Sandy and Marci, I agree my conversations were not and should not have been privileged. But it is not the case that non-believers cannot be helped by priests either in a priest/pentitent setting or less formally.
Steve -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Director of International Programs, Institute for Intellectual Property and Social Justice http://iipsj.org Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 http://iipsj.com/SDJ/ “There are no wrong notes in jazz: only notes in the wrong places.” Miles Davis On Dec 5, 2013, at 5:44 PM, Volokh, Eugene <vol...@law.ucla.edu> wrote: > I’m sure there are some such situations, perhaps even quite a > few. But I imagine there are quite a few situations where the priest would > quite rightly not give me the advice that works for me given my philosophical > worldview. The benefit of the clergy-penitent privilege to the religious is > that they can generally get such advice, tailored to the particular religious > belief system they follow. The irreligious, I think, don’t have that > benefit, though they might get some second-best option for those situations > where their worldview overlaps with a clergyman’s. > > Eugene > > > From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu > [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf OfSisk, Gregory C. > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 2:31 PM > To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics' > Subject: RE: The clergy-penitent privilege and burdens on third parties > > Actually, I think non-Catholics mostly would be pleasantly surprised, both on > the receptivity of the priest-confessor and the wisdom of the response. To > be sure, there are some misdeeds that are shared in confession that are > understood to be such solely from the perspective of the Catholic believer > (e.g., failed to attend mass, took the Lord’s name in vain, etc.), but most > of what is shared with a priest are the kinds of faults to which all of us > are prone and which all (or nearly all) of us regard as faults. And, > following the confession, a good priest (which is to say, most priests) > responds both in religious terms by pronouncing absolution and reconciliation > with God, but also speaking about reconciliation with one’s neighbors and > future personal growth. Indeed, in my own experience – and I do not go to > confession nearly as often as I should (one more thing to confess, I guess) – > is that the priest usually engages me in a common-sense and real-world > dialogue about why I have fallen short, what are the obstacles in my path, > and what steps I should take to overcome those obstacles. Penance may > include prayer (the traditional, “say, ten ‘Our Father’s) but more and more > often will include steps to compensate for harm to others, efforts to assist > others in a similar situation, charitable activities, etc. > > Gregory Sisk > Laghi Distinguished Chair in Law > University of St. Thomas School of Law (Minnesota) > MSL 400, 1000 LaSalle Avenue > Minneapolis, MN 55403-2005 > 651-962-4923 > gcs...@stthomas.edu > http://personal.stthomas.edu/GCSISK/sisk.html > Publications: http://ssrn.com/author=44545 > > From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu > [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf OfVolokh, Eugene > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 4:17 PM > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > Subject: RE: The clergy-penitent privilege and burdens on third parties > > My sense is that I (as someone who is irreligious) would get > relatively little solace or even wise counsel from speaking to an average > Catholic priest about my troubles and misdeeds, at least unless I was at > least contemplating converting to Catholicism. Unsurprisingly, the priest > would respond in a way that fits well the beliefs of Catholics, but not my > own. (There might be some priests who are inclined to speak to the secular > in secular philosophical terms, but I assume they aren’t the norm.) > > Religious people, then, have the ability to speak > confidentially to those moral advisors whose belief systems they share. > Secular people do not. > > Eugene > > From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu > [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf OfPaul Horwitz > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 9:33 AM > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > Subject: Re: The clergy-penitent privilege and burdens on third parties > > Is that accurate? It may vary, but I thought the privilege could be claimed > for any confidential communication made to a clergy member in his/her > professional capacity as a spiritual advisor. The person seeking that counsel > need not necessarily be a co-communicant. I don't think this is just > hair-splitting. It's not analogous to a statement that men as well as women > can seek medical care for pregnancy. > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; > people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) > forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
