/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>655097

They have lost all credibility as a church.

>>655111

>The Anglicans is a state church

Rather, anglicanism is a state denomination. No idea how that happened.

>>655103

>'church' was created because a king wanted to divorce his wife

>ever having credibility

>>655097

REMINDER THAT COMMON FILTH IS RIGHT ABOUT THE ETERNAL ANGLO

The curious thing is the priest is also forbidden by the canons of the church to pass that (or any) info on, see p33: https://www.canterburydiocese.org/media/forms/safeguarding/diocesanguidelines.pdf

So the statement is true - he may be obligated under civil law to pass on the info, but forbidden by the law of God. Presumably in this case absolution would be withheld until the person did the appropriate action, as the only way out of this Gordian knot.

christianity is dead

So the Anglicans have lost their confessional seal at the same time that UK police have put a confessional seal on muslim sex crimes?

>>655188

> Matthew 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Do you believe in Christ? Then you also must believe that whatever trials we face, that it will all be set right in the end. If you DON'T believe in Christ, then I struggle to understand why you'd be concerned about any of this.

>Anglicans stop protecting sex criminals

APOSTOLICS NO!

Imagine actually being anglican

>>655194

He's talking about the Catholic Church bro.

>>655188

>a protestant sect is dead

>>655188

Christ is risen brother.

>Bless me father for I have sinned

>before we go any further my son, bear in mind that if I believe you have committed an offence, I will report you to the police so they can arrest you

Good job anglicans

>>655178

why would you even listen to that phaggot

>>655187

Actually, we have a hierarchy going on in here. Law of God trumps any civil law.

So no, no Gordian Knot in here.

>Implying earthly law can put God in a Gordian Knot, A Catch-22, or any other kind of dilemma

>>655097

>implying the seal was valid in the first place

>implying any of the "one trues'" seals were valid either

>>655355

>implying implyment

>>655097

I see little wrong with this, the confessional is not a "get out of jail free" card. So long as the disclaimer is up front, and everyone knows.

I can see that it might be a problem with people wishing to confess serious crimes, but they can do that before the authorities – if they are serious about repentance.

>>655647

That's not how confession works or should work.

>>655296

Didn't they say that it's only information about 'ongoing abuse' where they have reason to believe people will be hurt if they don't act, that they will disclose to police? As opposed to Catholic practice which is, I guess:

>I sexually abused my neighbor's kid, father, and I fear I might do it again!

>Say 10 hail Mary's and try not to sin again. But if you do, come back here after your next abuse session and I'll give you some more vain repetitions to say.

I think God can forgive your sins without involving a middleman in the first place, but if you do choose to get a middleman involved, and he knows children will suffer if he doesn't step in, he has a duty to do so.

>>655346

>Be priest

>Someone confesses a major crime (Murder, rape, robbery, molestation etc)

>Your penance is to turn yourself in to the police and confess your crimes

>If you don't you will have no absolution and will burn in hell

Easy solution.

>>655673

the priest is forbidden to command the penitent to reveal his sins, otherwise the confessional seal would have a pretty big loophole. The priest may, however, gently or forcefully advise such an action… but cannot make it an obligatory penance.

>>655665

His duty to God is the confessional seal, which is why people approach him in the first place.

>>655654

Don't see why not, repentance is the purpose of confession. So what is more important? the gold of the temple or that which makes the gold sacred?

>>655965

You can't make gold sacred if it's not there to begin with.

You cannot split confession and repentance.

>>655704

Then refuse absolution. If they are truly penitent they would accept the punishment for their crime.

>>655988

You think the way the world thinks. Besides, that's still forcing the penitent to break the seal, which is not allowed.

>>655995

That is one messed up situation then for a priest who has a psychopath parishioner who is a serial rapist then.

>>655995

It IS allowed. Early confession was done in lent before the altar in front of everyone.

>>656111

>Early confession was done in lent before the altar in front of everyone.

That's not correct… Public confessions happened only for public sins. And even then it was only at the initiative of the penitent.

>>656113

https://qmbarque.com/2013/10/30/the-origins-of-mandatory-private-confession-in-the-catholic-church/

>>656121

Don't see the part about confessing publicly before the altar in that. Also, I think you're confusing public confession with public penance. Those aren't the same thing at all, and that article makes it clear that confession was only required to be done to a priest.

>>656125

>

Tradition developed private confession as a mercy (rather than penalty) to penitents: instead of publicly confessing — which was the norm in the very early centuries of the Church, and where the penances assigned were oftentimes harsh and severe — the Church developed a mechanism for private and anonymous reception of the sacrament, and total secrecy regarding the contents of the confession. Holy priests choose martyrdom over revealing what penitents confess.

>>656129

That's a weird conclusion since there's no solid evidence given for public confession. Regardless, Church discipline has evolved so I don't see the point in that being relevant. A priest is bound under penalty of excommunication to keep the seal of confession, and canon law prohibits him from using confessions to the detriment of the penitent.

Can. 983 §1. The sacramental seal is inviolable;

therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a

penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason.

Can. 984 §1. A confessor is prohibited completely

from using knowledge acquired from confession to the detriment of the penitent

even when any danger of revelation is excluded.

>>656132

I completely agree. However, absolution can be withheld, and public disclosure can be a condition thereof. I hope that's all that they're saying.

>>656148

>public disclosure can be a condition thereof

No, it cannot. Under no circumstances must the seal be broken. Here's the only citation from a priest on the internet I could find quickly:

[quote="bobolink, post:1, topic:212763"]

Can a priest withhold absolution on condition that a penitent hand himself in to law enforcement?

Can a priest compel a penitent to go the the police as a pre-condition for absolution?

[/quote]

No.

And No.

The priest can never require any penitent to do anything which would reveal the penitent's guilt. No. Nay. Never. No never nomore. Nothing.

This comes up every few months, so just to anticipate the follow-up questions, and to anticipate the "but what if….." scenarios, the answer will still be the same: No.

Once again, whatever else gets posted here, because inevitably people will post again and ask "but what if….." The answer will still be the same: No.

One last time, folks, whatever you are thinking of posting, the answer will still be: No.

Unfortunately, I'm sure we'll get the "but what if…" scenarios because someone out there will try to imagine a scenario where the answer will be yes. It won't be. The answer will still be: No.

https://forums.catholic.com/t/withholding-absolution/212763/8

>>656152

You sure?

>>656159

About FrDavid96? Yeah, he's certainly a priest, given how Catholic Answers has strict rules regarding identifying yourself as a priest on their forum.

>>655970

Um, yes you can, by going to confession intending to do nothing meaningful about your guilt

>>656220

>Um, yes you can

No you can't.

If you go to confession without an honest intent of repentance, the confession will be invalid.

If you repent without going to confession, you'll still live with grave sins and your penance will be for nothing.

You cannot have one and not the other.

>>655125

Henry never got divorced

He created the CoE to stop papal influence and plunder church assets