this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
748 points (99.3% liked)

News

29396 readers
3100 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Catholic Church has issued a warning to its clergy in Washington state: Any priest who complies with a new law requiring the reporting of child abuse confessions to authorities will be excommunicated.

https://www.newsweek.com/catholic-church-excommunicate-priests-following-new-us-state-law-2069039

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 46 points 6 days ago (27 children)

The worlds largest pedophile ring doing gods work I guess.

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 25 points 5 days ago

: reads headline

Woo! Good for them! Stick it to The Man!

: reads article body

ahhhh fuck these guys

[–] kworpy@lemm.ee 31 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] StonerCowboy@lemm.ee 14 points 6 days ago

Agreed its a cancer on humanity. Fake ass shit.

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 27 points 6 days ago

I was really hoping they'd be refusing to comply with unjust laws. If they wanted ways to look like the good guys, these days we've got plenty.

[–] TheRealKuni@midwest.social 28 points 6 days ago (11 children)

Separation of church and state goes both ways.

Confession is a religious rite. Try to legislate that rite is a violation of that separation.

Priests are bound by their office to maintain absolute confidentiality of confessed sins. Otherwise people are not likely to confess their sins.

It doesn’t matter how you, personally, feel about this or their religion or the value of confession as a sacrament, that’s their religion. The state doesn’t get to intervene.

The church should stay out of state affairs, and the state should stay out of church affairs. Exceptions exist, like when practices are outright criminal in themselves. But the state cannot compel a priest to violate their office. This is long accepted. You cannot compel a priest to testify about confession, for example.

Priests can encourage people to go to the police, but that’s it. Their role in confession is between the sinner and their god.

[–] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yeah religion is a great cover for abusing kids.

[–] phx@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 days ago (5 children)

This isn't about priests abusing kids (though that's definitely a recurring issue as well), it's about people who have done so confessing such to a priest.

I'm not religious so don't really have any stake in this, but it's interesting that it is specifically about child sex abuse and not other major crimes such as rape, murder etc. That makes me worried as "for children" is often used as a testing ground for stuff that will be expanded upon later, and there's a lot of stuff people likely confess - supposedly under strict confidence - to their religious figures.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] kevin2107@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (16 children)

This is disgusting, doctors need to report the same thing. Its child abuse its basically saying you support pedofilia. Unless that's what you're covering up in your thinly veiled argument. The Catholic church should not be a safe haven for pedophiles.

[–] TheRealKuni@midwest.social 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

This is disgusting, doctors need to report the same thing.

Doctors are not religious figures. Doctor patient confidentiality is not an absolute protected by the first amendment (with legal precedent).

Its child abuse its basically saying you support pedofilia. Unless that's what you're covering up in your thinly veiled argument.

That’s a nice false equivalence. I’m impressed that you managed to get from “priests cannot be compelled by the state to violate their religious office” to supporting pedophilia.

The Catholic church should not be a safe haven for pedophiles.

I agree. That’s a larger problem though.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (21 children)

Exceptions exist, like when practices are outright criminal in themselves

Aiding and abetting criminals is a crime.

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 13 points 5 days ago

A priest is substantially closer to a therapist in function than to a lawyer.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago (3 children)

A curious question. Why isn't everyone a mandatory reporter for child abuse? And assuming there is a good reason why, then why are doctors and such specifically seperated out. And do priests fit that same criteria?

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 20 points 6 days ago

You've touched on a key point, I think. Doctors and other professionals have mandatory reporting because a) they are in positions of respect and trust within the community, and b) they are professionals, as defined in law, and have standards to uphold.

Priests definitely meet the definition of a), however b) is a bit of a sticking point: their role isn't defined by law, but by the church. Furthermore, a court can order you to go to therapy sessions, but they can't order you to go to confession - it's completely voluntary. A therapist could tease out previous abuse, but a priest will only hear what the confessor wants to tell them about.

I'm in line with you in thinking that everyone should report abuse, but I think that a priest has more in common with an average person in this regard compared to a person working in a legally protected profession. There would be legal consequences for impersonating a therapist, but not for impersonating a priest.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It has to do with professional training and responsibility (duty of care), coupled with kids trusting them more and they are considered to have some para-custodial responsibility for children.

Priests aren't entirely in that category, but they probably should be, the question is the relationship of the priests, ie a random priest who heard a rumor is very different from one who heard confession or tends the victim or abuser directly.

Also, you don't want to empower random-ass people too much, people are absolute fucking morons and media will incite them to do something more moronic:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/vigilante-mob-attacks-home-of-paediatrician-710864.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

Inbred rednecks just danger incarnate, empowering them in any way is insane and will guarantee needess innocent victims.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago

Why isn’t everyone a mandatory reporter for child abuse?

Why isn't everyone a mandatory reporter for any crime?

There have been numerous societies in history where ratting out one's neighbors was expected behavior. None of them were fit places for people to live.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago (2 children)

To be fair and if we consider Catholic lore and dogma technically any kind of breach of the confessional seal is a major breach in Catholic law or whatever. So I understand this from a faith based perspective.

On the other hand, I'm an atheist so fuck the confessional seal and report major crimes. Especially fucking child abuse! Any kind of child abuse!

[–] nerv@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Catholics and all christians by extension are also bound to do good and protect those who can't defend themselves.

I'm going to risk that denouncing and delivering to secular authoroties those who practice one of the most heinous acts we can think of falls under that responsibility.

Or because the church has lost its power to deliver "justice" of their accord (read inquisition and the follow up torture and mutilation) it has also lost the will to persecute evil deeds?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 16 points 6 days ago

Geez... I never thought I would see so much support for religious bullshit on this site. I'd rather see fewer children harmed than preserve the "sanctity" of confession, and every excommunicated priest is a priest with actual integrity.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Mixed feelings

Obviously the clergy have absolute values which they believe come from god, so obviously they're not equipped to make exceptions such as this as individuals. You would have to appeal the to pope and cardinals directly to change the rules.

How does the state intend to enforce this? Is there a priest registry in washington state, and does it account for all recognized religions for tax purposes? Are they going to take away peoples license to preach?

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 13 points 6 days ago (4 children)

During the investigation of child sexual abuse, if the perpetrator is a Catholic, they'll ask if the abuser confessed. If so, the priest is liable to be prosecuted.

Honestly, my biggest problem with the law is how unlikely it is to ever be prosecuted. Proving that an abuser confessed would be impossible. They are infringing on the First Amendment and ensuring that no abuser ever talks to their priest, but in practice priests probably won't follow the law and if they don't the state is unlikely to actually enforce the law.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago

This isn’t really news. This has always been their stance. Priests will always urge the person to turn them self in for true repentance but they won’t ever break the confidentiality of confession.

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

It's funny, the post above this one on my feed is a bunch of people crowing about how you'd have to be a "tankie" to not support the new head of this organization.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The directive came from the Archidiocese of Seattle, not (apparently) the Vatican. This archdiocese has been at the center of the scandal that prompted the law, so it looks like the archbishop may be doubling down on the cover-up.

[–] aaron@infosec.pub 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The Catholic church is hardly going to allow priests to be forced to go to the police and admit crimes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] theotherbelow@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Excommunicated vs Imprisoned. The choice is yours.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Imprisoned for what? I can't see how any jury could ever convict someone "beyond a reasonable doubt" or what not on someone saying something. Most prosecutors would likely say you'd need more evidence to even start building a case. Now if the person went to the police and reported being sexually assaulted and then the priest came forward it might go somewhere, but even then it may not go anywhere if there wasn't evidence. They have to prove someone performed an illegal act, which someone's word counts for shit. We could get 1,000,000 people to say pdiddy raped Selina Gomez, but without any other evidence, it shouldn't go anywhere with the way our justice system is set up.

Public Defender: "were you there?" Priest: "No"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›