Posted by:
ThinkingOutLoud
(
)
Date: November 24, 2013 03:10PM
This conflict is an old one; I came across thus while looking for the link the OP mentioned:
https://ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/IssuesInReligionAndPsychotherapy/article/viewFile/242/241A confession from a church member to his or her bishop does not require that bishop to disclose the crime/be a mandatory reporter. The confessor is supposed to be persuaded by the bishop to go report to the authorities him or herself. The bishop is not supposed to go to authorities to report the crime to the authorities himself, without the permission of the confessor/criminal.
A wife or neighbor or a victim, even if they be church members, who discloses the crime to their bishop does or should require that the bishop report the crime. Only when the church member making the disclosure is also the penitent seeking confession from that bishop, does the law permit the bishop to hang back and not report the crime; note "permit". It is not against the law for the bishop to report the crime; it is against church policy.
The bishop could still report the crime, though he'd probably lose his church calling and face other church discipline as a result. It would be up to him to do so, and in the lds church where bishops generally serve only for five year terms before being replaced by another church member, why wouldn't he tell?
It is not a lifetime job or calling or true vocation; it is not something he trained for all his life/for years, it's not like he'd be permanently excommunicated from the church for doing it.
The law cannot compel the bishop to tell, but likewise it cannot restrict him from doing so.