Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. If love ought to guide all our actions, I can't imagine a set of circumstances where allegations against anybody backed up with credible evidence ought be covered up in any way.
   Perhaps Canon law permits the possibility of allegations being investigated and taken before a Church tribunal. In those circumstances possibly one could imagine the Church not disclosing such allegations to secular authority.
   Any thoughts for a sincere, possibly naive, enquirer?

   Posted By: Patrick Greenrod

2. The original article mentions toward the end that the church authority who became aware of the priest's history of paedophilia heard about it in the sacrament of confession. If that is the case, then, silence would seem to be the right to do.
   'At the Murcia conference, the cardinal said that Pican did not denounce Bissey because the priest had told sins in the confessional, where secrecy is respected under the law.'

   Posted By: Peter K

3. If the reality matches the account in this article, then it's appalling.

   Posted By: Marie H

4. 'Cardinal Castrillon's invocation of the confessional seal conflicts with a statement from Bishop Pican, who told French prosecutors that Father Bissey admitted his abuse during a private conversation -- which, unlike a sacramental confession, would not be privileged under the law. Moreover, if the bishop felt that he was bound by the confessional seal, he could not mention the priest's misconduct to anyone, including Cardinal Castrillon.'
   Catholic World News Report
   Does Bishop Pican's testimony suggest that Cardinal Castrillon is trying to excuse his own error and blame it on others?
   
   
   

   Posted By: Honoria

5. Perhaps the above article is a good reason for not hurrying the beautification/canonisation of John Paul II.
   It has never been wise to hurry these arrangements because you don't know - as now - if there is any skeleton in the cupboard. As one correspondent suggested, perhaps there is a possibility of allegations being investigated and taken before a Church Tribunal - why?
   I thought this point had been argued out over the centuries in England when various kings tried to ensure that clerics breaking the secular law should be tried in a secular court. Have we gone backwards? Canon law should only be invoked surely for church matters.

   Posted By: gloria healey

6. To be the leader of any group of people is to accept responsibility for their transgressions. CEOs do it. Generals do it. Presidents (like Nixon) are forced to do it. So should the Pope.

   Posted By: AndrewP

7. 'The Holy Father authorised me to send this letter to all bishops in the world and publish it on the internet.'
   The letter was written in 2001. Was a copy sent to 'all bishops in the world' then? Did it appear on the internet then? Where?

   Posted By: Fr Sean Coyle

8. Until every fact is verified I'd wait. Did the Cardinal say exactly what he is reported to have said?
   If he did how do we know what he told John Paul in regard to this matter or whether Johm Paul did read and approve the letter he did send out?
   Perhaps the Cardinal is one of the 'wolves' Pope Benedict has to deal with, or perhaps he is simply a man frightened of being brought up on charges of impeding the course of justice in civil and/or canon law?
   Time will tell; he is another one to add to the prayer list!

   Posted By: Bernadette

9. What a disgrace. The Vatican must publicly name those who hid priests and publicly deal with them. No more hidden agendas.

   Posted By: Mike S

10. I stand before God and say this;
    The seal of the confessional is not always kept. Nor are confidential Marriage Tribunal or Baptismal records.
    

    Posted By: L Newington

11. Let us understand that confession charges the priest to forgive or retain the sins of the penitent.
    A good confessor would have thrown out the penitent from the confessional if the person was not prepared to seek proper help. Indeed it is possible to use the confessional as a fake salve for our being.
    Padre Pio was a good example of a priest who on more than one occasion sent the penitent away without absolution.

    Posted By: Ron Fisher

12. I confused. Now that the pope has recommended that bishops report priests to civil authorities what happens if the bishop comes to this knowledge in the confessional?
    Is the “seal of the confessional” still in place?
    What if civil authorities do not recognise the “seal of the confessional”?
    What is the bishop to do?
    

    Posted By: AlexP

13. JP II dead and buried. How convenient.
    L Newington, confidential marriage tribunal documents, perhaps you would care to elaborate.
    Confidential baptismal records? Other than normal contemporary privacy concerns, I have never heard baptismal records described as confidential.
    Now the confessional seal. That is another matter. If you have any solid evidence that a confessor has broken the seal, you are obliged in conscience to inform the Ordinary.

    Posted By: Marco Elliott

14. What were the assembled Bishops, Priests and Laypeople applauding? I am confused!

    Posted By: gavin

15. Conversation is a different word from Confession!

    Posted By: david anthony davies

16. The way forward obviously is for a strict policy of adherence to the good things that even the pagans know. So what is our problem as supposed believers?
    The Sacrament of Confession is only for the genuine and not for cowards who refuse to agree to turn themselves in.
    St Paul enjoins us all to observe the secular law and governance of the secular auhorities insofar as the criminal law matches Divine law.

    Posted By: Michael Webb

17. L Newington: if you know confidentiality was betrayed you need to inform the Bishop. It is a serious matter and your courage in coming foraward may help the person concerned from ending up another lost sheep.

    Posted By: Honoria

18. An interesting article in the National Catholic Reporter makes me dubious of the Cardinal's claims. I doubt his version of events in regard to abuse can be trusted.
    'Castrillon took up cause of priest who admitted molesting minors', Apr. 22, 2010, by Jason Berry.
    

    Posted By: Bernadette

19. Honoria and David Anthony davies:
    It has been established in the law of Australia and other countries that any admission of guilt in a conversation with a clergyman – even if not a sacramental confession, and even if the clergyman is a protestant – is privileged under the law and may not be used in evidence against the person.
    

    Posted By: Peter G

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. British Archbishop issues full apology for abuses

   The Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, has issued an apology to the five million faithful in England and Wales, and to the victims of clerical sexual abuse.

2. Ex-Munich VG was Pope's fall guy, says magazine

   Former Munich Vicar-General Fr Gerhard Gruber claims he was pressured into taking responsibility for the transfer of a pedophile priest during the tenure of then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

3. Pope promises action on clerical sex abuse

   Pope Benedict has promised church action to confront the clerical abuse scandal, in remarks to his weekly public audience in St Peter's Square.

4. French Church launches drive for more priests

   France's Catholic church has launched a public campaign for more priests.

5. Pope marks fifth anniversary as head of "wounded and sinner" church

   On the fifth anniversary of his election as pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI says he does not feel alone at the head of what he called a "wounded and sinner" church.