 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
»
|
Ship of Fools
»
» Oblivion
»
Royal commission into sexual abuse and the confessional seal, etc. (Page 2)
|
|
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Royal commission into sexual abuse and the confessional seal, etc.
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
Why on EARTH are RC hierarchies so against following Safe From Harm policies?
In the Baptist churches, like with many other Protestant structures- abuse is admittedto - the leaders HAVE to inform the authorities.
Screw them. RC church - if there is endemic abuse, OPEN THE FUCKING FILES!
The Catholic churches need to join the rest of us re best practice legislation...
Agreed! As a BUGB accredited minister in the UK, I've had 2 occasions when private conversations have led to certain disclosures. I reported both and told the individuals concerned I would.
I would do it again without demur.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Over here in the West, our new Catholic archbishop has made it clear that he will not breach the confessional.
He also made what I perceive to be a similar point to Tabernacle's earlier: [QUOTE] "The imposition of the obligation of mandatory reporting of abuse confessed to a priest will mean that the one chance some offenders might have to finally confront and deal with their crime This does not seem to be a good way to protect vulnerable children."
It's not the one chance far from it.
Also theoretically if I created a new religion today and stated that x aspect of it was above civil law how far do you think I would get?
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Since 1996, not one of 620 incidents of child sexual abuse involving the Australian Roman Catholic Church have been passed on to police or other authorities.
I think this is far more important than anything to do with the confessional seal.
Even if there are people in the church who are attempting to do something good in the internal processes, they really need to understand that treating these cases as purely internal matters is NOT a good look - whether to the public, or to the victims.
We're talking about criminal matters here. Not civil torts where "how much money do we need to give you to settle this" works as a resolution. The attempts at damage containment can easily end up making the damage worse.
--------------------
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 womanspeak:
Since 1996, not one of 620 incidents of child sexual abuse involving the Australian Roman Catholic Church have been passed on to police or other authorities.
What evidence do you have for this statement?
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Statistics compiled by the Victorian Commission into sexual abuse show six times the abuse within the RC Church compared to all the other Churches combined. There must be a reason for this disgraceful bias which hopefully the Federal Royal Commission will highlight.
Someone told me that statistic came up in an article in the The Melbourne Age from a lawyer. I asked that person for evidence cited. They laughed. "The Age" they said?
Then they said it could be a issue of proportions as Catholic care might account for 6-times the number of children in care.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Since 1996, not one of 620 incidents of child sexual abuse involving the Australian Roman Catholic Church have been passed on to police or other authorities.
I think this is far more important than anything to do with the confessional seal.
Even if there are people in the church who are attempting to do something good in the internal processes, they really need to understand that treating these cases as purely internal matters is NOT a good look - whether to the public, or to the victims.
We're talking about criminal matters here. Not civil torts where "how much money do we need to give you to settle this" works as a resolution. The attempts at damage containment can easily end up making the damage worse.
Agreed.
Like Evensong, I would like to hear womanspeak's sources.
--------------------
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
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
This story on the ABC news website cites Victoria Police Deputy Commissioner Graham Ashton's testimony before a Victoria state parliament inquiry:
quote:
GRAHAM ASHTON: Since 1996 the Catholic Church of Victoria has upheld approximately 620 cases of child, criminal child abuse, none of which they have reported to police.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
Why on EARTH are RC hierarchies so against following Safe From Harm policies?
In the Baptist churches, like with many other Protestant structures- abuse is admittedto - the leaders HAVE to inform the authorities.
Screw them. RC church - if there is endemic abuse, OPEN THE FUCKING FILES!
The Catholic churches need to join the rest of us re best practice legislation...
Agreed! As a BUGB accredited minister in the UK, I've had 2 occasions when private conversations have led to certain disclosures. I reported both and told the individuals concerned I would.
I would do it again without demur.
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.
--------------------
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
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Over here in the West, our new Catholic archbishop has made it clear that he will not breach the confessional.
In that case
1. He's not fit to be in a position of responsibility
2. Get the Police to arrest him for aiding and abetting a crime.
Sorry. Wrong. Very wrong.
Vilely wicked though child abuse is, the seal of the confessional is more important. A priest who refuses to delate to the state what is confessed in the confessional and is imprisoned or worse is a martyr and entitled to be respected as such. There are certain things that prevail over the state whether it is being well-intentioned or ill.
Remember the Catholic Church looks at things over the centuries and draws on the experience of previous, and different crises, including those where it may have failed. If the state says that Jews are wicked, enemies of humanity, to be rounded up and taken to Concentration Camps, and that anyone who finds out about the location of any Jew is to go straight to the Police with the information on pain of suffering the same fate, and that no duty of confidentiality shall be any defence, is a priest to do his duty to the State and delate, or to God, and conceal, at whatever the cost.
All of us, I hope, would say that the duty of confidentiality prevails here, irrespective of whether under the seal of the confessional or not.
First they came for the child-abusers. Then they came for the money-launderers. Then they came for the illegal immigrants. Then they came for the travellers ......
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
[
Vilely wicked though child abuse is, the seal of the confessional is more important. A priest who refuses to delate to the state what is confessed in the confessional and is imprisoned or worse is a martyr and entitled to be respected as such. There are certain things that prevail over the state whether it is being well-intentioned or ill.
Remember the Catholic Church looks at things over the centuries and draws on the experience of previous, and different crises, including those where it may have failed. If the state says that Jews are wicked, enemies of humanity, to be rounded up and taken to Concentration Camps, and that anyone who finds out about the location of any Jew is to go straight to the Police with the information on pain of suffering the same fate, and that no duty of confidentiality shall be any defence, is a priest to do his duty to the State and delate, or to God, and conceal, at whatever the cost.
All of us, I hope, would say that the duty of confidentiality prevails here, irrespective of whether under the seal of the confessional or not.
First they came for the child-abusers. Then they came for the money-launderers. Then they came for the illegal immigrants. Then they came for the travellers ...... [/QB]
![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
Your reasoning sums up for me what is a moral bankruptcy in Roman Catholicism and I hope that it is the exception rather than the rule in the RC church but it appears that may not be the case. To lay down one's life to save the life of/prevent harm to others is praiseworthy to be willing to lay down one's life to prevent child abusers being stopped is evil and morally warped.
Reporting child abuse is not about a Priest doing his duty to the state it's about a Priest doing his duty to God by protecting children.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
First they came for the child-abusers. Then they came for the money-launderers. Then they came for the illegal immigrants. Then they came for the travellers ......
Evangeline has responded rightly to your wrongness, and this additional part is just plain idiocy as well as evil.
There is no equation between money laundering and rape of a child. None. Nor between immigration and whatever a traveller might be. That you even try to do this shows that you have not the slightest inkling of understanding. It cannot be rebuked in strong enough terms. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
[QUOTE]
1. All of us, I hope, would say that the duty of confidentiality prevails here, irrespective of whether under the seal of the confessional or not.
There is no duty of confidentiality where the greater harm lies in hearing but doing nothing.
Frankly I am not interested in anyone's tradition, simply in justice and grace - sometimes that demands I make a value judgement on what is "right" and what constitues the greater evil.
TBH, I'll take my chance on this one on not being fully in accordance with God's will.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
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.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
You may disagree, but leo has summed up the theological underpinning of the confessional in the traditions that practice it. At least AFAIK. Your tradition may differ.
I am hoping that the seal will not be challenged as a result of this RC. As orfeo and others have pointed out, the major problems the RC is being set up to investigate are much broader than the confessional, and can be satisfactorily addressed without reference to it.
The media over here continues to focus on it, though. Perhaps because it seems so mysterious and is really hard to justify without reference to a tradition that many in this very pluralist society are baffled by.
--------------------
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
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Remember the Catholic Church looks at things over the centuries and draws on the experience of previous, and different crises, including those where it may have failed. If the state says that Jews are wicked, enemies of humanity, to be rounded up and taken to Concentration Camps, and that anyone who finds out about the location of any Jew is to go straight to the Police with the information on pain of suffering the same fate, and that no duty of confidentiality shall be any defence, is a priest to do his duty to the State and delate, or to God, and conceal, at whatever the cost.
All of us, I hope, would say that the duty of confidentiality prevails here, irrespective of whether under the seal of the confessional or not.
That is a really poor analogy. In that scenario, Jews are the victims, plain and simple. Child abusers are not victims, the children they are hurting are victims. In short, being Jewish is not morally wrong, but being a child abuser is.
You could argue that abusers are victimised by society after their crimes are revealed, or victimised in prison, or whatever. I am sympathetic to that point, even if others quite plainly aren't. However, the primary victim is the child, and his/her protection must take priority.
--------------------
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
Well said, Annabel Crabb. As usual.
--------------------
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
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Since 1996, not one of 620 incidents of child sexual abuse involving the Australian Roman Catholic Church have been passed on to police or other authorities.
What evidence do you have for this statement?
I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that a representative from the Victorian police said something to this effect in the course of the current Victorian inquiry.
They certainly said something that indicated the police were very unhappy at what they perceived as a lack of cooperation from the Roman Catholic church.
[ 18. November 2012, 07:13: 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
|
|
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
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.
[ 18. November 2012, 07:37: Message edited by: the giant cheeseburger ]
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
Well, that would be an interesting strategy if it were true. I agree the confessional is a smokescreen, but you can see from this thread and from the response in the national media that it is far more likely to stir up anti-Catholic or at least hostile sentiment than support. So I don't see your point, really.
--------------------
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
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Well, that would be an interesting strategy if it were true. I agree the confessional is a smokescreen, but you can see from this thread and from the response in the national media that it is far more likely to stir up anti-Catholic or at least hostile sentiment than support. So I don't see your point, really.
I don't think it's designed to win the support of others who have made up their minds already, but to shore up the support for their position from within the faithful and get at least some of the middle ground into the "for us" side.
But overall, I think the main effect is the smokescreen, we're now all talking about the confessional seal and following that thread, instead of talking about the core issue of child abusers being protected by religious and non-religious institutions in Australia.
Of course, there is just the possibility that there are no sneaky smokescreens going on and that George Pell is just bumbling around without any cautionary counsel from somebody skilled in public relations. Notice that no other major church leaders are shooting their mouths off at this point, if there have been comments from guys like Aspinall, Jensen, Dutney etc they at least haven't been as sensational.
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
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)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
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".
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
|
|
|
|
|
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
