[nabla9]

An attorney must break privilege if they suspect their client may commit an additional crime, or if concealing the information would bring financial or bodily harm to another person.

Catholic priest on the other hand may take confession every day from child abuser who works with children and says nothing.

[trollbridge]

How far should breaking the confessional seal go?

Murder? Sure.

How about other violent crimes?

Damaging property at a protest? The police will think they need this information. Catholic doctrine is even minor sins should be confessed.

Priests will eventually need to govern a Miranda warning to penitents entering the confessional. “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you confess can and will be reported to law enforcement. You have the right to have an attorney and a canon lawyer present in this confessional. If you can’t afford a canon lawyer, please join the years-long waitlist for one. Knowing these rights, do you still wish to confess to me?”

[drivingmenuts]

No protection for clergy is how far it should go. As far as government is concerned, clergy should be exactly the same as any other civilian. Confession, in this case, is about a person’s relationship with a deity, over which government can make no claim, or relationship to church law, likewise.

No religious authority or relationship should receive special treatment under civil law.

This is not an “it’s for the children” argument, but rather about complete separation of church and state. Religious law should never overrule civil law in any circumstance, in the US.

[cgriswald]

This law breaks separation of church and state by making clergy de facto agents of the state and treats them differently than civilians.

[nabla9]

Priests should be treated like any any other person.

Past crimes, generally no responsibility. Danger or repeating a crime, obviously. What is there to discuss?

[trollbridge]

A confessional isn’t a counselling office and a penitent wouldn’t go in there to discuss future acts they plan to do.

The general idea is that confessors shouldn’t be civil agents (particularly in the confessional) conducting investigations on each person who comes in.

And no, priests aren’t treated like any other person. You or I (assuming neither of us are in some profession like teacher, police officer etc) don’t have to go “report” to the police if we think someone is in danger of repeating a crime.

[nabla9]

The issue is that there is an organization that attempts to prevent it's members to voluntarily reports crimes and future crimes.

That organization seems evil to me.

[readthenotes1]

I'm confused whether your talking about the response to Washington State law or the decades long effort to coverup priests raping children.

[ndriscoll]

Any other (generic) person is not obligated to report suspicion of crimes. This seems to specifically be targeting religious leaders purely based on their status among their fellow practitioners.