Should a priest be forced to testify about a confession he heard about sexual abuse?
That’s a case that was before the Louisiana Supreme Court and the court said “yes”. Some are saying this case is complicated but I disagree if the statements made under oath by the abused child are in any way true.
If it’s true that the priest advised the minor child at the time to “handle the situation herself” as is alleged, and did not report a crime to authorities then I think that the diocese and the priest should be held liable.
There’s the church though, screaming “First Amendment” violation. I’m not seeing a violation of anything but the law, which if all are not held to the same standard, why should any?
Of course there are some that are agreeing with the church’s view and here is what really had me banging my head on the table from this blog:
“I welcome the expertise of lawyers who read this blog. This is a very serious situation. I take no position on whether or not the priest handled the particular situation in the parish wisely or justly, but let there be no mistake: the seal of the confessional must be inviolable.”
So this blogger is saying that it’s okay for a priest to break the law? Because, you know, “Church Doctrine” or something. It was unwise advice? It’s criminal in my opinion.
I don’t think the framers had any intention of giving any religious organization a free pass from the law: just the ability to practice their religion without interference from the state. I’m for that as long as those practices do not endanger anyone.
I hope that when this hits Federal Court, as it surely will, the federal courts agree with the Louisiana Supreme Court.