Extracting the Confession from a Confession

July 8, 2008 § 8 Comments

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone in the comboxes of a Catholic blog claim something like the following:

Yes, the Magisterium’s statements on torture make it inescapably clear that torture to extract a confession is always and intrinsically immoral. But that still leaves open the idea that torture to extract life-saving information might be morally licit.

That makes me wonder just what ‘life saving information’ they have in mind, if it isn’t “I confess that we hid the ticking bomb at these coordinates”. Does this mean it is only OK to torture an innocent bystander who happens to know where the bomb is, as long as he wasn’t involved in planting it, because then he isn’t confessing to his own crime?


§ 8 Responses to Extracting the Confession from a Confession

  • Anonymous says:

    Dear Zippy,Back on my old soapbox, unjust divorces are, in fact, state sponsored torture and are REQUIRED by the Catholic Church.You know, also, that the Catholic church is fully aware that it is impossible to defend one’s marriage against this nightmare.So instead of attacking, ONLY, the government for torture, why don’t you use your considerable intellect, together with those who hold the same position, and assault the Catholic Church for the crimes that it DIRECTLY encourages in its annulment process?Futhermore, if torture is against the teaching of the Church, why don’t you get behind a movement to sue the Catholic Church itself, in its own courts for the torture it puts innocent spouses through?Certainly a man with your intellect can build a solid argument that if a divorce is unjust, the Catholic Church, by accepting it as the gateway into the annulment process, IS encouraging unjust divorces.In addition, since the Catholic Church does, quite literally nothing to help heal broken marriages, even though its Canon Law says that if the reason for a separation(and this PRESUMES it is a just reason, which most are not, in my opinion)ceases to exist the marriage is supposed to be healed, it seems this inaction implies a tacit approval of the unjust divorce, since such criminals are NEVER EVER told to make resititution and heal the marriage as part of their penance, rather they are allowed to receive Communion as if everything is just fine—effectively negating the entire meaning of marriage, since they are in “good standing” in the Church but the other spouse is DESTROYED OFTEN, the children destroyed in the middle and the marriage a total loss.Why doesn’t this bother people? Is it becasue everyone knows someone in their own family who has done this and they don’t have the guts to say, ENOUGH, and act?I certainly do not understand.Karl It is a fact that in the Canon Law of the Latin Church there is NO requirement for divorce in order to investigate nullity and it is a fact the in the Philippines there is only annulment. Just some thoughts, Zipster.

  • Anonymous says:

    Zippy:Please IGNORE the above commenter.This is the same infamous Karl of JA.O fame who hijacked entire threads at said blog just to work out his neurosis concerning his divorce, which he believes was the Church’s fault.Please don’t feed the hoggish troll!Thanks & God Bless.

  • zippy says:

    Well, I’m actually rather fond of the infamous Karl, and wish there was something I could do to make things better.

  • zippy says:

    In addition to prayer and fasting, that is.

  • William Luse says:

    Seems that Karl, if he is to keep his faith, needs to be able to distinguish the fallible fools who sit on marriage tribunals from the spotless bride Herself.Re the torture hypocrisy, Lydia once told me she thought this kind of thinking resulted from an inability to admit that there might be some situations in which one is prohibited from acting. Anscombe thought much the same thing. The result is a denial of intrinsic evil which, when brought to their attention, has the further result of an attempt to define torture as lying outside that arena.

  • Tom says:

    <>…there might be some situations in which one is prohibited from acting.<>There are no such situations, of course. See Zippy’s second comment above.

  • William Luse says:

    :~)It’s also Zippyhamlet’s solution to another conundrum: “To vote, or not to vote, that is the question.”

  • zippy says:

    Prayer and fasting isn’t too bad, at least as a first resort.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Extracting the Confession from a Confession at Zippy Catholic.