Foxy,

"We have the one set of laws and those are
the ones passed by our Parliament and we are all
supposed to abide by them"

Have you forgotten recent discussions re Tribal Law?

The State can pass laws abolishing the seal of the confessional but it cannot stop the Pope or the Bishops from making General Confession the norm in any country that passes such a law.
This is, in effect, silent confession and the priest gives a General Absolution.

So get around that!

@ mise:
"This is... silent confession and the priest gives a General Absolution. So get around that!"

What meaningless blather!

If that is all that confessional means, then fair enough - you are welcome to it. Confess to nothing, admit to nothing and the priest knows nothing. The absolution, "general" though it may be, is no more meaningful or heartfelt than the confession which preceded it.

However, if those who choose to actually confess and do thus admit to crimes that are legally reportable by priests, then the law must be complied with.

Indeed, as far as I know, there is no legal exemption to reporting for priests, so the law is the law and religion is only a valueless opinion.

Get around that!

//The State can pass laws abolishing the seal of the confessional but it cannot stop the Pope or the Bishops from making General Confession the norm in any country that passes such a law.
This is, in effect, silent confession and the priest gives a General Absolution.

So get around that!//

No, it isn't that simple. General Absolution is only a valid form of the Sacrament of Penance under very specific circumstances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolution#General_absolution

To Peter Bowden

Hypothetically speaking, what do you think will occure if the confessional is mandated to report confessions that deal with child abusers? Think it through to the end please.

If priests are the target of these confessional reports and they are aware of this rule when they take office, then what is the likelihood that they will confess a sin of child abuse to a fellow priest? The only two thoughts I can come up with is:

1). A priest guilty of this sin, of this crime, will not confess it and nothing to help the sitution will result.

2). Instead of desantifying the confessional, it becomes more sanctified. Thereby more priests might sill confess their sin (if and when they do sin against children), even though they know it will likely be reported. Because of their position as a priest being right with God might be more important then having their sins turned to the authorities.

Of these two potential outcomes which one do you think your views will lead to? More help with reducing child abuse among priests, or less help to reduce child abuse among priests? (Or no effect at all).

(Continued)

(Continued)

With this in mind I think there are other means that should be tried to fight against child abuse among priests.

One is to reduce the workload of priests in the congressionals they serve by having a call for more people to serve in their churches and have Christians be more active in their church ministries. If this is done, then priests will hopefully not be tempted to do wrong with children, because they won't be alone with them as much. Or because more people will answer that call and become priests themselves reducing the workload over large communities and hopefully reduce the stress that might break a priest to sin by taking it out on children.

Another means to try is to allow priests to marry. If there is less sexual tension because they have a wife to love, then they will (again) hopefully lower the amount of abuses given to children.

By making confessionals an unsafe place to confess sins, this would likely cause a rift in people coming to confessionals, instead of making them a means of reducing or stoping sin.