Paul,

Given your intimate involvement in the catholic church and your hyper interest in their goings on, I would suggest that you have deep personal issues that you are hiding?

Issy the more you tell me the more I keep it up. I'm flying to Sydney this morning. Next time I'll try flying in an airplane. Don't mock the Rev Devine.

The above contribution by the village idiot is what we've come to expect.

Issy, you should apologise to Shadow Minister, he no longer lives in the village, he's moved into the town! Catholic priests should have no more rights when it comes to the law than any other citizen. Many in the Catholic Church knew of the pedophlic activity of other cleargy but failed to report it as they should have. Jail is what they deserve.

Paul.

The above, above, refers to the post immediately above it, no deflections.

No matter what the faults/misdemeanours/crimes of the Catholic clergy etc., etc. the question is, how would the law be enforced and how would evidence be collected?

Seems to be a bit of a void there, does no one have any ideas?

Dear Diver Dan,

You put to me the following;

“Read what I said. There is no comparison between a priest performing in confessional, and a school councillor. A priest is in a metaphysical state of being, (according to his religious belief system). No comparison.”

Sorry what?

So a claim of being in a metaphysical state means you are above the laws of the land? Further he is not hearing about metaphysical matters but very worldly ones. No leave pass here I'm afraid.

Dear Is Mise,

You asked of Paul;

“No matter what the faults/misdemeanours/crimes of the Catholic clergy etc., etc. the question is, how would the law be enforced and how would evidence be collected? Seems to be a bit of a void there, does no one have any ideas?”

Sure. If an abuser is identified and confesses to the crime and when asked if they had told anyone of their crimes and they answer “Yes, I confessed it to so and so on such and such a day” then the matter should be investigated and charges should be laid if there is a substantial likelihood the non-disclosure occurred.

What is so hard about that?