more likely they will be told that to truly receive absolution they need to confess and (to the police not the priest), turn themselves in and do what's right.
You're applying the worst case scenario (priest/rabbi/etc simply absolves confessor and gives no guidance on the moral thing to do) and ignoring the most likely scenario (priest/rabbi/etc tells confessor how to "get right with God."
. You also seem to be focused only on the Catholic faith, as the other faiths don't generally have confession/absolution in the same way. But I feel fairly confident your average Catholic priest is going to try and encourage that person to do the right thing and turn themselves in.
Do you disagree with that? If so, based on what?
Your scenario requires someone to have enough guilt to go to a priest, but not enough guilt to do anything else, that somehow that guilt will be relieved and they will then feel free to do it again and again. That's not necessarily reality. The repeat offenders are, generally, the folks who haven't reached the guilt stage yet...whether because they are incapable/too selfish to feel it, or because they don't have the emotional maturity to see the wrongness of their acts (particularly in "date rape" cases). It's only after someone calls them out (usually through the trial process, but also could be because someone they trust (family, friend, or yes priest) calls them out and encourages them to do the right thing).
How does it benefit the victim? Pretty easily, some percentage of confessors will be convinced to turn themselves in. The alternative, there is no confessor, who simply keeps quiet and thus receives no ethical or moral counsel. Your position seems to be that somehow, that scenario will result in more confessions and fewer victims, and sorry I'm not seeing how that is.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read