Philo,

I agree, the abuse will not stop, yet we can increase awareness and try to diminish the number of examples. Given continuing media exposure, I think children's accounts might be believed today, whereas twenty years ago that was not the case. Likewise, DUI campaigns wont eliminate drink driving, but these campaigns are necessary.

We are starting to see junior clerics gaoled for offences. Good. The next step is the gaoling of the bishops, who cover-up events and "transfer" the offender, say from an ophanage to a primary school.

Although, I am unaware of any nuns being prosecuted for beating children with the strap, engaging in child labour and milking Govenment care allowances. The papers, a few weeks back, cited a significant example the aforementioned regarding nuns in Ireland.

When chidkred are abused there should be no such thing as Church previledge under Church and State.

Oliver,
I agree that there should not be any difference under the law, for any person. However standards have changed, parents straped their children in those days. The events of the 1940's were during war years where the children were supposedly being protected from what could be a worse fate - death.

My wife was born in Scotland during the war time and having lost her father she never knew in the war. Her mother moved to England and on the death of her mother at eight was adopted by a school friends parents. Children were catered for in the best way they could. Sure my wife was not deported to Australia to live in an institution but she was equally orphaned and had to adapt to a new family. She speaks only of them being her mother and father.

Philo,

I too admire most of the folk whom open their homes and families to orphans.Loving foster parets whom truly become "mum" and "dad".

Yet, we Church nuns not so long ago.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/at-the-mercy-of-nuns/story-e6frg6so-1225790158530

I was born the 1950s and saw the tail-end of corporal punishment in secular schools, yet fear the cases, now giving rise to concern, go beyond the sting of the cane on one's finger tips.

It would seem going on media reports, in Australia, these things happened up until at least the 1970s. Herein, some of the guilty must still be around. I wonder if they escape by way of the statute of limitations.

Dear All,

"Three Dublin archbishops — John Charles McQuaid (1940-72), Dermot Ryan (1972-84) and Kevin McNamara (1985-87) — did not tell police about clerical abuse cases, instead opting to avoid public scandals by shuttling offenders from parish to parish and even overseas to U.S. churches, the commission found." ...

"The report said all four archbishops sought 'the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities'."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hG7UpOwvc_tTJz3KkFUHO9AUBnBAD9C7E5L82

I just don't get it. Why doesn't the State (regardless of country) put these Church leaders on trial? And, if convicted, throw away the key?

It is also pathetic that the Christian "folk" sit silence and don't become enraged. If genuine priests were true to their convictions, they too, would turn on their leaders and peers. St*ff their vow of obedience. The issue is too big.

Is Australia in the same position as Ireland? Well, I think that we can do better than guess the answer.

"It is also pathetic that the Christian "folk" sit silence and don't become enraged. If genuine priests were true to their convictions, they too, would turn on their leaders and peers. St*ff their vow of obedience. The issue is too big."

Oliver, I recently watched the debate on Intelligence Squared - "Is the Catholic Church a Force for Good in the World". It made me think that the christian 'folk' are finally waking up.

The two people who spoke for the catholics were Ann Widdecombe and Archbishop Onaiyekan (of Abuja, Nigeria). Ann Widdecombe would have to be the nastiest apologetic for Catholicism I've ever seen or heard. She poo pooed the church's child abuse scandals as if they were nothing and really turned the whole crowd against the catholics, the pathetic Archbishop was hopeless, the audience was asked to vote before the debate, and after...eye opening stuff, its really worth a look, Christopher Hitchins and Stephen Fry on the other side!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvZz_pxZ2l

Thanks, trikkerdee. There were several interesting youtube sites. Cheers, O.