Prayers for the Catholic Church

[JohnH]

The fact that that YouTube video uses voice from the time Robert Prevost was not Pope, mixed with a picture of him in the garb of Pope Leo is in itself IMHO deliberately misleading. Regarding if he said these words, he did NOT say them in the role of Pope as any sort of official position of the entire RCC, hence mixing that picture, audio, and referencing it as “Leo says…” is wrong.

It is no different than finding audio of a president 10 years ago and matching it with a picture of his as President. There is nothing wrong with saying”so and so said this 10 years ago, perhaps his position is still the same”. But the presentation should be honest and clear IMHO.

It seems to have some kind of AI based "cleanup" to remove gaps and enhance the audio. Unfortunately, that makes it useless to listen to, because I don't know if whoever composed this also changed 1% of the words he said.

[temporal1]

The fact that that YouTube video uses voice from the time Robert Prevost was not Pope, mixed with a picture of him in the garb of Pope Leo is in itself IMHO deliberately misleading. Regarding if he said these words, he did NOT say them in the role of Pope as any sort of official position of the entire RCC, hence mixing that picture, audio, and referencing it as “Leo says…” is wrong.

It is no different than finding audio of a president 10 years ago and matching it with a picture of his as President. There is nothing wrong with saying”so and so said this 10 years ago, perhaps his position is still the same”. But the presentation should be honest and clear IMHO.

It seems to have some kind of AI based "cleanup" to remove gaps and enhance the audio. Unfortunately, that makes it useless to listen to, because I don't know if whoever composed this also changed 1% of the words he said.

i appreciate all this, believe me, i learned a lot from kind forum members when i initially joined MD 100 years ago.
i’d never been on a forum, didn’t intend to be on MD.

Example, ohio jones had to tell me huffpost was a lib source. i think that’s a good benchmark to describe who i am.

It was family shared desktop computers back then. Tech things continue to change. Too much for me.

My family didn’t want me to register at all. They warned about scams, etc. (They’re used to it now.)

However.
i wouldn’t expect Pope Leo to make a significant departure from his established faith beliefs in his role as pope.

Due to his age, i don’t think there’s any rush to presume.
Due to my age, he’ll likely be the last pope in my lifetime.

Most would probably prefer to see far more honesty on the internets.
i’ve sometimes wondered how the internet would vary if it had come along 100+ years ago, when editors were “stronger”?
Footnotes, sources, etc., were taught and required.

[temporal1]

See also P.8+11 .. Confession

June 17 / “Orthodox churches join Catholic bishops in suing Washington state over confession law”
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news ... ession-law

[JayP]

I do not think there is much question the Church will win this lawsuit. The compelling argument is that ONLY Clergy are named. The idea that a school nurse retains privileged conversation status or “therapist” who may well or even hold a medical degree yet the confessional alone is stripped of historical legal protections is a gross violation of Constitutional law.

Every religious person should object because this law is not about the Catholic Church, child abuse, or the seal of the confessional. It is a bare faced open attack on religious practices and an example that many on the left have no real belief in the Constitution.

It is far more than a slippery slope.

[temporal1]

I do not think there is much question the Church will win this lawsuit. The compelling argument is that ONLY Clergy are named. The idea that a school nurse retains privileged conversation status or “therapist” who may well or even hold a medical degree yet the confessional alone is stripped of historical legal protections is a gross violation of Constitutional law.

Every religious person should object because this law is not about the Catholic Church, child abuse, or the seal of the confessional. It is a bare faced open attack on religious practices and an example that many on the left have no real belief in the Constitution.

It is far more than a slippery slope.

i agree. i hope you’re correct it will be overturned. unanimously would be great.
(i think) my forum history reflects consistent (passion) for victims of abuse, esp children, minors, the vulnerable. i consider this healthy human development. even healthy young children grasp the gravity of abuse of the vulnerable. their tender hearts break.
it’s a non issue.

even if there is no evil intent, in the least it’s a poorly construed bill that reeks of ignorance and thoughtlessness.

so much damage is done as a result of unintended consequences. typically based on faulty human reasoning.

[Ken]

I do not think there is much question the Church will win this lawsuit. The compelling argument is that ONLY Clergy are named. The idea that a school nurse retains privileged conversation status or “therapist” who may well or even hold a medical degree yet the confessional alone is stripped of historical legal protections is a gross violation of Constitutional law.

Every religious person should object because this law is not about the Catholic Church, child abuse, or the seal of the confessional. It is a bare faced open attack on religious practices and an example that many on the left have no real belief in the Constitution.

It is far more than a slippery slope.

Nothing you just wrote is remotely correct.

First of all, all educational and health care professionals in Washington are already mandatory reporters and have been so for decades. So you are wrong, school nurses and therapists have always been required to report child abuse. Washington was one of only a small handful of states that did not require clergy to report child abuse. At least 45 other states (depending on what list you look at) already require clergy to report child abuse so Washington was simply joining the rest of the modern world. Maybe look up the actual law in question, it is available online: https://dcyf.wa.gov/safety/mandated-reporter

Many other states including Texas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, West Virginia, and New Hampshire also don't provide a loophole for confession. There are apparently 17 other states on this list. So Washington is doing nothing unusual there.

Honestly it is not a good look for the Catholic Church with its own past history of abuse to claim the right to aid, abet, and cover up for child abuse. If the Catholic church doesn't want to report child abuse, maybe they shouldn't hold themselves out to children as a trusted and safe authority that children can rely on.

[JohnH]

Ken,

Can you explain to use how stepping into a confessional booth would work now?

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to talk to a lawyer for advice before you confess anything. You have the right to have a lawyer with you during confession. If you decide to confess now without a lawyer present, you have the right to stop confessing at any time."

Priests should be priests, not intermediaries for cops. If other states also don't provide an exception for the confessional seal, those states also have bad laws.

Confession and the confessional seal is thousands of years old, and should be respected as a legitimate religious practice. The confessional booth is not an interrogation room. If the police want to catch child abusers, then the police should do their jobs.

[Ken]

Ken,

Can you explain to use how stepping into a confessional booth would work now?

Child abusers typically don't confess to anyone, priests or otherwise. What happens in the real world is that children do. So the actual scenario is this:

An 8 year old child who is being sexually abused by a neighbor, parent, uncle, older sibling, teacher, or another clergy finally winds up the courage to tell a trusted adult about it in the hopes that it will stop. Or maybe the child thinks that SHE is at fault (and that is why she is confessing). And so decides to tell her priest because he is one of the few trusted adults that she might be alone with and have the opportunity to do so away from her abuser.

And so the priest who has built themselves up as a trusted adult for that child is now going to sit on that information and violate that child's trust by doing nothing? Just let the abuse continue because it was discovered during confession? An 8 year old child knows nothing of reporting laws. She simply told an adult she trusted because she wants the abuse to stop.

That is the most likely real world scenario we are talking about here. You have a Bible. Tell us where Jesus comes down on the question of protecting little children versus protecting the institutional prerogatives of the church.

As a teacher I'm a mandatory reporter under the law and this has come up twice in my career. It wasn't the parent coming to me and confessing to abuse. In one case it was a student who came to me and told me what was happening at home. In another case it was a friend of a student who told me that she thought her friend was in an abusive relationship and that someone needed to intervene. In both cases I notified the school administration and filed a report with child welfare as I'm required to do.

[R7ehr]

Ken,

Can you explain to use how stepping into a confessional booth would work now?

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to talk to a lawyer for advice before you confess anything. You have the right to have a lawyer with you during confession. If you decide to confess now without a lawyer present, you have the right to stop confessing at any time."

Priests should be priests, not intermediaries for cops. If other states also don't provide an exception for the confessional seal, those states also have bad laws.

Confession and the confessional seal is thousands of years old, and should be respected as a legitimate religious practice. The confessional booth is not an interrogation room. If the police want to catch child abusers, then the police should do their jobs.

[Ken]

Ken,

Can you explain to use how stepping into a confessional booth would work now?

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to talk to a lawyer for advice before you confess anything. You have the right to have a lawyer with you during confession. If you decide to confess now without a lawyer present, you have the right to stop confessing at any time."

Priests should be priests, not intermediaries for cops. If other states also don't provide an exception for the confessional seal, those states also have bad laws.

Confession and the confessional seal is thousands of years old, and should be respected as a legitimate religious practice. The confessional booth is not an interrogation room. If the police want to catch child abusers, then the police should do their jobs.

You do realize it typically isn't adult abusers who are going to be confessing to priests. It is children who will be telling the priest that they are being abused because the priest has built themselves up as a trusted authority with whom the child can confide. And the trust being broken here is that of the child who expects help but doesn't get it.