Louisiana’s Supreme Court has ruled that a priest may be compelled to testify as to what he heard in the confessional in 2008
concerning an abuse case.

The priest, Fr Jeff Bayhi, faces automatic excommunication if he breaks the seal of the confessional. But he also could face jail if found to be in contempt of the court should he refuse to testify.

In the case, a girl who was 14 in 2008 said she told her parish priest – Fr Bayhi, parish priest of St John the Baptist Parish in Zachary – in the confessional that she was
abused by a now-dead lay member of the parish.

The girl’s parents sued Fr Bayhi and the Diocese of Baton Rouge for failing to report the abuse. The parents won at the district court level about compelling the priest to testify, but lost in Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeals, before the state’s highest court reversed and vacated the appellate court’s decision.

“As you know, one of the great sacraments of healing in the Church is the sacrament of reconciliation/Confession. It has given hope and comfort to all Catholics throughout the centuries and continues to do so today,” Fr
Bayhi said this week.

“The seal of Confession is one that can never be broken. Through its use the faithful must always be protected, so much so, that as a
priest I cannot even say someone has come to Confession, let alone divulge the contents of what was revealed.”

The Baton Rouge diocese, in its own statement, said the state Supreme Court violated the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment to the US Constitution in its decision.

“A foundational doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church for thousands of years mandates that the seal of Confession is absolute and inviolable. Pursuant to his oath to the Church, a priest is compelled never to break that seal,” the diocese said. “Neither is
a priest allowed to admit that someone went to confession to him. If necessary, the priest would have to suffer a finding of contempt in a civil court and suffer imprisonment rather than violate his sacred duty and violate the seal of Confession and his duty to the penitent.
“This is not a gray area in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. A priest/confessor who violates the seal of Confession incurs an automatic excommunication reserved for forgiveness to the Apostolic See in Vatican City.”

The diocese added: “In this case, the priest acted appropriately and would not testify about the alleged Confessions. Church law
does not allow either the plaintiff [penitent] or anyone else to waive the seal of Confession.
“This matter cuts to the core of the Catholic faith, and for a civil court to inquire as to whether or not a factual situation establishes the sacrament of Confession is a
clear and unfettered violation of the Establishment Clause of the constitution of the United States,” it continued. “This matter is of serious consequence to all religions, not just the Catholic faith. The statutes involved in this matter address ‘sacred communications’ which are confidential and are exempt from mandatory reporting.”

The diocese said: “For a civil court to impinge upon the freedom of religion is a clear violation and the matter will be taken to the highest court in the land by the
Church in order to protect its free exercise of religion.”

E get as this case be oo

Dubby6: E get as this case be oo

hmmm

If the Priest divulged the girl's secret earlier, the same parents would sue him for breaking his oath.

Human beings!

italo: If the Priest divulged the girl's secret earlier, the same parents would sue him for breaking his oath.

Human beings!

i think the girls lawyer are wise in a bad way, the real criminal is dead, the church is the only remaining defendant, then the girl claims he told the priests the issue in the confessional, they know that,

1. The priest under canon law cannot affirm even seeing anybody in the confessional.
2 he can't affirm a confession happened.
3. He can't disclose what happened in the confessional.
4. He can't even defend himself by reporting he prudently advised the lady.
5. The lady is the only person who can relate what happened, and the court will judge the priest silience as admittance of guilt.

The end product is that the priest who probably did his job flawlessly goes to jail and the church pays millions to the family for damage.



So the question remains, does the court have the power to require the priest to talk about an issue that his religious beliefs prohibit him from talking about?
Does the court have power over the church? Does the first amendment hold?




If this case is decided against the priest then all priests in America are in trouble, they will be bundled before court to testify about crimes they heard in the confession.

Common sense should have told the Priest to look for a way of protecting the child instead of ravaging the gory details of her molestation but what do one expect from pedo.philes . I think the priest should be hanged

superior1: Common sense should have told the Priest to look for a way of protecting the child instead of ravaging the gory details of her molestation but what do one expect from pedo.philes . I think the priest should be hanged

Your point has been noted.

This priest is in a very tight conner, only God can save him, it seems which ever step he takes now will cost him a thing.
Lord have mercy.

SalC: Your point has been noted.

Thanks SalC, how are you?

superior1:

Thanks SalC, how are you?

Am fine and you?

The priest dude has no common sense. In his greed to stay in office, he decides to ignore the case of child abuse by his own church member. She is a 14 yr old and considering that age he couldnt help her.

of what use is this confession nonsense then?

Its only a catholic priest that can fail to know the correct thing to do when a child admits to being molested. The poor girl came to this guy with a cry for help thinking he would know what to do and the senseless priest didn't even see fit to inform her parents or the police because of some ridiculous middle age tradition.

Even doctors (who have a much older and more credible confidentiality tradition) regularly risk their licenses to warn others when they feel that keeping a secret can seriously harm another or threaten public safety. But I guess its the girls fault for thinking that the world's largest international pédophile syndicate would ever act against one of its own.

In any case I see no reason why the law should make exceptions for these peoples' (or anybody else's) religiously motivated crimes. If you you are aware that a minor is being molested and you either cover it up, or fail to report it to the authorities, you should be punished just like any other criminal. "Yahweh/Sango/Guru Maraji told me not to talk" is not a valid defense.

Ubenedictus:
i think the girls lawyer are wise in a bad way, the real criminal is dead, the church is the only remaining defendant, then the girl claims he told the priests the issue in the confessional, they know that,

1. The priest under canon law cannot affirm even seeing anybody in the confessional.
2 he can't affirm a confession happened.
3. He can't disclose what happened in the confessional.
4. He can't even defend himself by reporting he prudently advised the lady.
5. The lady is the only person who can relate what happened, and the court will judge the priest silience as admittance of guilt.

The end product is that the priest who probably did his job flawlessly goes to jail and the church pays millions to the family for damage.



So the question remains, does the court have the power to require the priest to talk about an issue that his religious beliefs prohibit him from talking about?
Does the court have power over the church? Does the first amendment hold?




If this case is decided against the priest then all priests in America are in trouble, they will be bundled before court to testify about crimes they heard in the confession.

But they dont go after rap artists who flaunt their crimes in their music: "I shot 5 niggaz..." etc...

...or people who come on tv and say "I used to be in the drug gang...I killed people" etc.

My brother, it's just the devil trying to bring down the Church of God.

In the first place, none of us know if there was ever such a confession.

Yet some are already calling for the priest's head.

The devil fills men with unreasonable hatred.

In some parish in the western world most priest are not even allow to see the face of the person talkless of knowing her age. The molester is long dead so what do the parent want from the priest.

superior1: Common sense should have told the Priest to look for a way of protecting the child instead of ravaging the gory details of her molestation but what do one expect from pedo.philes . I think the priest should be hanged

a little context might help you before you start crucifying the priest.
1. It is not even an established fact that the alledge confession took place.
2. Every catholic child who went to catechism knows from abt 5yrs of ages that the priest cannot act on issues he heard during confessions.
3. The girl could have reported the issue to the parents, the priest may have advised the girl to do so.
4. Many atimes confession is made behind a fixed grill, so that the priest does even know the identity of the penitent.
5. It is only prejudice that will make you assume that the priest who you don't know and who wasn't accused of pedophilia is a pedophile.


In essence the kid already knew there was nothing the priest could do with information learned in the confessional, she also knew that such communication cannot to reported to anybody and somehow it is the priests fault.

Omexonomy: In some parish in the western world most priest are not even allow to see the face of the person talkless of knowing her age. The molester is long dead so what do the parent want from the priest.

the church pays millions of dollars in damages.

PAGAN9JA: The priest dude has no common sense. In his greed to stay in office, he decides to ignore the case of child abuse by his own church member. She is a 14 yr old and considering that age he couldnt help her.

of what use is this confession nonsense then?

the confession is an avenue to confess your sin, it usually starts with "bless me father for i have sined", it is considered sacred communication under civil law and thus is exempt from madatory reporting, thus it is not an avenue to report crimes, and if you do report crimes the best the priest can do is tell you to "tell someone else" either your parents or the police.


We still cannot even know if the said confession took place.

Ubenedictus: the church pays millions of dollars in damages.

if so they should go and exhume the dead criminal to stand for jurtices.

Catholic ped.ophiles at it again!!


Psychologists and Doctors are to breach confidentiality in the case of murder or possible homicide or harm towards a person. What gives priests the right to keep quiet when minors are abused?

I used to be a catholic.....please, where in the bible is confessions to priests mandatory or regulated? Italo and Ubenedictus, the bible says that laws are made for man and not man made for the laws. I think it was Jesus that said so.

Use your common sense. And please, dont sell the lie that the confession didnt take place.

Firstly, the parents of this poor child are very silly. They should ask themselves what they did wrong for their daughter to prefer talking to an 'outsider' about a wrong done to her as against talking to them.

Common sense dictates that friends do not tell on each other, especially when it bothers on keeping confidential information. The solace the poor child sought in the priest is evidence enough to show that she regarded him as a friend who she believes would not tell on her.

True to his promise as an ordained Priest he never told a soul just as the lady wants. It shows very poor taste to go blabbing about something told to one in private, let alone the confessional. The Priest did the right thing here.

Having said that, I do hope the Church modifies this rule, such that Priests would be given some concession to break this oath if the life of another is threatened. I definitely would not keep quiet when I know for sure that someone else is going to be raped or worse still murdered.

striktlymi: Firstly, the parents of this poor child are very silly. They should ask themselves what they did wrong for their daughter to prefer talking to an 'outsider' about a wrong done to her as against talking to them.

Common sense dictates that friends do not tell on each other, especially when it bothers on keeping confidential information. The solace the poor child sought in the priest is evidence enough to show that she regarded him as a friend who she believes would not tell on her.

True to his promise as an ordained Priest he never told a soul just as the lady wants. It shows very poor taste to go blabbing about something told to one in private, let alone the confessional. The Priest did the right thing here.

Having said that, I do hope the Church modifies this rule, such that Priests would be given some concession to break this oath if the life of another is threatened. I definitely would not keep quiet when I know for sure that someone else is going to be raped or worse still murdered.

blame the parents for the inaction of the church/priest over molestation.


Sha, at least you agree that the confidentiality has to be broken where harm could be heaped on an innocent victim

Touching story. The priest is caught between two damning options. Yet the reality is, secular law prevails over ecclesiastical law. At best, ecclesiastical laws are considered to be conscientious conviction.

The better step is to follow his conscientious objection and be damned by the state. He should serve time for his deeply held beliefs. It is the moral thing to do. Most times the thoughtful moral actions always come with injury of any kind. So he should see it as a test of faith.

Kay17: Touching story. The priest is caught between two damning options. Yet the reality is, secular law prevails over ecclesiastical law. At best, ecclesiastical laws are considered to be conscientious conviction.

The better step is to follow his conscientious objection and be damned by the state. He should serve time for his deeply held beliefs. It is the moral thing to do. Most times the thoughtful moral actions always come with injury of any kind. So he should see it as a test of faith.

Stop trying to appease the catholics to appear like a "mellow" atheist. A girl was molested...damn any religious convictions or doctrines!


You are a woman, how would you feel if it was your daughter that this happened to? This has nothing to do with a test of faith. The main issue is the molestation. Anyone focusing on the faith or doctrines is a joker.

TheBigUrban2: Catholic ped.ophiles at it again!!
Psychologists and Doctors are to breach confidentiality in the case of murder or possible homicide or harm towards a person. What gives priests the right to keep quiet when minors are abused?

i hope you are aware that lawyer don't breach confidentiality even in cases of serial homicide or even genocide?

The law guiding sacred communication is america absolves it from all madatory reporting, in essence even the law know that much.
The law has a downside, the lady can waive her right to confidentiality and request that the priest answers the questions, ecclesiatical laws on the matter are however absolute, even if the girl waive her right to confidentiality the priest still can't admit he heard anyones confession.

I used to be a catholic.....please, where in the bible is confessions to priests mandatory or regulated? Italo and Ubenedictus, the bible says that laws are made for man and not man made for the laws. I think it was Jesus that said so.

Use your common sense. And please, dont sell the lie that the confession didnt take place.

you don't even know yet if the confession took place so stop assuming i am selling a lie.

Proverbs have harsh words for those who can't keep their mouth shut and those who repeat information told them, and this particular law was made for man, it is man's duty to keep it.