This is an attempt to treat fire with fire, rape with rape: Spiritual rape is even worse than physical rape.

But of course, politicians never truly cared for the victims of rape - only for their own seats from which they can rape the ordinary people.

What this will do in practice, is to stop confession altogether, forcing people to travel overseas to confess. Most priests would not dare to risk jail, so they will no longer conduct confessions, some will go underground while the best will become martyrs, bearing the cross and gaily filling the jails.

There is of course a section of the population who will rejoice at such outcomes for sheer hatred of religion. While they won't get a single report to police, this was never their intention in the first place.

What the dickens is Yuyutsu on about?

I remind him that the church is a construct of man, not a creation of God.

Indeed, if a church or, if he prefers, The Church, chooses to go its own way as it has so often in this matter, then it leaves the State, who actually run this joint, no choice but to act.

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's... etc.

My advice to him is to be patient. If his views of matters eternal are correct, then after his 3 score plus 10 conforming to democracy's law, he may have the whole of eternity by celestial rules. His time will come. I, on the other hand, will be but ashes strewn to the winds.

Clergy have in my view forfeited any claim to have special rules applied to them that don't apply to other professions that care for children.

Other professions (teachers, nurses etc) have mandatory reporting of child abuse, and it's high time that clergy were subject to the same rules. This is doubly the case when clergy hold leadership positions in schools and other institutions that care for children.

Such rules should be blind to religion. Priests, ministers, rabbis and imams should have a mandatory reporting requirement, just as nurses, social workers and teachers do on the basis that all of these professions involve the care and leadership of children.

As I said elsewhere, if a law is passed requiring priests to reveal what is told to them in Confession then the Pope can make the law irrelevant with a few strokes of the pen.

If anyone at all fails to report the abuse of a child that person is sick. If the Pope makes that stoke of the pen which some people think overrules the law of the land , the Pope is sick too.

It is time our children were freed from parental and peer pressure to trust sick individuals.

Not only should people who abuse children be gaoled. So should the people who fail to take those measures which would prevent such abuse.

They all should be kept in a cage.

Dear Engineer,

It is not "The Church" for me because I am not even a Christian.

Yes, the churches should leave the state alone as they have been involved in its power-games and feeding on its teats for far too long. Likewise, the state should also leave the churches alone.

Yes, Render Unto Caesar that which is theirs: my money may be theirs, but not my conscience.

You speak about "celestial rules" as if earth is exempt from divine law, but it is not.
As a Hindu I am not interested in the celestial realms, which are only a distraction and a complete waste of time. If I fail to complete my journey to God during this lifetime on earth, then I will sadly need to return to this same earth again and again until I do.

Now if by informing the regime I create suffering, if my actions cause someone to be imprisoned, then not only would it block my spiritual path, but I would also have to bear that karma and be imprisoned myself either in this lifetime or in future.

Doomed to jail either way, as a private person I can at least try to shut my eyes and ears in such matters, but Christian priests cannot afford this luxury. I suppose they could hang a big sign saying "No confessions or absolution for child abusers and victims, please", but what if people fail to follow those signs, sending their poor priest to prison regardless?

---

Dear JBSH,

«Clergy have in my view forfeited any claim to have special rules applied to them»

Then there should indeed be no special rules: nobody, regardless of profession or standing, should be forced to serve as an informant to the regime against their conscience.

---

Dear Old Man,

Anyone who challenges the secular regime, be they a pope or otherwise, who is not even afraid of your threats and abuse, is a hero.

What you ask is to abuse innocent and peaceful people for refusing to serve your regime. Suits you to live in North Korea.

The seal? Has no authority to cover up a crime against the innocent! With those found to be doing so! Guilty of ipso facto, aiding and abetting after the fact

Moreover, repentance and remorse, never ever include repetition or recidivism! Nor endless cover ups!
Alan B.

Hi there YUYUTSU...

I'm in agreement with you, indeed those who have a need to make a confession might have to travel abroad especially if they fear their Priest might give em up as it were. From a purely policing perspective I couldn't imagine how you'd ever manage to police such a law?

Interestingly TONI LAVIS in another Topic gave a very good explanation of what the precise options are for a Priest, when he hears of serious criminality allegedly committed by a confessor?

You really have to roll around the floor with uncontrollable laughter when the boring old Hart claims that: the "confession in the "catholic" church is a spiritual encounter with "God" through the priest

Further there is nothing "sacred" about the confession either. It is entirely a man-made device/procedure the purpose of which is essentially political or a form of crowd control. And of course there is almost zero demand in the lets-pretend process of the "confession" for the person confessing to change their action(s) in any fundamental way - or to simply not to perform or do that form of "sin" any more, no ifs, ands or buts.

Remember too that the "catholic" church is not in any sense a "sacred" institution, it is primarily a power-and-control-seeking political entity and a world-wide business corporation which is collectively one of the worlds largest property owners.
And whenever it can it puts itself above the laws of the secular state, as described on this site http://www.concordatwatch.eu - and evidenced by the fact that "catholic" cardinals have world-wide diplomatic immunity and privileges

Has the law changed regarding client confidentiality for psychiatrists and lawyers?

//Has the law changed regarding client confidentiality for psychiatrists and lawyers?//

Dunno about lawyers, but mandatory reporting laws apply to all NSW health professionals if a patient admits to having committed or intending to commit a range of offences.

All that the Pope has to do is to instruct priests not to hear confessions except those near death and to authorize them to give general absolution before each mass, weekdays and Sundays.

Would the Pope taking such action be an interference in Australia's internal affairs?

A little reading of Catholic rules for the governance of the Church and a bit of theology would help some posters.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Sadly, it is not only those who committed heinous crimes who will be forced to go overseas for confession - everyone would, perhaps to the exclusion of some middle-aged ladies and those on their death-bed: even when one has done nothing illegal, still very few priests will risk providing them the service because they cannot tell in advance what will be said in the confession. Those who will suffer most, will be the children victims of abuse. They wouldn't even have the means to travel overseas so more likely they would instead jump down from a roof in shame.

The police would also be among the losers: while they will not receive any more reports, at least at the moment they can trap suspected paedophiles using an undercover policeman who pretends to be a priest to catch the unsuspecting criminal - this too will be over.

---

Dear Daffy,

Thank you for the pointer regarding Concordats, it is very interesting.

Something becomes sacred when people treat it is sacred and use it as a representation of God.

Of course, the Catholic Church has been quite unholy for centuries, but this does not exclude the possibility of individuals within it - priests and laypeople alike, doing the right thing despite the organisation and fulfilling the confession as a genuine spiritual practice.

The thing is, since the perpetrator is made aware of the very reasonable expectation that priests report abusers who confess, they simply will not admit to their actions in the confessional. Also, how does this apply to priests who are abusing children? Given the criminal obfuscation/lies/denial/blaming victims reaction by the church in front of the world as it rushes to cover up and protect it's own, how can we possible trust them to obey the law of the land?

Just suppose that the priest decides to abide by a law that says he must report a penitent how does the priest know the identity of the offender?

Without any way to in force this kind of law, it will come down to the priest and the confessors. A matter of conscience indeed. Unless confessional become wire taped, or those who confess in them speak out later about what they confessed to a priest, there's no way to know what was confessed and was wasn't in a confessional.

The priests doing confessions might be able to gadge how often (if they ever have had) an abuser will confess their sins against a child. Or how often a child confess such things. And if the law is passed only the police will know which priests will turn people in.

If it passes it will be a matter of conscience for who will follow it. I doubt every priest will have the same reaction to this. I doubt Catholics that feel the need to confess will stop going to a confessional either. Because it's a matter of their guilt.

That said. Watch the actions of the state. This is brought to light and brought to law not long after laws have been suggested removing Christian observation and discussion among students within schools. (Even to give Christmas greeting cards). Whether this law for child abuse goes through or not, or is followed or not, it seems to me that Australian legislation might be forming an agenda against religion, (or maybe just Christianity). Watch out and be alert.

JBSH wrote: "Clergy have in my view forfeited any claim to have special rules applied to them."
And Yuyuysu wrote in reply: "Then there should indeed be no special rules: nobody, regardless of profession or standing, should be forced to serve as an informant to the regime against their conscience."

This is dependent upon the clergy having the divine blessing of a divided conscience. Though his conscience be bruised by the depredations of a predatory monster feeding his dreadful desires by causing irreparable harm to the most innocent of his flock, he suffers a mental breakdown at the contemplation of being stripped of the "right" by civil and criminal law to channel his god's word to the "penitent".

The "regime" as Yuyutsu puts it is generally a democratically elected government who has the power to put in place legislation reflecting the electorate's moral and civil opinion, which electorate seems to be more outraged by pedophilic clergy than by the possibility of said clergy being disgraced and barred from connection on the Royal Telephone.

In a response to Old Man, Yuyutsu writes: "What you ask is to abuse innocent and peaceful people for refusing to serve your regime. Suits you to live in North Korea."

A society has laws requiring "innocent and peaceful people" to report criminal behaviour because not all citizens are innocent, some even promote criminality and there are sufficient of these to make such laws necessary. Societies develop codes of laws because the electorate deems them necessary. In a FAIR AND OPEN society where conflict arises between the sacred and the profane the profane must prevail. If it doesn't we will be governed by a theocracy, not a democracy.

I find Yuyutsu's attitude to be repugnant in the extreme. The way religious authorities have acted over the past 20 years or so to protect their hierarchies from legitimate charges of criminality brands them as vile minions far more dedicated to self-preservation than to the welfare of the innocent. That they have the gall to claim privilege in any human endeavour insults intelligence.

So, a special rule for Catholic clergy is proposed. But none for other religions which don't have confession. Just another anti-Catholic rant, then.

The royal commission into institutional child abuse has generally been reported as a royal commission into the Catholic church, yet many other churches (excluding the Left-voting Muslim child abusers, of course, and the "safe" schools criminals) are free to carry on.

Child sex abuse is an extremely emotive subject in society because it is so difficult to understand how an adult can desire to have sex with a small child. Most adults feel revulsion at the very thought of this behavior. And herein lies the difficulty in trying to deal rationally with the problem. We get so angry and emotional that all we can think about is revenge and punishment. There is clearly something wrong with pedophiles. It is too late to intervene after the damage has been done to a child. Society has to target some of its resources at preventing the damaging behavior in the first place. Focusing only on the anger and urge to get revenge for the abused children is not the most effective way of preventing child sex abuse in the first place. Modern Germany is an enlightened society. They have recently established programs where pedophiles who are troubled by their urges, can get help without fear that they will be demonized. This is a sensible approach because it aims at preventing the crime in the first place. Some other countries are also taking steps in this direction. Pedophilia should be treated as a illness, like schizophrenia. Of course, the child protection programs, like 'good touch and bad touch', must continue because they empower children to protect themselves. But it is now probably time to hand over control to our frontal cortex a bit more. The amygdala has done its job in getting us angry about the scourge of child sexual abuse.

If Catholics have forfeited the right to have a say on Child abuse then the leftist hypocrites should never have a say on aboriginal issues. They have ignored up to a third of kids in towns right now being abused thanks to their sick ideologies.

What seal? The one that allows an anointed by the very hand of God anointee empowered to hear confessions then forgive transgressions against the most innocent victims?

Being so disgusted as to ring crimestoppers as Mz Ann Nonymous? And voice concerns about a particular individual, without once revealing, special knowledge?

Suggest, given this individual manifests monstrous mental health issues, ought to mean, this individual bears watching/very close official evidence gathering surveillance?

Finishing with the advice, failing to act on this advice may result in permanent harm to a number of groomed and targeted juvenile individuals or worse?

And if followed to the letter? Ensuring at no time ever, has this alleged seal been broken!

Anyhow, the penitent confessor, needs to give himself or herself over to the Authorities and wear what's coming, in order to gain alleged divine forgiveness!

The fact that very few prosecutions have ensued! Sad testament to the absolute farce this man made custom/convention has become!

So much so that their Satanic master, must be rubbing his paws with glee! [Saying, shovel that coal son, the fires of hell have to be kept going for the massively expanded influx, with reserved VIP (vicious, insane, Paedophiles) bookings?]

Suffer little Children to come unto me!
Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's! Quote, unquote.
Alan B.

Runner
*...then the leftist hypocrites should never have a say on aboriginal issues. They have ignored up to a third of kids in towns right now being abused thanks to their sick ideologies...*

Expand on that if you will. A statement like that is disturbing, how is it so?

Alan B,

How does the confessor know the identity of the penitent, should he (he/she in some denominations other than Catholic) take a guess?

diver dan

just check out the state of play in Roeburne and look at those opposing intervention diver. Twiggy referred to the Greens as protectors of paedophiles. The lefties are still more interested in protecting their totally flawed dogmas and narratives than protecting kids from sexual abuse.

Thanks runner..

I'll watch this subject in future. I have some uninformed biases ATM. I think intervention is fraught with many issues.

…One of which is how Aboriginal communities are used as a trial for interventionist policies to be broadened to the general population. It is cynical and abusive towards Aboriginal communities in itself, used in this way.

The problem is how to balance intervention for true benefit, against cynical Government cost saving.

Whatever the church did in the past did little to protect the innocents. Why do they hark back to the past?
Isn't it time for some forward thinking about how priests treat the very people who are known as their flock?
Shame and shame again for upholding a practice which enabled criminals to get away with their crimes and to be excused for their sins by their peers.