How far does confidentiality extend itself in the confession booth?

Dojo,

If you want to give your interpretation of the Bible verse that Julia quoted from the Bible, then feel free to do so. But you will not be allowed to twist her words to mean something she didn't say. If you have a problem with what the Bible says, then I am sorry. But, that is what it says.

Joseph Botwinick
Moderator

[ March 05, 2002, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: Joseph Botwinick ]

 

Former Lutheran Minister:
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/winrod/print.html

A host of religios ministers, including, but definitely not limited to Catholics:
http://www.matriarch.com/sex3.htm
http://www.thelinkup.com/crimes00a.html
http://users.cybercity.dk/~ccc44406/smwane/CC2.htm

Read through these. No Lutherans, huh?

 

Hi tulpje,

You wrote, "No, you never hear about Lutheran ministers raping children. Only Catholic priests."

June, 1997: James Eric Holmgren, 46, resigned from the pulpit after being charged with sexually administering enemas to a boy; he had been pastor of the Embarrass-Pike Evangelical Lutheran Church in the town of Embarrass, Minnesota. (http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/alleloo.htm)

SAN DIEGO - A former Solana Beach Lutheran church pastor accused of sexually molesting two young brothers - including one he was counseling - must stand trial on 30 charges, a judge ruled Wednesday. Michael Skoor, 55 (pictured. left), faces more than 40 years to life in prison if convicted of multiple counts of committing a lewd act of a child, showing pornography to a minor, and burglary. The older boy -- now 12 -- testified at a preliminary hearing that he got to know Skoor when his divorced parents arranged for the pastor to counsel the youngster. The "counseling" would take place in the boy's bedroom with the door closed, he said. The molestations also occurred in Skoor's car, the defendant's home, and Skoor's church office. (http://www.newnation.org/Archives/index-020125.html)

JAMES ALLEN WELLER, 31, a day care teacher and youth counselor at Redeemer Lutheran Church, Redwood City, CA, was booked on 20 counts of child molestation, oral copulation, sexual battery and child exploitation. A counselor in another state contacted police after a boy reported being abused by Weller. Boys ages 13 to 17 told police he paid or tricked them into posing for pornographic photographs over the last 3 years. Weller was also a Boy Scout leader and coached a youth basketball team at the church. Church officials hired him even though they knew he was a convicted felon who had served 6 years in prison for bank fraud, and was on parole. (San Jose Mercury News, 12/2/89) (http://relfrauds.www4.50megs.com/christianity/christianpedofile2.html)

Would you kindly retract your statement?

God bless,

Carson

[ March 05, 2002, 10:08 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]

 

I apologize if I just went overboard here, but the things I said were true. All of a sudden this board got filled with a lot of anger, hate, and lies. Please, I beg you, to read through those links. To claim that Baptist or Lutheran ministers are some how more saintly than Catholic priests is insane. Lutheran and Baptist ministers have committed the same horrid crimes, even when you said "Only Catholic priests."

I hope you'll retract your comments.

 

Dojo, I think you need a break from the BB, or else you just need to ignore me! Did I say that I wished that demise on any priest (or any person for that matter) who commits a crime against children? Those very words were from the mouth of Christ.

How horrid of you, sir, to defend a child molester with little or no thought for those children whose lives have been torn apart by this atrocity. If you are not defending him, then I offer my apologies, but by your post you seem to have more compassion for him than those children.

Julia

 

You wouldn't have pulled that verse out if you didn't share the sentiments. We are supposed to be non-judgemental here. A guilty priest is a guilty priest, but forget not the forgiveness of sins, and condemn no one.

You made bad accusations against the Catholic Church as well. Check out those links. No church is innocent of sinners. Least not you condemn our church unless you condemn your own; they share in the sin.

I'm not defending the priest; I'm also not condemning him. I'm defending my church, just as I know you will despite reading about what some Baptist ministers have done. Sin is prevalent everywhere.

[ March 05, 2002, 10:34 PM: Message edited by: DojoGrant ]

 

Folks, you are getting off the subject rather quick. The question was and is centering around the confessional, and not on who is committing more sins (Catholic priests or Evangelical pastors). Joseph Botwinick's question was about the inconsistency between Catholic confessionals and the teachings of the Bible.

Case example: In Ezekiel 3:18-21 God asks His people to prevent each other from continnual and or practicing sin. God holds us accountable to each other, therefore we are responsible in preventing sin - not covering up. This is the main reason of contention here.

[ March 05, 2002, 11:26 PM: Message edited by: Barnabas ]

 

Amen, I'm all for getting back on track.

 

Hi Barnabas,

The purpose of the sacrament of confession is to free one from sin, not to "cover up" sin.

God bless,

Carson

 

Dojo, did I not qualify my post by acknowledging that this can, and does, happen in churches other than the Catholic church? Were there a case of a Baptist pastor being guilty of this crime, I would hope his deacons would not fail to turn him over to the authorities should he confess to them. If they failed to do so, they would be as guilty as he. Forgiveness on our part does not excuse one from facing society in their crime.

Julia

P.S. I take it that you do not have children? I am sure if you did, you would view this in an entirely different manner.

 

Carson, the Bible mandate on confession is repentance. Repentance means a turning around. The sinner is traveling toward the South and now he is heading North. The primary ministry of the Bible as well as the church supposed to be restoration. I believe this is the pivoting point as well as the bone of contention between Evangelicals and Roman Catholics, because as you so eloquently put it:

However, the original question was "How far does confidentiality extend itself in the confession booth?" The answer: there is no Biblical evidence to confidentiality at all, since our confession is primarily to God and He wants us to turn from our evil ways. Now the question was and is, (and this is what Joseph Botwinick was referring to) if a practicing sinner (such as a child molester) is continuing to sin and continuing to confess his sin to the priest by what Biblical mandate does the priest withold information from the authorities to prevent the othewise unstoppable atrocity?

 

Hi Barnabas,

You wrote, "the Bible mandate on confession is repentance. Repentance means a turning around. The sinner is traveling toward the South and now he is heading North."

Amen. In the Gk, it is referred to as "metanoia".

You asked, "by what Biblical mandate does the priest withold information from the authorities to prevent the othewise unstoppable atrocity?"

The Catholic Church does not adhere to Sola Scriptura; your assumption of a "Biblical mandate" is invalid when considering the only Christian Church that predates New Testament Scripture.

She acts with the authority of Christ; her mandate is divine authority given to her. If you're interested in why I believe this, then I suggest reading through my post on the Davidic Covenant at:

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=28;t=000707

God bless,

Carson

CCC 1430. "Jesus' call to conversion and penance, like that of the prophets before him, does not aim first at outward works, 'sackcloth and ashes,' fasting and mortification, but at the conversion of the heart, interior conversion. Without this, such penances remain sterile and false; however, interior conversion urges expression in visible signs, gestures and works of penance. (Cf. Joel 2:12-13; Isa 1:16-17; Mt 6:1-6; Mt 16-18)"

[ March 05, 2002, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]

 

Hi all,

If I am not mistaken, the original question deals with whether or not there is ever an exception to the seal of the confessional. The short answer is "no".

Now, I am certainly no expert on the subject, but I don't think that this seal totally paralyzes a priest in his actions (or reactions). For instance, if someone were to go to confession just before Mass, and confess that they had poisoned the wine to be used during the ceremony, I don't know that there would be a problem if the priest discreetly decided to use different wine.

But I am certain that if a person were to confess to a priest that they are the one who poisoned half the parish at last week's Mass, then the priest is bound to silence.

I know this may sound harsh to many of us but it does make sense. The moment priests begin testifying in court about parishoners' sins is the moment parishoners stop confessing their mortal sins to priests. Common sense dictates this.

As far as whether or not confessing sins to a priest is Biblical, I offer a passage from the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the subject. This is a small part of the official Church teaching on the Sacrament.

"Only God forgives sins. (Mk 2:7) Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, 'The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins' and exercises this divine power: 'Your sins are forgiven.' (Mk 2:5, 10; Lk 7:48). Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name. (Jn 20:21-23)" CCC 1441.

I hope that's somewhat helpful.

I do sincerely ask for your prayers for the Catholic Church during this time of trial.

God Bless.

IOA,
Deacon's Son

[ March 06, 2002, 12:02 AM: Message edited by: Deacon's Son ]

 

Hi Joseph,

You wrote, "No wonder they can encouurage covering up rape among their own clergy."

This is a false statement; the Church does not encourage covering up corruption of any kind. The purpose of the Seal of Confession is not to "cover up" sin, but to allow the faithful to freely confess their sin, so that they may receive the grace of the sacrament, be reconciled to the Church, and sin no more, being free from guilt.

For you to accentuate such a distortion displays a lack of charity on your part.

You wrote, "They don't really even care what the scripture says."

This is, again, incorrect. The Church is bound by the Word of God. Your statement is logically absurd considering the fact that the very reason we have the Scriptures today is due to the careful preservation and copying of the New Testament manuscripts in the monasteries of Medieval Europe. Why would the Church perpetuate the very existence of Scripture if she "doesn't really even care what the scripture says" (and use it as a definitive source of revelation for the vast majority of her doctrine)?

You wrote, "They have dillusions of grandeur of being more important than scripture."

The Church teaches that she is not equal to the Word of God, but under the Word of God.

You wrote, "So, when in doubt, (you know those times when the Church contradicts scripture), beleive the Church and not scripture? WOW!"

As a student of Scripture, I do not see a contradiction of the Church in Scripture. I do, however, see a fulfillment of the Scriptures in the Church and a Church that is more Biblical than any other ecclesial communities found today.

I do have a question for you. Why do you post this sort of material? Is it to engender emotional dispute, to draw anger from your Catholic audience, or to evoke anything contrary to the spirit of the Gospel?

I would like to refer you to our LORD's words in Matt 12:36-37 - "I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."

God bless,

Carson

CCC 1790. A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

CCC 1791 - This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin. In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

[ March 06, 2002, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]

 

Hi Deacon's Son,

Thank you for your comments.

There is evidence in Matthew's Gospel that this sacrament was administered in the church of the NT. We read in the 9th chapter of his Gospel:

Matt 9:2-8 - And behold, they brought to him a paralytic, lying on his bed; and when Jesus saw their faith he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven." And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, "This man is blaspheming." But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, "Why do you think evil in your hearts? For which is easier, to say, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Rise and walk'? But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins" -- he then said to the paralytic -- "Rise, take up your bed and go home." And he rose and went home. When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to men.

Matthew adds "who had given such authority to men", which is not in Mark's rendering of the event, probably because the presbyters in his ecclesial community administered the sacrament of penance.

I can find no other reason for this addition in Matthew's rendering of the Story of the Paralytic.

God bless,

Carson

 

I felt compelled to post again because I am truly amazed at the venom being spewed by some on this thread. Now I know that this is a Baptist-run board and that we should all expect to have our views challenged. I appreciate that. But honestly, is it just me or do mean-spirited attacks by Baptists on this thread seem to be going un-checked? I will refrain from going any further lest this post be deleted, but I think we all know who I am talking about.

For Christ's sake, I think we should all take a deeeeep breath before typing something that a seeker might find to be contradictory of the love we share in service to our Lord. Baptist and Catholic alike.

Our unity in Christ is much more important than our inability to see eye to eye on all subjects.

God Bless.

IOA,
Deacon's Son

 

Deacon's Son you quoted
"Only God forgives sins. (Mk 2:7) Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, 'The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins' and exercises this divine power: 'Your sins are forgiven.' (Mk 2:5, 10; Lk 7:48). Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name. (Jn 20:21-23)" CCC 1441.

That is taken out of context. If Jesus was to give us the authority to forgive sins then why do we need God? Jesus is our advocate between God and Man. No human being can forgive sins for let God be true and every man a liar. What would be the purpose of Jesus dying on the cross when all he had to do was say to mankind I give you the authority to forgive sins on earth. Jesus had to die to take upon himself all of our sins so that we can come before the Father through Jesus. Not through some priest but through Jesus. Priest have no authority whatsoever to forgive sins. That is for God and God only. Priests who hide confessions of men are just as guilty as the one who has committed the crime. Praise the Lord that we are not all catholics, can you imagine all of the confessions of the crimes that have been committed and never being told, in my opinion catholics give their congregation the license to kill because their priests will never tell.

[ March 06, 2002, 12:30 AM: Message edited by: Promise ]

 

Dear Friends,

I'm amazed at the effort to attack Catholic priests so quickly. Part of the reason is that Catholic priests are held to a higher standard partially because of their vow of celebacy.

But in spite of all the criticism, let me ask you this:

Have you ever heard of a priest breaking the seal of the confessional?

Now I'm sure that it has happened somewhere sometime, but it is so incredible rare that not only have I never heard of it, I've never heard of anyone else hearing of it.

That is something sacred. I must tell you I have frequently heard of Protestant ministers breaking their vows of confidence. I have heard it first hand also.

I recently talked to a Protestant pastor. He said (speaking of keeping the seal of the confessional) "Those guys are amazing (Catholic priests). That is so important it must be bred into them at birth. As a Protestant pastor, there is so much pressure on us to preach well, that I think we violate confidences, frequently and unintentionally, because we are always looking for examples and stories to use in our sermons."

This man's heart was breaking over something and he had no one to talk. He couldn't reveal his problem to a fellow pastor because he could not be assured that it would not be used against him in the future.

I hurt for him, wishing that he had the opportunity to use the confessional.

As for the Catholic priests who violated children. It is a hideous crime and should be punished. But it is so rare an occurance. We all know if a priest is involved, it will get extra "air time".

I was reading a large metro paper recently. Half the front page dealt with the problem in Boston. On page 13, with no tie to the front page, was the story about the Hare Krishnas. Hundreds of children, possible thousands, have been molested in Hare Krishna homes / orphanages. And this occurred recently not 25 years ago.

Grace and peace,
Uncle Ray