 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
»
|
Ship of Fools
»
» Oblivion
»
Royal commission into sexual abuse and the confessional seal, etc. (Page 0)
|
|
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Royal commission into sexual abuse and the confessional seal, etc.
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
I'm not really clear on your position, Evensong. On other threads you have expressed a very strong anti-abuser position. But here, when the police have expressed criticism toward the Catholic Church for a lack of reporting and transparency in abuse allegations, you seem to be on the other side. Perhaps you would clarify?
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
[QUOTE] A private conversation with a minister (in supposed confidence) is different from sacramental confession in which the penitent confesses to God - not to the priest but in the presence of a priest.
Nope. I don't agree.
I am a priest wherever I am - and God hears any conversation, as it is all sacramental.
Even if it were not the case (and you were right), I'd still be duty bound to report it anyway.
No disrepect but you are not a priest (except in the royal priesthood of all the baptised). You are a minister of religion. (Again, no disrepect - I know a fairly high up Baptist minister who describes the difference between Anglican and RC orders and his own in the same way.)
Episcopally ordained priests are bound by canon law. This canon law is also part of the law of the land so the state would have to repeal/alter canon law, which it can only do through General Synod.
Part of canon law covers the seal of the confession as inviolable.
Much as I like the notion that every conversation is sacramental, diocesan guidance, as a commentary on canon law, tells priests clearly to distinguish between pastoral conversations and sacramental confession.
The latter must be distinguished by setting it apart, preferably in a church building, the confessor wearing a purple stole etc.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
[QUOTE] A private conversation with a minister (in supposed confidence) is different from sacramental confession in which the penitent confesses to God - not to the priest but in the presence of a priest.
Nope. I don't agree.
I am a priest wherever I am - and God hears any conversation, as it is all sacramental.
Even if it were not the case (and you were right), I'd still be duty bound to report it anyway.
No disrepect but you are not a priest (except in the royal priesthood of all the baptised). You are a minister of religion. (Again, no disrepect - I know a fairly high up Baptist minister who describes the difference between Anglican and RC orders and his own in the same way.)
Episcopally ordained priests are bound by canon law. This canon law is also part of the law of the land so the state would have to repeal/alter canon law, which it can only do through General Synod.
Part of canon law covers the seal of the confession as inviolable.
Much as I like the notion that every conversation is sacramental, diocesan guidance, as a commentary on canon law, tells priests clearly to distinguish between pastoral conversations and sacramental confession.
The latter must be distinguished by setting it apart, preferably in a church building, the confessor wearing a purple stole etc.
To use your words - no disrespect - but
1. Many "ministers" don't see any practical or theological difference between their calling and that of a priest in the Anglican Church or RCC. I've lost count of the number of times I've been called "Father" so it seems that the people I work amongst don't see a distinction either.
2. I don't care for canon law above justice.
3. I don't believe in a (neo platonic) sacred/secular divide that makes one conversation any less sacred than another. Please show me how it can be different (excluding the setting and purple robes please!).
4. Baptists don't recognise "high ups" - what your friend says is simply his persoanl opinion. I know many (it's pretty much universal IME) who see it otherwise.
5. Why does it matter what we call ourselves or what we might be called? It's hpow God and others perceive us that's important - if you have to get behind a title or position to serve God then you have a bit of a problem.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
I feel that all this talk about the confessional seal is probably a smokescreen aimed at reducing the ranks of those opposed to the RCC by confusion and division, a vintage George Pell strategy. If you go back to the story linked in the OP you'll see no mention of the confessional seal, and even a claim from the Prime Minister than Pell was "taking a very co-operative attitude." So on the one hand we have this co-operative attitude, then from the same source this diversion into arguing over the confessional seal.
If that's the case, then most of the media has swallowed it hook, line and sinker - a whole lot of people who would in general all be in favour of the Royal Commission are now bickering about the confessional seal which is just one part of the bigger picture, and quite likely to be a very small part of that bigger picture at that. I think the threat the RCC and other organisations need to worry about is around the exposure of their handling or non-handling of allegations made against priests (or other staff/volunteers). But that's not an issue on which they can possibly use to their advantage, so instead we have Pell shouting SQUIRREL and diverting the debate to the sanctity of the confessional seal instead.
I'm not an apologist for Cardinal Pell - I tend to find him brusque and bullish. However, I don't buy this narrative at all. I don't think it's the Cardinal who has introduced the subject of Confession. This is the reflection on the matter of Confession from the Cardinal's press conference:
quote:
Seal of Confession
• Debate on the seal of confession is a diversion given the immense problems the community confronts.
• Church teaching is clear. The seal of confession has been explicitly inviolable for more than a thousand years.
• The law of the land is also clear. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution protects religious freedom. This separation of Church and State provides an essential protection for religious communities from Government interference in questions of belief and religious discipline and practice.
• In addition, confessional privilege is not "medieval" or "abhorrent", it is, in fact, specifically recognised in Section 127 of the 1995 Commonwealth Evidence Act. In a similar way to the protections from disclosure available for clients in respect of their communications with their lawyers, this Act protects a member of the clergy from being forced to divulge details revealed in a religious confession and even the fact that a confession has been heard.
• As Archbishop, the Cardinal does not hear the confessions of his priests (expect in an emergency), just as the Rector of a seminary is forbidden to hear the confessions of his seminarians. A priest who suspects the sacrament of penance will be abused by the penitent should not hear such a confession. Any absolution is dependent on genuine personal repentance, a commitment to suitable restitution and a firm "purpose of amendment" to sin no more.
This is available on the Archdiocese of Sydney's webpage here.
Note the first point: "Debate on the seal of confession is a diversion" - that was Pell's position.
There is great misunderstanding of the Catholic practice of Confession and people seem to think it's what is to blame for the inept handling of sex abuse cases. The truth is more shocking really - it has been things outside the confessional which were not been dealt with at all properly. In fact, if things had been known within the confessional, there would be no record, no recollection, no possibility of reporting those incidents as no-one will ever have spoken of them.
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
There is great misunderstanding of the Catholic practice of Confession and people seem to think it's what is to blame for the inept handling of sex abuse cases. The truth is more shocking really - it has been things outside the confessional which were not been dealt with at all properly. In fact, if things had been known within the confessional, there would be no record, no recollection, no possibility of reporting those incidents as no-one will ever have spoken of them.
Indeed. Those who see the confessional as a key issue have got it wrong. "If only priests hearing about things within the confessional had disclosed them, then everything would be alright."
That's a simplification, of course, and I don't think that people pointing fingers at the confessional deny that there are other areas that need attention. But the main issue is how the Church handled the stuff it already knew about, and how it responded to disclosures from victims.
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Baptists don't recognise "high ups" - what your friend says is simply his persoanl opinion. I know many (it's pretty much universal IME) who see it otherwise.
I would have thought that a former president of the Baptist Union and a regular contributor to the (late lamented) Baptist Times would be quite representative.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Baptists don't recognise "high ups" - what your friend says is simply his persoanl opinion. I know many (it's pretty much universal IME) who see it otherwise.
I would have thought that a former president of the Baptist Union and a regular contributor to the (late lamented) Baptist Times would be quite representative.
How do you know you aren't talking to someone who could claim the same qualifications?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
I don't believe in a (neo platonic) sacred/secular divide that makes one conversation any less sacred than another. Please show me how it can be different (excluding the setting and purple robes please!).
Regardless of what YOU believe, I was stating what the C of E and RC churches believe.
I don't know much about the RCC but having spent many years in the CofE, I'm not sure that particular belief is as widespread as you think it is. It may be amongst the more sacramentally minded churches in the CofE but IME not amongst the ones I frequented or by many of the priests I know.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
I think this may be a bit of a red herring as my understanding is that most of the crimes reported in the RC seem to involve the person running the Confessional Box rather than the Penitent, or have I missed something. I'm not sure many Child Abusers ever confess voluntarily to anyone, given the punishment which could be visited upon them!!
Can one of you Statistics people tell me if i have swallowed a Stereotype here?
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
womanspeak
Shipmate
# 15394
|
Posted
BEATMENANCE
You are on the right track. However one of the problems that RC Bishops have is that they do not have control over many of the individual orders represented in their Diocese who are under the control of Rome or other overseas headquarters.
So mandated training in Child Protection and Creating Safe Ministries, even in the two Australian Diocese who have joined the national program of the National Council of Churches, will not reach all participants in children's work or ministry within the RC's.
Personally I believe that parish based awareness training is essential to enable the laity to support their clergy, teachers etc in good practice and identify potential for abuse.
New South Wales has mandatory reporting for clergy and laity involved in scripture and any work with children. However a lack of widespread training and awareness within the RC's appears to be a weak link which allows "Father to know best" to the detriment of the Gospel message for all our denominations.
For statistics the Victorian Commission is throwing up horrifying police data - such as the 620 cases since 1996 which were not notified.
--------------------
from the bush
Posts: 62 | From: rural australia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I feel cynical about this whole issue in Australia as a lot of what is going on is politically motivated. The leader of the opposition is a practicing Roman Catholic while the Prime Minister is an outspoken atheist. There is a great deal of vitriol directed in the media and on social websites against churches, particularly RC and in fact all Christians. Most of it is bigoted and ill informed. Statistics show that children are far more likely to be abused by a member of their own family than any church or other organisational member. The RC church is no greater perpetrator than other community groups. Although I am not a Catholic, I have found most priests to be caring and dedicated in their profession and fear that this campaign seeks to tar all of them with the same accusations of paedophilia. In relation to the confessional, I doubt in view of the enforced revealing of confidences, if perpetrators will then go and tell anyone of their crimes any more. Anyhow, who is going to be listening in to what is being said to the priest. Will the confessional be wired? There are other groups who claim privilege to keep information secret eg lawyers, so will there be the same rules for all?
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mullygrub
Up and over
# 9113
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
There is a great deal of vitriol directed in the media and on social websites against churches ...[snip]... Most of it is bigoted and ill informed.
Now there's a surprise.
More genuinely, now, do not the "other groups" you speak of a bit later in your post, bib, ascribe to the three-point-exception* confidentiality clause? I'm aware that counsellors and psychs and things maintain their client's confidence unless danger to their client, another person, or property is disclosed. This may not be the case for lawyers and doctors, etc, though... Do you know?
*Not a technical term, just so we're all cleaning the same crapper.
--------------------
Smurfs are weird. And so am I.
Posts: 634 | From: Melbskies | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Statistics show that children are far more likely to be abused by a member of their own family than any church or other organisational member.
Agreed.
quote:
The RC church is no greater perpetrator than other community groups.
Not agreed. Quite a lot of the statistical reporting seems to be indicating that the RC church is markedly overrepresented, within the category of abuse by non-family members.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
womanspeak
Shipmate
# 15394
|
Posted
The most recent stats that I have show that at least 75% of confirmed abuse ( sexual, neglect, emotional,physical) of children in Australia is within the family circle. Ten percent includes stepparents, neighbours, friends and only 5 percent is others including strangers and teachers, clergy, church workers etc.
However the Victorian police stats show the church linked abuse is 6 - 1 in "favour" of the RC's. So they have to fess up, be open to change and clean up their act. And get a new front person other than Archbishop Pell who takes advice from others, for the sake of all the churches and the spread of the Gospel.
--------------------
from the bush
Posts: 62 | From: rural australia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
My recollection was correct. It was a Deputy Commissioner who said this.
Mandatory reporting exists in Victoria for police, doctors, nurses and teachers.
So the Catholics are not breaking the law here, they are dealing with the issue through their own systems (Towards Healing).
And there is nothing stopping those 620 incidents being reported to the police by those that brought the cases forward to the Catholic church if they felt the Catholic church did not act adequately.
And that article states:
quote:
But he defended the church for not reporting cases of abuse, saying Facing the Truth indicates many victims requested confidentiality.
Archbishop Hart, however, said many victims took their accusations to police as "a result of the encouragement and assistance provided to them by the church".
![[Confused]](confused.gif) ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
So Evensong, does the Roman Catholic church have no moral obligation to report crimes of which it is aware, to the Police?
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
The RC church is no greater perpetrator than other community groups.
Not agreed. Quite a lot of the statistical reporting seems to be indicating that the RC church is markedly overrepresented, within the category of abuse by non-family members.
But have those statistics been adjusted for the over representation of the Catholic church when it comes to being providers of child services (e.g. schools)? If you put all protestant and orthodox denominations together then double that number you get the size of the Catholic Church. It's frickin huge.
My understanding is that there is no evidence that the Catholic church abuses more than the standard population and other denominations and institutions.
How they have dealt with it compared to other institutions and denominations may be another matter.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
womanspeak
Shipmate
# 15394
|
Posted
Sorry to double post but I'm on the road and won't be in satellite contact for a while when I move on.
The effect of abusing priests on parishioners in general cannot be over estimated. In Newcastle Australia I know of a family where three priests, the one who married the couple and the two who baptised their first two children were all charged with henious child sexual abuse. This abuse in one case included interfering with boys who were under dental anaethetic! While one did get off on a technicality , despite the evidence of the other perpetrators, the other two were jailed.
The victims included the children and their families, but also christian families, like this one, who had trusted their local priests and who no longer attend church.
The public airing of such stories will be damaging and hurtful for the RC's and many of us fear the Vatican and Cardinal Pell will not allow the many voices of reason within the RC's to florish.
Pray for them all.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
from the bush
Posts: 62 | From: rural australia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
The RC church is no greater perpetrator than other community groups.
Not agreed. Quite a lot of the statistical reporting seems to be indicating that the RC church is markedly overrepresented, within the category of abuse by non-family members.
But have those statistics been adjusted for the over representation of the Catholic church when it comes to being providers of child services (e.g. schools)? If you put all protestant and orthodox denominations together then double that number you get the size of the Catholic Church. It's frickin huge.
That's a good question, and it's not always clear from the articles I've seen to what extent that's taken into account. Certainly, there are a huge number of areas where statistics based on absolute numbers and statistics based on rates can give completely different impressions. (Deaths and fires in the course of the housing insulation scheme is a superb example of this.)
And I think you would have to distinguish between cases that happen in a school context from cases that happen in a parish context. I suspect you're right in saying that there are a lot more Catholic schools than there are schools of other denominations. But there are also examples of abuse happening outside that, in areas where the Catholic church doesn't have an emphasis over and above other churches.
Sounds like a good topic for investigation by the commission, to be honest.
PS In terms of how the church has dealt with it, one observation I saw today may be very pertinent and also does incline me to still think that the RCC might be overrepresented.
The observation was that, even in more recent times, the RCC was inclined to keep a discovered pedophile within the church and attempt treatment, whereas other denominations would kick them out.
Now of course, there are all sorts of comments to make about BOTH of those strategies. But it does mean that a person from another denomination would be less likely to continue to rack up further victims while still on the church's books.
[ 19. November 2012, 07:14: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
My point is that the issue in the Catholic church seems to overwhelmingly involve Priests. The proportion compared to other groups is not as important as these being committed by a trusted figure who should know better.
It would be the same if we were to suddenly find hundreds of GPs (Doctors for those outside the UK), Solicitors or Members of Parliament, convicted of child sex crimes - but we havent.
Wikipedia provides a detailed page on the CONVICTED ( no hearsay here Mr Host ).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country
Unless these guys confessed to God in the presence of other priests (making the distinction to please Leo) then the Confessional aspect is largely a red herring.
These seem to have been found out by witness statements from victims - no confessing involved - to anyone.
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
So Evensong, does the Roman Catholic church have no moral obligation to report crimes of which it is aware, to the Police?
Personally I'm rather surprised that not all states have mandatory reporting for all professionals and all institutions . I think all should.
I'm curious as to why victims do not go straight to police tho if they know the church will not report these crimes. Perhaps it is a confidentiality thing? The victims don't want anyone to know...?
As for the not reporting thing....that cleric said that in some cases the victims were encouraged to report to the police. That doesn't square well with what the police lawyer said.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
So Evensong, does the Roman Catholic church have no moral obligation to report crimes of which it is aware, to the Police?
Personally I'm rather surprised that not all states have mandatory reporting for all professionals and all institutions . I think all should.
I'm curious as to why victims do not go straight to police tho if they know the church will not report these crimes. Perhaps it is a confidentiality thing? The victims don't want anyone to know...?
As for the not reporting thing....that cleric said that in some cases the victims were encouraged to report to the police. That doesn't square well with what the police lawyer said.
You haven't answered the question Evensong, does the RC church have a moral obligation to report crimes when it is aware of them?
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
A further observation: when it comes to schools, there's a ready comparator available in the form of the government system.
I'm aware of individual abuse cases in the government school system, but there isn't anything like the same perception of an institutional problem. What are the numbers? The Catholic system might be much larger than the other Christian schools, but is certainly not larger than the government-run schools.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
quote:
The observation was that, even in more recent times, the RCC was inclined to keep a discovered pedophile within the church and attempt treatment, whereas other denominations would kick them out.
What treatment was that exactly?
My understanding seems to be that the strategy was 'A new life in a new town'. I can see this making sense when you are dealing with a repentant sinner who has moved on and needs a new start (i have known it being done with new christians with criminal connections who need to be kept away from their old croney and haunts) , but i would suggest that this kind of sin requires a lot more support, and i would say ,thereputic help, and secrecy is about the WORST strategy of the lot as it increases the likelihood of continuing to offend.
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Sorry, I don't have the article to hand now, it was in the press clippings at work. Will try to remember to look again tomorrow.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
You haven't answered the question Evensong, does the RC church have a moral obligation to report crimes when it is aware of them?
As opposed to a child care centre, orphanage, scouts group or other institutions you mean?
[ 19. November 2012, 08:23: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
You haven't answered the question Evensong, does the RC church have a moral obligation to report crimes when it is aware of them?
As opposed to a child care centre, orphanage, scouts group or other institutions you mean?
No, not as opposed to any other institution, just as the Roman Catholic Church.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Why are you singling them out?
Don't you think everyone has a moral obligation to report abuse?
Which raises an interesting question......if mandatory reporting was required of everybody, including family and friends and neighbours, what would happen?
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
That situation, Evensong, would mean that many are convicted on hearsay alone. I believe the Chinese called that sort of thing re-education, and the Russians sent people off to populate Siberia.
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Why are you singling them out?
Don't you think everyone has a moral obligation to report abuse?
Which raises an interesting question......if mandatory reporting was required of everybody, including family and friends and neighbours, what would happen?
I wasn't singling them out, "they" are the subject of this thread! Of course I think everybody has a moral oblication to report abuse but you appear to be arguing the opposite.
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong
Mandatory reporting exists in Victoria for police, doctors, nurses and teachers.
So the Catholics are not breaking the law here, they are dealing with the issue through their own systems (Towards Healing).
And there is nothing stopping those 620 incidents being reported to the police by those that brought the cases forward to the Catholic church if they felt the Catholic church did not act adequately.
And that article states:
quote:
But he defended the church for not reporting cases of abuse, saying Facing the Truth indicates many victims requested confidentiality.
Archbishop Hart, however, said many victims took their accusations to police as "a result of the encouragement and assistance provided to them by the church".
implies that you believe the church is not doing anything wrong by failing to report child abuse because it is not legally mandated to report abuse and it is "dealing" with this through its own processes plus you seem to be putting the onus back on the victim to report the crime.
So which is it Evensong, reporting is only required when it is mandataory and in any case should be done by the victim or
quote:
everyone has a moral obligation to report abuse?
Your point about mandatory reporting is a furphy. First of all, you don't seem to be able to distinguish between a moral and a legal obligation. Friends, nieighbouts etc DO have a moral obligation, o report instances when they believe children are in danger but they are not subject to mandatory reporting laws.
Secondly and this is important, we're not talking about a vague suscpicion of wrong doing or heresay, the RC has, in many instances, conducted investigations which have led them to conclude their is sufficient evidence to warrant substantial payouts to victims and in other instances there have been confessions by the Priest but the Church has still failed to report this to the Police.
[ 19. November 2012, 09:40: Message edited by: Evangeline ]
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
hearsay, not heresay..... there not their.. shocking.. blaming sleep deprivation,
[ 19. November 2012, 09:44: Message edited by: Evangeline ]
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
I wasn't singling them out, "they" are the subject of this thread!
Oh right. Sorry. I thought it was about the Royal commission.
And yes, I do believe everyone has the moral obligation to report abuse.
An interesting conflict might arise however if the victim does not want the abuse reported to the police.
Who do you side with? The victim? Even if means their perpetrator might go on to abuse others?
Fuuuuuuuck......what a nightmare.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
That situation, Evensong, would mean that many are convicted on hearsay alone. I believe the Chinese called that sort of thing re-education, and the Russians sent people off to populate Siberia.
Not so. Hearsay is where it begins. Doctors, teachers, social workers ( who have to mandatorially report) bring the hearsay to the police and they investigate. Convictions come on sufficient evidence.
If the vast majority of abuse occurs in the home, you'd be hitting the nail where it really hurt if you made reporting mandatory for all.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
I agree about those mandated to report. As a scout leader, I've made more than a few reports myself.
I don't know if I would trust friends and neighbours though. Truly.
And there's still the spectre of the examples of the Russian and Chinese authorities.
[ 19. November 2012, 11:50: Message edited by: PeteC ]
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
I wasn't singling them out, "they" are the subject of this thread!
Oh right. Sorry. I thought it was about the Royal commission.
And yes, I do believe everyone has the moral obligation to report abuse.
An interesting conflict might arise however if the victim does not want the abuse reported to the police.
Who do you side with? The victim? Even if means their perpetrator might go on to abuse others?
Fuuuuuuuck......what a nightmare.
Not at all. If the victim is a child, as I see it the duty is clear. You have no choice, morally, but to report the allegation to the police. That is my position, even if I empathise when other professionals with far more experience than me (e.g. Doctors) may elect otherwise.
I have to agree with Evensong on this, Pete. Report, and let the police do the investigating. If there is an accusation, let it be tested. Medically, if possible. Just because an allegation is made (or, as is sometimes the case, an adult misinterprets an innocent statement by a child) doesn't mean abuse has occurred. But that is not for me to say, but the justice system to assess.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
I am not a great believer, despite being a avid socialist, in shuffling everything off to the Nanny State. Nanny is chronically short staffed and overworked.
And I also dispute that no harm will be done if we wait for the system to investigate. That is bollocks. I have seen people's lives destroyed because of false accusation even if that person is later "cleared". The clearance never seems to be as broadcast as the accusation and follows the person falsely accused around like a black shadow for the rest of their lives.
Sort of like forced moves to the countryside. Or to the Gulag ... Posthumous rehabilitation isn't worth a pot of warm pee.
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
I wasn't singling them out, "they" are the subject of this thread!
Oh right. Sorry. I thought it was about the Royal commission.
No need for apologies my dear, I'm glad it's clear to you now, as the thread title and opening post make clear it is about the specific issue of the Royal Commission AND the confessional seal of the Roman Catholic church which does single out the RC church as the topic of thread.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
PeteC: Well said. I think I may have over simplified, but you are right.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
To further expand on Pete's point, I am sitting here in one of the more green-liberal (small 'l') suburbs in my hometown. The waitress, who obviously knows one of the nearby couples, was discussing a past stint of jury duty, involving the importation of child pornography. Without knowing any of the facts of the case at all, the female of the couple said, loud enough for anyone else to hear, 'Just lock him up! Why can't you just lock him up?'
If this conversational excerpt strikes you as unusual, you are living somewhere I don't know about. ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
The court of public opinion is a big, big problem with this issue and is likely to continue to interfere with the process of discovering the truth.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mertide
Shipmate
# 4500
|
Posted
Don't Anglican priests also consider the seal of the confessional to be inviolable?
Posts: 382 | From: Brisbane | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mertide:
Don't Anglican priests also consider the seal of the confessional to be inviolable?
The Primate's statement suggests that it would not be. It is almost certainly not going to be an issue beyond giving the press something to sound concerned and indignant about. I'f be very surprised if anyone had confessed any activity amounting to child sexual abuse (or indeed any other criminal offence) to a priest over the last 50 or more years.
And what DK said, in spades.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
The court of public opinion is a big, big problem with this issue and is likely to continue to interfere with the process of discovering the truth.
Yep.
My mother, by the way, still vividly remembers just how many people 'knew' that Lindy Chamberlain was guilty of murdering her infant daughter.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
Not sure if this case even made the radar over your way, orfeo, but I know people who are convinced that Lloyd Rayney was guilty.
Story here for those with not a clue what I am talking about.
Off topic, but the point is, as PeteC pointed out, sometimes the mud sticks. And there is no nastier shit to sling around than sexual abuse allegations.
Still - I think I would err on the side of reporting allegations. However, it is something I would do with a very heavy heart, of course for the child, but also in anticipation of the utter chaos that would explode in the aftermath.
BTW: I have no idea whether Rayney did it or not. And I know that being found not guilty may not equate to actual innocence. But the number of people here in WA who just know he did it - perhaps in some kind of paranormal sense, as the evidence won't get you there. People are nutso.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Here reports of concerns about children go to Social Services (Care, technically, but that's less clear) and in training we were told to report anything because it might add up with other comments to add to concerns, or may be an isolated incident which would be ignored.
But ... social care tend to go and talk to the family saying they've had a report from the school or the playgroup or the neighbour. So schools tend to have someone in school to collate all reports, and talk to the family before they talk to social care - because the school still has to teach those pupils.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Thought it was worth posting this here as it comes from the royal commission context.
Only the first couple of paragraphs of this story are available for free online, but they have the gist of it.
Which is, the Anglican diocese of Brisbane has said that the royal commission needs to look at insurance companies, because in some cases the church has WANTED to apologise and settle a case and been told no by their insurers.
There are different forms of secrecy, not just the confessional...
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
That's interesting, orfeo - I was surprised by that. But he sys nothing about the confessional seal being violable in such cases, and I'd be prepared to bet a dingo's kidney that he doesn't support that.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
I observed the same thing, Chesterbelloc. However, this seems very positive to me, and as others have pointed out how the church deals with victims (particularly currently vulnerable victims) is more important than the seal issue.
[ 27. November 2012, 15:14: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
At last! THIS looks Solomonic: 'Archbishop Hart also called for mandatory reporting by priests of suspected cases of child abuse'. One can see how this can be done EASILY and keep the letter of canon law.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages in this thread: 1 2 3
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
