What drives the cover-up?

Fewer and fewer are entering the clergy. Many churches are not open even on Sundays. To a bishop, a low-paid highly educated parish priest is almost irreplaceable. The bishop cannot afford to sack him. So - the bishop finds some way of keeping him on and hopes for the best.

LETTTS not just single out 'Churches'.... how about we address such problems across EVERY aspect of our culture and society..

SWIMMING COACHES... ?

SCOUT MASTERS...?

ROTARY....?

LIONS...?

In fact ALL bodies where people are placed in positions of power, and we could look at the LAW FRATERNITY and JUDGES.. (remember the one who committed suicide in Sydney.. was found to be masterbating at Wynyard Subway station ?)

In fact..the ABSENCE of the mention of other parts of society in this thread, expose the deliberate and malicious and anti God nature of its motivation.

Does Amanda REALLY care about the victims of child abuse...

OR..

Does she care more about DESTROYING the credibility of "the Church" as a social instituion ? What could be the motive for this ?

Hmmmm *thinks*..ok.. here is a theory..

1/ Destroy all symbols of morality in the Community
2/ Proclaim some ideology (lets say Marxism)as the alternative.

Well gee... I've never come across THAT before...OH WAIT.. yes I have.. in just about every country and place where Marxists exist and where they struggle to gain POWER for themselves and line their pockets and nests with privilege and pompt.. "Peoples" parades.. and like the hypocritical Pharisees of Jesus day:

43Woe to you Pharisees! For(N) you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. 44Woe to you!(O) For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it."

Marxists are like that..and SO ARE priests who abuse children.. the priests are under MORE condemnation from Christ, but NEVER NEVER NEVER suggest that this is just a 'Church' problem.

amanda

thank you for this thoughtful article. perhaps the victims/survivors should being suing those who put the individual into the position of trust in the school. as well, the authorities should be prosecuting a person who talks about 'minor indiscretions' and 'he has put it all behind him' as a collaborator-in-crime. an offence to cover this form of reprehensible conduct - the enabling of a child sexual abuser - to continue the practice is something that ought to be able to be prosecuted. those who collaborate in 'covering up' are equally to be susceptible to prosecution.

also the crime of misprision of felony applies to the covering up/failure to report to authorities (police, etc - that is, the legitimate authorities, not those who usurp state/community authority) of serious crimes (felonies) which applies to sexual offences against children.

some states have abolished misprision of felony replacing it with a crime of 'covering up' for money. this should be revisited and a crime fashioned to deal with this 'cover up'/absolution - which should be recognised as a crime in itself.

it is astounding that churches have been allowed to set up bodies, etc to 'deal with' these crimes - without intervention from/of the authorities that are set up to deal authoritatively with them viz state police, dpp, etc. this is usurpation of authority which the community places in police, dpp, etc.

"Silly indiscretion,"did the man say?I'd like someone to hold him down and make him perform some disgusting acts and see if he still called it that..Nowhere in the article did i see any suggestion that this problem was only in the church.It just so happens, that is what the article was about.We are all well aware that it happens in all walks of life and that perverts pick jobs that give them easy access to children.Even a blue card is no guarantee that these sick individuals won't slip through the net.As you are well aware their other sections on this site dealing with child abuse and noone has tried to claim that these professions are the only ones where this happens.It somehow seems worse when it is a member of a religious order that is supposed to believe in love and treating children kindly.If we could all confess our sins and be exonerated from horrific crimes,imagine how much worse the world would be in.Shame on all those disgusting pieces of so-called humanity.LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE.

BOAZ_David

This is one of your least ethical posts. The article was about sexual abuse by clergy, not about abuse by swimming coaches, scout masters, judges et al. There are plenty of other articles about sexual abuse by non-clergy.

Nowhere in Amanda's article does she suggest that this is just a 'Church' problem. Show me where I'm wrong, David.

To leap from ..".the ABSENCE of the mention of other parts of society in this thread" to an accusation that the writer is deliberately and maliciously 'anti God' is logical nonsense and downright bizarre.

Even more bizarre is your suggestion - based on no evidence whatsoever - that Amanda doesn't "... REALLY care about the victims of child abuse..." Really David! (And where in your posting do you express your concern for those vulnerable children?)

Your old tack that it's an assault on the churches so as to enable some ideology to be given an advantage ("let's say Marxism" – might as well, why not kick the old commie can to try to distract the moronic right from the real issue of child sexual abuse.)

Now a really intelligent and sensitive Christian response to Amanada’s article would do one or more of the following:

(a) show some concern for the victims - they need our love and care;
(b) offer some insights into why clergy engage in child sexual abuse - we must find a way to stop it;
(c) show an understanding that sexual abuse by clergy is a fundamental breach of trust between pastoral carer and the child - I would have thought a reason for instant dismissal;
(d) offer some analysis of why churches so often put the welfare of their priests above the welfare of the child victims - they can't afford any more loss of credibility.

That’s what I would expect a real Christian to do David.

Yes BD I an afraid that is right, and your post highlights the fact Church's are trying to both hide and forgive the unforgivable.
Remember I once was among you , a Christian, from a family who very much still are.
And time and again have heard people who proclaim to be followers of God defend people who he[if he existed]would condemn to hell[if it existed.
While they do not these child molesters do exist in Church's of all faiths in number far too big.
Defending them is questioning the very reason people trust in Gods.
Think about your post please.

Boazy: "Does Amanda REALLY care about the victims of child abuse...

OR..

Does she care more about DESTROYING the credibility of "the Church" as a social instituion ? What could be the motive for this ?"

Yes, Boazy really has sunk to a new low in this post, hasn't he?

His callous disregard of the victims of sexual abuse by clergy is exacerbated by his completely speculative attack on the article's author. The deployment of the Marxist 'straw man' in his effort to deflect attention from the obvious deficiencies of churches with respect to protecting child-abusing clergy is as laughable as it is contemptible.

Perhaps the article touches on issues a bit too close to home for our most vociferously hypocritical godbotherer?

BOAZ_David

You’re right that clergy aren’t the only ones to abuse children, but the case of abusive clergy is different in several respects:

- Even more than a swimming coach or Rotarian, clergy are expected to exercise moral discernment and pastoral care for the material, emotional and spiritual welfare of their flocks. The betrayal of this responsibility is especially serious.

- As the author points out, by treating abuse as a sin to be forgiven (which it is) rather than a crime to be punished (which it also is) churches have committed grave injustices that are rightly perceived to be self-serving.

- Again as the author said, the systematic and prolonged cover-ups, intimidation and denial of the churches goes beyond mere protection of friends and colleagues, but are cynical institutional self-protection, in which the churches have demonstrated lower moral standards than many secular institutions facing similar allegations.

The effect of this is evident in the trivial - changed church policies meant I needed to get a police clearance to continue teaching Sunday school - to the appalling - the terrible damage inflicted on victims, and the loss of respect and trust in not just the churches but the faith they serve. It's time we faced up to the huge damage the Churches have done to themselves as well as their victims.

"LETTTS not just single out 'Churches'.... how about we address such problems across EVERY aspect of our culture and society.."

Well BD, lets look at who pontifates the loudest, about "good
Christian morals" and those "dumb atheists"

Personally, I have little time for hypocrites. In the US senate
we've just had one of Clinton's main attackers, exposed as a closet
gay, trying to obtain gay sex in an airport toilet.

In the papers there is a story of a Christian fundamentalist
preacher, sent to jail for trying to use the scriptures to
justify having sex with his teenage daughters.

The Catholics pontificate the loudest about how people should
control themselves, yet their priests are pretty bad at it.

Personally I have no problem with singling out those
who pontificate the loudest. Hypocrites!

Clearly all that thumping of bibles isn't doing much good.

I'll just stay a humble Darwinian agnostic thank you :)

One of the saddest things about the abuse saga is that it has tainted all church workers, many of whom are good, hardworking, caring and compassionate people.
There has been a tendency, in the media especially, to sensationalise and exaggerate the events and an encouragement for people to 'come forward'.
Yes, some abuse has occurred and that is an appalling thing and must be dealt with but there are also false accusations being made. What of the priest who, in an effort to comfort a crying boy who has lost a parent, puts a hand on the boy's shoulder. In the confusion of grief and looking for someone to blame in his anger at losing a parent the boy in turn accuses the priest of inappropriate behaviour.
There is a need to be very, very careful when making such accusations. The lure of financial compensation can be very strong and the assumption that all priests/ministers etc accused are guilty is too easy to make when religious organisations are seen as wealthy cows to be milked.
It is similar to the claims of abuse elsewhere by other groups. Perhaps the answer is to search for other ways to assist people rather than provide lump sums in financial compensation.

A large part of the problem with sexual abuse with children is that it is treated softly by the courts. Castration would be a good option those who are repeat offenders. Jesus is actually harder on those who cause little ones to sin. Unfortunately a number of our judges have also committed the same crimes as some of those men in frocks.

The author would have more credibility if she campaigned against the porn industry today which results in masses of children being interfered with.

The thing that puzzles me is that the churches compensate the victims (in which I am in full agreement of) but the multitudes of others (doctors, teachers, coaches, step fathers etc etc etc) don't.

Churches are seen as a soft target Runner - there is an assumption that they are going to pay up without argument and that they can afford to do so. It does not matter in the slightest to those demanding compensation that the money will often come from people who have had nothing whatsoever to do with the actions, that they are merely church attendees - often of a church that has no relationship to the abuser but one within that 'communion'. That the money is also diverted from use with others who also have a great need and may, if used wisely, help to prevent future abuse through the alleviation of all manner of ills is apparently beside the point.
Those who have been abused need every consideration but there is also a need to consider where financial compensation comes from and what the consequences are. I think we can be quite certain that the AMA would strongly object to being asked to pay financial compensation to the victim of sexual abuse by a doctor. It should not be any different for the churches but the values and traditions are seen to be different...although how it can be different from "First do no harm" is beyond me.
Any wonder that church attendance is dropping and priests are hard to find...who would want the job knowing that a false claim could be made against you at any time just because someone is emotionally fragile or that you have unwittingly made a statement someone thinks is heretical or a gesture of comfort was misunderstood by someone else.
I have no time for sexual abusers but I also wonder why it is that there suddenly seems to be so much of it. In no way intending to belittle those with genuine cases (who have my utmost sympathy) - is it seen as potentially easy money for some troublemakers?

"I think we can be quite certain that the AMA would strongly object to being asked to pay financial compensation to the victim of sexual abuse by a doctor."

Thats quite a different situation. Doctors are simply members of
AMA, not employees. Priests are employed by the Catholic Church,
no different to say staff who work for McDonalds. If they cause
others harm whilst working for McDonalds, it costs the company
bigtime. When those staff got it wrong in the US, I remember
a case, where a woman in her 70s spilt boiling hot coffee in her
lap. It cost McDonalds 10 million$.

The Catholic Chuch is a hugely wealthy organisation. I doubt
if those funds come from rattling the tin to the congregation.
More like large legacies of real estate which have been left
to the church. Check out how much real estate that many religions
own, its a huge business!

Hopefully what the various religions have learnt out of these huge
payouts, is that cover ups are not worth it and only perpetuate
the problem. Better to come clean when the problem first surfaces,
then sweep everything under the carpet for years, or it will
cost them a great deal more.

David,

You're right when you say that exploitation and physical abuse are not just Church problems, but when the Church is responsible for allowing the activity to go unchecked in its own domain, given what it professes, it is the biggest hypocrite of all.

The only way to solve the problem is to open up the cloistered world of the Church (as well as all other well-protected, powerful and secretive places) to scrutiny. As long as such places exist, the predators will always have somewhere to hide. A bit of strong leadership from Church and society leaders would also not go astray, although I wouldn't hold my breath waiting. I suspect the only saving grace will be when the Church has its own version of an "Andrew Johns" moment, when it gets sprung doing the wrong thing once too many times and realises that it's better off coming clean than continuing to hide such activities.

Interesting to note that Bishop (retired) Geoffrey Robinson has just published a book called "Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church: Reclaiming the Spirit of Jesus", where he grapples with these issues. The speech he gave at the launch of the book is here http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3413

Robinson is well-qualified to write on abuse as he authored the Towards Healing document, that guides the Australian Catholic church's response to allegations of sexual abuse. Well, except for Melbourne, where Archbishop Pell brought in his own proceedures.

Robinson's book has been well-received in the mainstream presss and in portions of the religious press. But it's provoked a storm of protest in some Catholic circles, for example http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=53109 (some of these ranters would be right at home on OLO).

I can't really comment on the book as I haven't read it, but Robinson obviously feels that the Catholic Church's response to abuse claims is symptomatic of a deeper malaise. He feels that entrenched interests in the Church would rather ignore the problem than actually tackle it, I suspect he might agree with much of Amanda Gearing's thinking.

I don't quite get the by-line to this article title.

What more is it that Parliaments are required to do?

The author has covered the actual legal situation in totality, and that legal situation is unequivocally clear. Pedophilia is defined in law, and viewed by the bulk of society, be it religious or otherwise, as a particularly reprehensible crime.

Amanda has said "Only the police have the authority to investigate and charge offenders with crimes. ..... ..... The reporting of crimes or suspected crimes against children only requires an ability to dial 000."

It seems to me that the central issue here is one of authority. The authority of the Crown at all times over and above that of any church. Most immediately, that of course requires the confidentiality of the confessional be no longer able to be resorted to as an excuse for not passing information with respect to such crimes so obtained on to the police. A logical corollary of this is that in circumstances where it can subsequently be proven that any priest having heard a confession to such a crime and failed to inform police must in turn face the consequences for having effectively been an accessory after the fact.

This is a protestant kingdom. Non-catholic clergy have no "benefit of clergy" exemption from their clear civic duty. All that is required is for the Catholic Church to address this requirement under the British Crown, and formally decide whether or not it will comply. Either it opts to be seen as a haven for pedophiles, or it outs them.

It has the example of Peter (Hollingworth, that is), who stepped aside from the Governor-Generalship, rather than be seen to let any claim to, or mantle of, authority remain available to minimise such offences, some of which had earlier occurred under his nominal pastoral responsibility. True it may be that some thought him hounded from office in a perhaps sanctimonious championing of this cause, but as General Michael Jeffery, perhaps prophetically, said, upon taking up his office, "The Almighty works in some very strange ways."

Others have said what I am saying really. That is there are so many of these depraved monsters in so many professions that we have no surety for our children.

The church is particularly distasteful because they profess "good" in everything. In reality the church does very little of what they advertise.

To me paedophiles are possibly the worst of all humans. Sorry, the word human is the only one I can use here as animals don't do what these despicable waste of spaces do. I would want them all put away permanently. Any offence once a person is an adult, 18, would mean the rest of their lives is spent behind bars with their own sort. NO release at all as the rescidivism rate is very high.

Why pick on the church over any other area? Rock spiders are just that. Wherever these creatures live, work or reside should be made public, at all times should they ever be out of prison once convicted.

Agree with Belly and disagree with Boaz big time.

Boaz, where on earth did you dig this conspiracy theory up? Marxists? I'm just surprised you didn't blame the Druids. Sorry, John Howard is seeing them in private now, all sects to the PM's office immediately!

Really Boaz stick to what the article is about if you can.

Paedophiles should be simply executed on conviction. Or physically disabled over and above what can be done now. Like castration and shock treatment.

RobP I quite agree... the Church and its 'agents' ARE to be held to a high level of accountability.. no argument there. But by secular society ? ... they are accountable to CHRIST Himself. Now.. we often hear of the "evil" Exclusive Brethren.... but I should let you in on a little not so well known secret..the 'exclusive' aspect of their denominational badge is that they ABSOLUTELY will NOT tolerate "sin" in the members.. leaders or otherwise... so.. there are many aspects of stories filtering throught he 'totally unbiased' media.. (cough) which are not made known, but which IF known would change the public perception OF those situations AND the 'Church' as a whole.

So...why do I deflect this attack by Amanda and raise questions about her true motives ? AAAH.. I do it because 'The Church' which includes me, have been given the rotten rough end of the media stick for so long now..and from hollywood, that I'm determined to 'fight back'. It's called the COUNTERpunch.

So, (for Franks benefit) while this "topic" is about Church related funny business, it forms part of a much bigger thing, which is perpetrated by Leftist interests and thus, I see no reason whatsoever not to attack it for what I feel it is.

David-BOAZ

I'll talk in your language. You don't seem to understand mine.

"Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice." (Matthew 26:34 King James Version)

Three times you've denied the child victims of sexual assault by clergy. Do you have any feeling for them at all?

Boazy: "...while this 'topic' is about Church related funny business, it forms part of a much bigger thing, which is perpetrated by Leftist interests "

There you go, Frank - all is revealed. Clergy don't sexually abuse kids. It's the LEFTIST PAEDOPHILES.

It certainly could NEVER happen in the Brethren. We know this because Boazy said so, and he never tells porkies, does he?

"but which IF known would change the public perception OF those situations AND the 'Church' as a whole."

Hang on whoah BD. You won't get far, trying to defend the bretheren
mob. Any cult, which brainwashes its kiddies, denies its followers
from freely mixing with the rest of the community, bans tv, radio,
internet etc, so that those brainwashed followers can't think
for themselves, is not defensible. You are sinking to new
fanatically religious lows, tryng to do it.

Castration of child sex offenders? This solution is predicated on an obviously faulty premise. Clearly, this solution wont stop an offender from switching sides.

Lets not live with our heads in the sand.

Claims of hypocracy on this forum? Hahaha.

OLO is the gathering place of hypocrites. Every single poster in this place indulges inconsistent opinions.

Lets refrain from self deceit, shall we. Afterall, self deceit is at the heart of those who abuse the vulnerable.

David Boaz,

Whether you meant to say it or not, the implication, as with your counterpart Muslim fundamentalist brethren, puts you above the law, "... the Church and its 'agents' ARE to be held to a high level of accountability.. no argument there. But by secular society ? ... they are accountable to CHRIST Himself."

The mad mullahs, their followers and their form of allegiance to Allah are, in principle, exactly the same as yours is to ‘Christ’. Whilst we can be reasonably certain your nature is not one of terrorism, this of type misguided authority will eventually spawn such activity. J.C. himself, as the story goes, submitted entirely to Roman authority for trial – you, however, place yourself above such action. It would seem you desire your own Shari type court, outside of secular authority.

Yes, Trader.. We’re all hypocrites, to a lesser or greater degree – but the biggest deserve to be cut down to size, so we can at least look 'em in the eye :).

Hi Relda...yes that was a bit ambiguous... I don't mean that Clergy should be above the (secular) law at all.. I intended to convey that utlimately the harshest Judge of these people will be our Lord.

The only secular law which the Church is 'above' is any law which seeks to enforce:
a)Idol worship or pagan practices.
b)Denial of Christ and/or faith.

Apart from that, we are called to accept rulers as 'appointed by God'.

The tragedy of child abuse by Clergy is that they of ALL people should know Christ's view of such things. Yet...some still go against what they know is right.
Perhaps this tells us something about their spiritual condition ?

The biblical concept of faith is not a 'once' only decision, but a lifetime of moment by moment repenting and committment in faith.

Somewhere along the track, these people became lost and went astray, or.. they never knew the Lord, but simply saw the position the Church offered as a means to an end to satisfy their own carnal cravings.

The thing which rather irritates me though, is the constant onslaught by secular media against 'The Church' while at the same time condoning the most scandalous behavior among non Christian celebrities. (Paris Hilton-olatry comes to mind) The FM stations CONstantly discharge a disgusting foul stench of immorality in the name of popular youth programming as though it was as natural as breathing. Well..perhaps the day is coming when some of us will start demonstrating outside their offices.(and of course giving them some free publicity :) But still, the point will be made if such things happen.

...annnnnd...here is a classic example of 'secular society'...making it up (on the downward slide to moral oblivion) as they go.. seeking the BIGGG bucks from the LOWWWWW morality.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22352257-5001021,00.html
[ANGRY Catholics have pledged to hold candlelit vigils outside Channel Ten headquarters whenever the steamy new show Californication is on air.
The first vigil was overnight, with more than 30 people praying away their concerns about the louche new dramedy billed as "the filthiest show on television"]

See... 'secular' media/society glories in 'filth' uncritically, and then...'they'.. attack the Church as a bunch of 'filthy' priests.

Notice also...that the 'Fundamentalist' Catholics.. are simply holding a vigil.. no bombs, no threats, no violence.....

BOAZ_David

Got to get your priorities right, eh?

Quote: "The thing which rather irritates me though, is the constant onslaught by secular media against 'The Church' while at the same time condoning the most scandalous behavior among non Christian celebrities. (Paris Hilton-olatry comes to mind)"

David, if the choice is between condemning clergy who sexually abuse children and condemning crass publicity for a no-talent like Paris Hilton, give me Paris anytime.

Your defence of 'The Church' is touching. Your defence of and sympathy for sexual abuse victims remains absolutely zilch.

Suffer the children.

Thanks for your clarification on ambiguity David, but I don’t think Amanda Gearing wished to entertain such ambiguity, “...the continuing confusion between sin and crime must be openly and clearly ended.” Her attack, if I can put it that way, is against a culture quite devious where, “the cruelty and the perversion... is shrouded by the loving, the kindness and the normal..” She also accurately states, “Pedophiles are known to groom not only their victims but also the child’s protectors including parents, teachers, headmasters and senior clergy”. The great difficulty arises where a child must, “..look into the face of evil and become a whistleblower, risking the wrath and ostracism of the congregation, and possibly even their own family”. The Church, therefore, can be as protective and promoting of ‘bad culture’ as any institution or organisation – it’s hypocrisy to suggest otherwise.

Whilst I respect your sincerity and your faith (aspects of which I might even share), I understand faith (or belief) as entirely different from, by definition, knowledge. Faith, as an internal condition and can certainly be prompting of outward action. There are two guiding principles(amongst others), however, in the separation of Church and State, i.e. not to promote religion above secularism and not promote secularism above religion. In other words, the Church can influence the values of a secular society and may indeed, in the name of free speech, directly critisise the ‘corrupted’ values of society –but to enforce her values is not in her arena.

A secular publication, incidentally, recognises the morality (or lack there of) residing within the confines of the air-headed Paris Hilton, “When it comes to selfish, self-centred, over-privileged wastes of oxygen, Paris Hilton comes at the very top of the list. Contributing absolutely nothing useful or meaningful to the planet, this pitiful, spoilt celebrity airhead tries desperately hard to look sexy but instead just comes over as stupid. And deeply unpleasant.” (Urban 75 Mag.):)

BD, as usual you miss the point completely!

Paris Hilton is a bimbo, making money out of being a bimbo.
She does not pontifate her morality to anyone and is accountable
to nobody, if she doesent break the law.

The devoutly religous pontifate their morality and their
little moral lines in the sand to everyone, suggesting that
the law should be changed to suit their moral agenda.

At that point they are accountable to everyone and under
intense scrutiny, or face the open charge of hypocracy.

People in glass houses, should not throw stones.

Boaz, Boaz, you have dug yourself a really big hole this time, haven't you.

I'm afraid they aren't on YouTube, so you will be asked to read words rather than watch lurid pictures, but do take a look at these.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pastor-had-sex-with-daughters/2007/08/30/1188067266454.html

http://www.eux.tv/article.aspx?articleId=13702

And that's just the last couple of days. Admit it, there is a problem.

Your response is, I know, just a knee-jerk reaction in defense of your religion, but you are defending the indefensible, aren't you?

>>I don't mean that Clergy should be above the (secular) law at all.. I intended to convey that utlimately the harshest Judge of these people will be our Lord.<<

Isn't that just the teensiest bit convenient? Especially as his biggest claim to fame, apparently, is his ability to forgive us our trespasses?

>>The thing which rather irritates me though, is the constant onslaught by secular media against 'The Church'...<<

Yet another attempt to deflect the charges. You're definitely in denial, aren't you? The media - in this instance, at least - is simply pointing out the added piquancy of hypocrisy that adds another layer of newsworthiness an an already heinous and unforgivable - yes, unforgivable - crime.

Take a close look at yourself. Right now, it is not a particularly pretty sight.

Abuse is a complex of problems which require a sophisticated response.

Lifeline and other support organisations can help abuse victims. It is vital that we in community raise our awareness and help create an environment for healing. After any financial compensation there are intellectual, social, emotional, spiritual considerations.

Australia as a signatory to our United Nations http://www.un.org & WHO (World Health Organisation) initiated a National Mental Health Strategy http://www.mentalhealth.gov.au in 1992 which developed a Promotion, Prevention and Early Intervention (PPEI) Action Plan in 2000. The PPEI Action Plan has explicit process and outcome indicators for mental health recovery.

At the 2006 Anglican Adelaide Synod http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_Diocese_of_Adelaide a question was asked on what were the barriers to creating an international research centre on sexual misconduct.

HERE IS SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT

It may be the case that when parliamentarians actively and deliberately seek out their respective churches for political support, they set up a situation where it may become difficult for them to have the necessary arms length needed to genuinely committ themselves to purusing such abuses that may be carried out by certain members of the church, by way of demanding policy and procedures be put in place.

Such active engagement with the church and support for church positions on issues such as abortion and so forth, in order to raise political support for the respective candidate, may compromise the ability of such candidates to effectively pursue such issues.

IS ABORTION A BIGGER SIN THAN CHILD ABUSE?
I am not aware, so I ask this by way of a question, but has that very Catholic Senator Julian McGauran who zealously pursued the case of that woman who had a late term abortion, also ever been noted for purusing and/or publicly condemning any member of the church who has engaged in child abuse?

The Catholic Church needs fundamental reform of its structures and processes to address the issue of sexual abuse, because this is just one symptom of a larger problem. If more men and women within and outside of church structures have the courage and commitment to speak out about the misuse of unbridled power, regardless of the costs, then change will happen.

Times have changed. The Article is true about the Anglican Church ten years ago. Now when an allegation arises against a clergyperson which is criminal the Church reports to the Police as a matter of course and also assists the victim to tell his story to them.
Experience shows that Police cannot always prosecute due to lack of corroboration or passage of time. And the high criminal onus means the many prosecutions do not suceed.
The Church still needs to deal with the allegation as a serious matter in any event, make an appropriate pastoral response to the victim including an apology, come to some conclusion if possible about the facts, deal with the perpetrator and protect people into the future.
All Anglican abuse can be reported to 1800774945 or to reportabuse@sydney.anglican.asn.au as well as to the Police.

It is important to not only consider what has happened for healing but also realise that Synods in major denominations have seriously started to address sexual misconduct which includes updated Canon (Church law). Further information can be seen by doing an online search eg by www.google.com for the respective denomination you may be interested in or have ongoing concern.

We all need to be part of the change we are looking for so that the victims do not victimise.

Kind regards

--
Matthew Fowler
2007 Kingston Candidate

http://www.sa.democrats.org.au/Election <-- see our Objectives, balloted policies and current issues
- change politics! be the change we are all looking for ...

The Australian Democrats stand for a fair society that values justice, democracy, individual freedom and diversity.

We work for a prosperous, environmentally sustainable and equitable economy; good, accountable governance and responsible, peaceful engagement in the global community.

We are honest, compassionate, beholden to no interest group (big business, the unions or chained to any extreme ideology or religion) and we provide a voice for the voiceless.