, yet appalingly equally frail human hierarchy.

Originally posted by Devil King
Wendy's paying off a guy that found a hypodermic needle in his french fries.

I'd still rather find that than a finger in my chili.