384
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by nothingcorporate@lemmy.today to c/news@lemmy.world

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] orclev@lemmy.world 219 points 2 weeks ago

I read the headline and was prepared to support the church on this one (for once). Then I read the first paragraph of the article. I have never made a 180 on an opinion so fast. The fuck is wrong with the Catholic church and child abuse? Why is this a constant problem with them?

[-] Photuris@lemmy.ml 98 points 2 weeks ago

Imagine if any other type of organization had this sort of systemic problem with child abuse.

“Wow, there sure are a lot of pedophile employees at Apple Computer abusing their customers’ children.”

“Dang, the US Department of Transportation sure does have a kiddie diddler problem.”

“Holy shit, what’s the deal with all the abusive perverts working at Ronald McDonald House?”

Sounds absolutely bonkers, right‽

If any secular organization was having this kind of problem at scale, we’d all be calling for their blood. Yet the church gets a pass somehow. A few complaints, a few lawsuits, some big scandals, some negative press, but fundamentally nothing ever changes.

To hell with the church.

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 weeks ago
[-] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 2 weeks ago

Do the Boy Scouts have a legally protected mechanism to talk with each other about their child fucking that I’m not aware of?

[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

They do not. Your point of distinction is valid.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

I think Boy Scouts have done a better job reforming than the Catholic church.

[-] Darleys_Brew@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago

That’s affiliated with the church so it’s probably ok.

[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

You're out of date. A lot of scouts exist apart from churches now. Hypocritically, the churches are distancing themselves from scouts which have reformed.

[-] Darleys_Brew@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

I just looked it up off the back of your comment, things have changed since I was a scout.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

Wasn't their founder Lord Baden-Powell a nonce?

[-] Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

They do affiliate themselves with Christianity - maybe not Catholicism specifically, but the Catholic Church is hardly the only denomination of this cult that can’t keep their hands/mouths off of kids’ genitals.

Frankly if I ever had kids I’d have a gaggle of drag queens babysit before I let any even slightly religiously affiliated group near them.

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago

Same here. Leary of any adult dude who wants to hang out with kids that don’t include their own child in the mix.

[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I think you should make some exceptions. Youth (including scouts) need mentors to develop skills. Just because my kids age won't change that. I'll still feel the Call. It's very rewarding to see a kiddo grow. Totally redefined my concept of "legacy".

[-] 5715@feddit.org 12 points 2 weeks ago

I don't want to derail the discussion, but Churches aren't the only organisation attracting/raising child sexual abusers. Sports clubs are an example for secular organisations facing a similar problem.

Sports clubs on the other hand don't have this kind of power and history as organised religion.

Sports clubs would simply be banned, but try to ban the Catholic Church in a place with a Catholic majority.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean, you joke, kind of, but a massive, MASSIVE amount of QAnon bullshit that drives current rightwingers in the US is literally nothing but inventing fake demonic pedophile cults and putting anyone they don't like in these made up cults...

All so that they can demonize others, and what this functionally does is give these nutjobs an infinite well of whataboutisms to either shift a conversation about pederasty and child abuse in any christian church/sect ... over to 'the even worserer badderer people'...

...or just do something akin to a 'no true scotsman' and claim that anyone in any church who is a pedo or child abuser... well actually they're not a real christian, they're a secret demonic cult member who is embedded in the organization to both commit evil and also to discredit the church when they are exposed.

The purpose of a system is what it does, not what it claims to do.

These people invented what is essentially their own new religion, a religion dlc, which entirely serves as a mechanism to avoid and make impossible discussions of actual child sa, abuse, going on in the institutions they revere.

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 42 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The entire religion is based on shame and fear. The clergy take advantage of both.

[-] cocolowlander@feddit.nl 19 points 2 weeks ago

This isn't just Catholic church thing. It's rampant in any religion, organization, hierarchy, etc. where the person on top of the totem pole demand obedience, they are insulated from outside accountability, and there is a culture of secrecy.

Go probe Ultra-orthodox Jews, Amish community, Quranic Schools. It's rife with sexual abuse.

[-] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 weeks ago

It's a constant problem because its a cult that wants to protect its cult members. It finds no issue with indoctrinating kids, to the point where nobody batted an eye when they recently (like, in the past 10 years) decreased the age at which children go through the sacrament of Confirmation. The same sacrament that is meant to affirm your adulthood in the church, where you say, "I may have been told to practice this by my parents before, but now I'm an adult now and choose to practice it of my own volition."

They do this when children are thirteen years old. Thirteen.

When I was fifteen I did not have the capacity to make this decision for myself. Now I have to live with the fact I'm on a list somewhere as an adult in the church. The Catholic Church is an evil institution that uses trauma for the purpose of coercion.

[-] tomenzgg@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

For a century now, the option has been at some point between 7 and 16, at the diocese's discretion. I received mine around 16; 13 sounds like an outlier, to me.

[-] tomenzgg@midwest.social 1 points 1 week ago

I truly wonder what's going through someone's head when they downvote purely factual statements. I didn't even give an opinion here.

[-] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I can explain what's going through my head for you. I downvoted you because your purely factual statement seems to completely miss and is entirely irrelevant to my point -- that coercing a child to declare themselves an adult in the eyes of a particular social group, to declare that they have the agency to consider such a thing that is supposed to be a LIFE LONG decision, is straight up wrong.

Doesn't matter if it has been in place for a century, if age 13 is an outlier, or if you think 16 is old enough because that's when you had to do it. It's whack, and your justification is whack. I downvoted you instead of engaging because most of the time it's not worth entertaining someone who justifies the cult I was indoctrinated into as a child, from which I had to spend many years deconstructing the hate for others -- often the lowliest groups of individuals -- that Catholicism had fomented in my child and adolescent heart. Forgive my harshness, but I'm not going to act like this thing that made me into a spiteful hateful kid -- towards the exact groups of people that Jesus tells us to love the most -- is a good thing.

[-] nothingcorporate@lemmy.today 17 points 2 weeks ago

Oh yeah, my bad for not including what it's about. I'll edit that back into the post.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Personally, I think it goes back to the Catholic Church's special status as its own sovereign country. They didnt just elect a Pope this week. They elected an absolute monarch. Even though that monarch's territory is only .5 sqkm, it used to be much larger, and the Church literally has outposts everywhere indirectly subject to its rule.

And a key thing to understand is that the Church doesn't use confession to hide crimes from just anyone. If some random Catholic confessed to a priest that he was diddling kids, you can bet that as part of the penance, the priest would tell that person to turn themselves in to the authorities. But we know what has happened when the confessor was a priest.

The Church was always super arrogant when it came to transgressions by its own people. To them, subjecting a priest to civil law makes just as much sense as subjecting an Italian to Australian law. When a priest confessed he was diddling kids, they would handle it in their own manner, without getting the local authorities involved.

That's the real reason why this law is written the way it is. It's to keep the Church from hiding its own people. The Church, as an institution, has proven over the years that it can't be trusted on that front.

I haven't read the law, but it would be interesting if it explicitly allowed a "mandatory reporter" to satisfy the requirement by facilitating the transgressor to turn themselves in. That is a clear way out of this problem, keeping the confidentiality intact while keeping the local government's jurisdiction over crimes as well.

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

If some random Catholic confessed to a priest that he was diddling kids, you can bet that as part of the penance, the priest would tell that person to turn themselves in to the authorities. But we know what has happened when the confessor was a priest.

This is the thing that's bugging me. People are taking the Catholic church's history with priests committing child abuse, then making a blind logical leap that Catholics in general are child abusers (or a significant number of them). It's twisting the feelings about Catholic priests and targeting them at a wider group. What's happening here is insidious.

How many Catholics are child molesters, and how many of them are confessing in church, and what penance were they given?

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 2 points 2 weeks ago

I haven’t read the law, but it would be interesting if it explicitly allowed a “mandatory reporter” to satisfy the requirement by facilitating the transgressor to turn themselves in.

Here's a link to the law as passed.

It doesn't seem to explicitly allow what you are suggesting but I supposed the "or cause a report to be made" clause could be interpreted that way.

[-] Regna@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

I agree and I agree. However, as a being that was indoctrinated and abused by the church, I still have to point to the ”Sacrament of Confession”, which… yeah… evil bastards.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Because that is what they are.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

To be fair, lawyers get to avoid this (I assume). This isn't the same obviously, but if you view it from their frame of reference it is even more important. They must confess if they want to be "saved from God", and similarly you should be honest with your lawyer to be saved from the court.

I don't know where I stand on this issue. I obviously want them to be caught, and the religion is bogus, and the organization causes tremendous harm. However, if someone believes it's true then this is pretty significant overreach and directly interferes with religious practice. The start with the crime most people will agree with, and then it sets a precident to go after other crimes in the same fashion. I'm too skeptical of the state to trust it'll always be a good thing.

To be fair, lawyers get to avoid this (I assume).

Lawyers don't get to avoid this. They need to, in fact they are forced to, otherwise the entire legal system fails. There is no justice without privileged defense. That's literally in the fifth amendment.

The desire for clergy not to be mandated reporters goes in the opposite direction from what you suggest. The slippery slope here doesn't lead to breaking freedom of religion, it leads to a religious organization hiding crimes whenever they want.

Leaving an exception in for the confessional when it comes to mandatory reporting would allow any religious group that had a mandate for secrecy to say, ‘We don’t have to report anything.’”

Confession requires penitance. They must confess and repent to God, but there is no reason why the penitance for Catholic confession can't involve actually fucking answering for your crimes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

Is it a constant problem? How many child molesters are confessing in church? How many Catholics are child molesters?

The Catholic church's history with child abuse is to do with Priests and the church covering for them. This is new spin, suggesting that Catholics as a whole contains a lot of child molesters, but I've not seen any evidence showing that.

load more comments (23 replies)
this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
384 points (99.2% liked)

News

29513 readers
2417 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