By MIA FREEDMAN
Is there any crime more heinous than child abuse? If there is, I don’t want to know about it.
Legally, every Australian who suspects or knows about a case of child abuse is required by law to report it to the police.
It’s mandatory.
Unless you’re a Catholic priest and someone tells you about child abuse in the confessional, in which case you’re totally free to do nothing.
No need to mention it.
Even if the abuse is still occurring.
Even if a child – or children – are in danger of further abuse.
Even if a child’s life has been destroyed and nobody is able to help them because they are too frightened, ashamed and traumatised by the abuse to say anything.
Priests are not bound by the same laws as the rest of society – including doctors, teachers and counsellors. So the church is effectively a safehouse for pedophiles who can ‘confess’ to their crimes and receive absolution without consequence.
They are then free to re-offend. Their secrets – their CRIMES – will always be kept away from authorities. They will be protected.
Surely, this is madness.
And never has this madness been highlighted so clearly as this week, when it became clear that child abuse in the Catholic Church has been so systemic over such a long period of time and has been so well covered up by so many individuals, that the Government has been forced to announce a Royal Commission into child sex abuse.
While Julia Gillard has been politically careful to point out that the parameters of the Royal Commission are more far-reaching than just the Catholic Church (it will also look into child abuse in all institutions including schools, community groups, foster homes etc), make no mistake: this is about the Church and the literal get-out-of-jail free card they wield when it comes to protecting paedophiles.
Watching Cardinal George Pell’s press conference yesterday – the same day yet another Catholic brother was arrested in NSW for child sex offenses – was an exercise in trying not to yell at the TV.
I was struck by the sight and sound of an old, arrogant man, woefully out of touch with public attitudes towards child abuse, a man who was desperately trying to justify the ongoing and systemic crimes that have been allowed to flourish within the Church he runs.
A man seemingly without compassionate for the victims of sex abuse by people who held sacred positions of trust.
As broadcaster Derryn Hinch wrote on his blog:
This is the head of the Catholic Church in Australia who several days ago couldn’t see the point of a federal Royal Commission. At a press conference today Cardinal Pell said he still would not favour an investigation into the Catholic Church alone. But welcomed a broad-based one on the basis it seems that it would show ‘we weren’t the only ones doing it’.
He actually said today that a Royal Commission would clear things up because ‘we object to being called the only cab on the rank’. He said it.
I felt like shouting at the TV set: You’re not. But most of the cabs for the past forty years have been Catholic ones, and the majority of drivers are yours and they can’t be trusted with innocent children’.
He even had the gall to try to make us somehow responsible for the suffering of victims. Pell said one question had to be asked: ‘ Are victims helped by the continuing furore in the Press? Should old wounds be re-opened?
That part was truly staggering.
To suggest that victims of sex abuse by Catholic clergy would be better served by it remaining covered-up?
To suggest the media should never have aired the disturbing accusations of whistle blowers such as Senior Detective Inspector Peter Fox who stated, “I can testify from my own experience that the church covers up, silences victims, hinders police investigations, alerts offenders, destroys evidence and moves priests to protect the good name of the church.” ?
That is simply repugnant and self-serving in the extreme.
This from News Limited:
Addressing the media in Sydney in relation to the royal commission into child sex abuse, Cardinal Pell explained church protocol for priests who confess to child sex abuse to another priest.
“If that is done outside the confessional (it can be passed on),” he said.
“(But) the Seal of Confession is inviolable.”
Is it any wonder that pedophilia has been allowed to fester, seemingly unchecked, for so many decades? The idea that victims of abuse would be better served by silence and that bringing perpetrators to justice would ‘open old wounds’ for victims is appalling.
Surely it’s time that we take away from priests the outrageous exemption from mandatory reporting of child abuse. Surely the rights of vulnerable children must transcend those of criminal adults who prey on children and have an expectation they’ll be protected by the law.
Enough. It’s time that the law was changed.
In an article for The Herald Sun yesterday, writer Susie O’Brien wrote exactly that:
We need an urgent change to state laws to ensure mandatory reporting includes priests and other religious figures. At present, it’s confined just to doctors, nurses, teachers and police.
But mandatory reporting by priests is absolutely meaningless unless claims made in the confessional are included.
You would think the Catholic Church wouldn’t want to absolve paedophiles, but to hand them over to authorities. And yet the church wants to allow confessions by child abusers, or confessions by those involved in the cover-up of child abuse, then take no further action than a few Hail Marys.
It is outrageous.
The church maintains that paedophiles wouldn’t confess if they knew a priest would tell the police. But so what? The entire purpose of the confessional is to absolve and pardon someone for their sins: to offer, as one priest put it, “divine forgiveness and healing”.
Enough with the coverups. Enough with the self-serving justification. And enough with Catholic priests being immune from this most basic of child protections: mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse.
Note: In the past 24 hours several politicians have also expressed their concern for the rule that allows members of the church to be exempt from the mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse.
Bill Shorton said: “What immunity can you claim when it comes to the safety and protection of little children? When it comes to the abuse of children, that privilege, if it ever had validity, is well and truly exhausted.”
Christopher Pyne also said priests had a responsibility to report the crimes that are revealed to them in confession. “If a priest hears in a confessional a crime, especially a crime against a minor, the priest has the responsibility in my view to report that to the appropriate authorities,” he said.





Comments
279 Comments so far
I dont understand how they are exempt from reporting it… Isn’t it like aiding and abetting?
loading...
It is discusting. I have never understood confession. I wonder if cardinal Pell thinks breaking confessional vows is a worse sin then murder or child abuse.
loading...
It’s sadly not just the catholic church that will be sweating about this commission. It’s frightening to think that there are pedophiles in many institutions in Australia and many in positions of power and trust in our communities. Hopefully the network I’m sure they all operate within won’t protect them this time by slamming down walls to halt investigations. I truly hope this disgusting group of people are all named and shamed and I have a feeling, that should this commission be successful, we are going to be horribly shocked and sickened by some of the members of this dirty little club.
loading...
A friend of mine came out and said she had been abused by a family member for years and the church knew about the abuse, but stood by the family member and did nothing to help her. I was so sad to know this. I don’t know why the church should over rule the law.
loading...
Why why why?!? They are not above the rest of us and they are surely meant to have better morals… Disgraceful!
loading...
I’ve lost any faith I had left in the Catholic Church.
loading...
I read an article yesterday that also revealed that within the Church, having sex with a woman is considered to be breaking the solemn vow of chastity, whilst having sex with a young boy is NOT considered breaking this vow. It is so incredibly confusing to me even these early revelations and insights into how this group of people think! Not to mention terrifying that this has been going on for so long and involving so many. I truly hope that all of the victims get to finally be heard, and that the perpetrators are brought to justice. Something tells me we’re going to need a lot more prison space in the years to come.
loading...
Woah. Stop the world I want to get off. Where did you read this, Charli?
I’m not doubting that someone has written this, but I am definitely doubting that it is doctrinally true (i.e. in an Encyclical or the like.) Maybe this is a practice accepted by a very, very, VERY teeny weeny minority (read: a couple of already defrocked pedophiles trying to justify their actions), but it is not something that is accepted within ‘the Church’ (a term which, on 2006 census data, applies to 26% of Australians.)
loading...
Source is here: http://m.perthnow.com.au/news/national/child-sex-abuse-not-the-biggest-sin-and-confession-gives-a-clean-slate-pedophile-priests-believe/story-fndo6ejf-1226515833723
Noted quote was made by Emeritus Professor Freda Briggs and she says: “There has been an acceptance over the years that having sex with a boy is not breaking celibacy. What priests told me was that the biggest crime was to have sex with a woman.”
Professor Briggs has just published a seminal text on child protection. She is from the University of South Australia, started out as a policewoman and has now been working in the area of child abuse and child protection for 50 years.
So … You tell me how prevalent this notion is within the Priesthood. Doesn’t sound like a very very very teeny weeny minority to me.
loading...
Well done, Charli.
loading...
Isn’t this the problem with pedophiles in general? That, at the basis of it, they do not really believe that what they are doing is wrong?
I believe that Freda Briggs also said (I was listening to her on the radio yesterday morning) that, unlike other types of criminals (thieves, bank robbers, car thieves) pedophiles NEVER retire.
loading...
Hey Charli,
Thanks for the link
I’m going to be on the lookout for Briggs’ publication.
I was just trying to say that to say that this is accepted in ‘the Church’ is wrong, because I’m in ‘the Church’ and a bunch of my friends are in ‘the Church’ and a whole heap of really lovely priests, nuns and brothers are in ‘the Church’ and they would not think that this is remotely acceptable, or with any doctrinal basis.
Obviously, ANY number of people believing this is too many.
loading...
Wow is is not true Charli, where did you hear these lies? Chastity encompasses the vow sexual purity not just relating to men and women. Some people will believe anything!!
loading...
Some people even believe that the pope is the vicar of Christ on earth. Who wrote this doctrine? Where is the proof?
loading...
@ Ali Flint
Where is the Proof ??
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/03/50-new-testament-proofs-for-petrine.html
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/09/biblical-support-for-terms-holy-father.html
As you were !
loading...
This is dogma not proof. Dogma is always masquerading as proof. Superstitio is probably a better pseudonym than “Veritas”.
loading...
Charli you are right. I saw a documentary about 12 months ago where they interviewed a pedophile priest and he said that they justified their abuse of children in that way, that sex with a woman is a sin but is not with children. There was some other justification, I can’t clearly remember but it was something like girl children would have sex anyway eventually so it wasn’t so bad to abuse girls. I will try and find the transcript from that documentary, it was American and an absolute horrifying eye-opener.
loading...
think the church needs also to recognise that some victims are going to be damaged by what happened to them and the self harming, anti social behaviours etc are because of what happened to them. I’m thinking the church looks at these adults and thinks, oh personality disorders, criminals, trouble makers, we can take their character and evidence apart with a good lawyer.
loading...
Em I think the “witch hunt” Pell called the new Royal Commission is a very good analogy. The Catholic church has now become the victim of a witch hunt where once it was the Catholic church itself who perpetrated a witch hunt on INNOCENT people. Now the church itself is the victim of a witch hunt which is focused not on the innocent but the GUILTY people. Now this is the right kind of witch hunt to have! Divine retribution at last. There are billions of Christians who always knew that this church was no representative of the real message of Christianity. It was an organised sham from the start. Any person who ever studied Christianity at a tertiary level impartially (including the 4 or 5 ancient languages required to do so) discovers this for themselves. But anybody with a functioning critical faculty can do this without even that education.
loading...
it’s such a hideous crime. And no doubt Pell doesn’t get it. Priests live such a priviliged life in many ways. And some have exploited that power in awful awful ways. About the seal of confession, I gather Pell meant that a priest could act on such knowledge (ie go to the police) and avoid being bound by the seal of confession by hearing the confession, if that makes sense. I don’t think he’s a very good communicator. I’m a catholic and although its been a while I recall the confession is meant to be between you and God (via a conduit, the priest). I doubt though, that the terrible sweeping of carpet institutionalised response (moving priests and brothers around and sending them to remote areas to reoffend) has anything to do with confession. So everybody who knew and signed off on a priest being removed from one area under a cloud time and time again heard that confession? Doubtful. And are they confessing these crimes anyway?? Surely somebody capable of such despicable acts would be capable of lying too. I;d be interested in hearing from more thoughtful members of the church rather than Pell, or herald sun writers for that matter.
loading...
Em the concept is that priests are not allowed to act on anything they hear in a confession – if a priest stepped into the confessional box and admitted to sexual abuse, the priest taking the confession cannot take that information to the police. If he admitted the same thing over a cup of tea, then it can be acted upon and taken to the police, but the second they step into that confessional box they are safe. Pell’s suggested solution to priests who are hearing confessions of abuse and unable to act on them is to simply not take the confessions of anyone they suspect of it……
loading...
Em you hit the nail on the head. Pell doesn’t get it. He actually minimises it. It means the organisation of the church as a whole doesn’t get it and this is happening 1500 years too late as far as I’m concerned.
loading...
Good on you Mia. It’s about time we were all demanding this.
I think a lot of people might not even be aware that priests don’t have to report information received in confessional, so the more we talk about it the better
loading...
It’s just absurd to think a disgusting pedophile who confesses to a MAN, sorry priest, is then given some divine forgiveness, when an innocent child is molested. It makes me sick to my stomach.
loading...
hear hear
loading...