|
|
Post by Grant on Oct 23, 2012 3:43:45 GMT -5
Guess the figure would be about the same or higher for the workers. Staying in people's home give them just the opportunity to get access to children alone, not to mention the trust of the parents which makes it more difficult for children to believed.
|
|
|
|
Post by emmarr75 on Oct 23, 2012 6:05:03 GMT -5
Here's the Herald Sun's reporting of the same:
A FORMER priest has called for the Catholic Church to accept married clergy to help change a culture which has contributed to sexual abuse of children.
Des Cahill says the Victorian government should amend the Equal Opportunity Act to remove the exemption allowing religious organisations to bar people from serving in the church because of their marital status.
Professor Cahill told a Victorian parliamentary inquiry the reform would require "major changes" in the church and admitted it would be a long shot.
But allowing married clergy in the Catholic Church could be the "circuit breaker" needed to change the whole culture of what he called "celibate caste clericalism", he said.
"Celibacy should be maintained, but there should also be the scope for diversity to include married clergy," he told the inquiry into child abuse by religious and other organisations.
"To introduce this requires major change, not least of which is the financial implications."
While a small number of married Anglican ministers have crossed over and been ordained as Catholic priests in Australia in recent years, Prof Cahill is calling for further steps.
He believes the church should readmit married former priests like himself and allow married men to be ordained.
Prof Cahill, who served in two Melbourne parishes in the 1970s and is now professor of intercultural studies at RMIT University, said there was general support for change.
"Around the world, the majority of Catholic lay people support married clergy," he said.
He said celibacy in a closed community such as the priesthood could contribute to emotional immaturity and lead indirectly to a culture of offending.
"If a celibate does not receive the emotional support of a close community, such as a marriage, there's a greater likelihood of offending," he said.
Prof Cahill said figures showed one in 20 priests ordained in Melbourne between 1940 and 1972 were child abusers, but because many cases went unreported, that figure could be as high as one in 15.
He said 22 of the 452 priests who studied at Corpus Christi College in that time were known child sex offenders, a similar rate to a US analysis which found 4362 of 105,000 priests had abused children.
He said the figure may be even higher among Christian Brothers.
While reported cases have decreased in the past 20 years, he feared sexual abuse in the church may rebound in the coming decades because the "underlying problems have not been addressed".
The church was incapable of dealing adequately with sexual abuse, he said, as it maintained unrealistic ethical clericalism, lacked openness and transparency, and operated under canon law rather than civil law.
He said giving lay members of parishes representation on diocesan synods to have their say on policy matters would help the church.
"Where there's greater openness, there's more likelihood of bringing issues that fester to the surface," he said.
Prof Cahill also called for the Melbourne Response - the church's internal protocol for dealing with abuse accusations - to be dissolved and all allegations to be sent to police.
"It (Melbourne Response) is in house, designed to protect the image and reputation of the church and to contain financial liability," he said.
"All this saga would have been much more easily handled if it was handled in the proper arena - the police and criminal justice system."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2012 7:26:50 GMT -5
Guess the figure would be about the same or higher for the workers. Staying in people's home give them just the opportunity to get access to children alone, not to mention the trust of the parents which makes it more difficult for children to believed. It's such a hidden crime that it can be difficult to determine the extent of it. In a worker convention photo, 5 male workers out of 16 males were identified with having allegations against them. That's 31%. One would hope that this particular photo isn't indicative of the overall worker group (but we can't ascertain that either). When certain factors are considered: unmarried clergy, living in homes with vulnerable children, and an unusual adoration toward the worker group, the conditions are set up for a large number of abuses. The only thing tilting the risk factors away is the 2x2 companion system. However, if one companion is a naive non-abuser, they won't see what's going on and if the companion is a fellow abuser, they won't "see" what's going on. |
|
|
|
Post by spiders on Oct 24, 2012 5:31:05 GMT -5
Here is a link to the website of the "Inquiry into the Handling of Child Abuse by Religious and Other Organisations" being conducted by the Victorian Parliament. Submissions to the Inquiry are published and make very interesting reading. I wonder if the F&W church made a submission? www.parliament.vic.gov.au/fcdc/article/1789 |
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Oct 24, 2012 14:17:35 GMT -5
Submission?
They don't like to put things in writing remember.
They don't like to show their ignorance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Oct 24, 2012 14:44:45 GMT -5
Submission? They don't like to put things in writing remember. They don't like to show their ignorance. Anyone could make a submission. It wouldn't have to be done by a worker. In the opening remarks it is pretty clear what the focus is for this inquirey: The committee has been asked, amongst other things, to consider how practices and processes within these organisations discouraged reporting to state authorities and possibly contributed to both the incidence of offending and the effective denial of justice to victims. It will also seek to identify systemic and legal solutions to improve responses to child abuse in religious and other organisations.
It may not be generally understood that the committee has substantial powers and privileges as a joint house committee of the Victorian Parliament.
It is important to point out that the committee has the same or equivalent powers and privileges as a court, judicial inquiry or royal commission.
It has the power to call for any witnesses to come before the inquiry, to produce any and all documents and to answer questions relevant to the terms of reference.
It can issue a parliamentary subpoena to require the attendance of any person before the committee. Contempt of Parliament can apply when the committee rules and orders are not complied with. |
|
|
|
Post by guitar on Oct 24, 2012 16:04:21 GMT -5
Do you think any religious organization will submit to a lower power than the almighty God?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Oct 24, 2012 20:54:24 GMT -5
Only those that follow scripture regarding secular authorities.  |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Oct 25, 2012 12:19:23 GMT -5
guitar, when workers submit requests to their governments, are they submitting to a lower authority than God?
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on Oct 25, 2012 16:21:24 GMT -5
submit
1 To yield or surrender (oneself) to the will or authority of another.
3 To commit (something) to the consideration or judgment of another.
|
|
|
|
Post by guitar on Oct 25, 2012 23:53:24 GMT -5
I think they are. When the courts ask u to swear on the bible do u quote the verses about not swearing on the bible.
|
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Oct 26, 2012 10:17:00 GMT -5
Is it wrong for the workers to be under the law?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Oct 26, 2012 13:32:15 GMT -5
I think they are. When the courts ask u to swear on the bible do u quote the verses about not swearing on the bible. What verses are those? Weird that would be in the bible, since the bible hadn't been compiled...... |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 26, 2012 13:48:08 GMT -5
I think they are. When the courts ask u to swear on the bible do u quote the verses about not swearing on the bible. What verses are those? Weird that would be in the bible, since the bible hadn't been compiled...... Matthew 5 has some swear not's, I couldn't find the one I wanted to but it does say not to swear about the tabernacle or anything of it....but the idea they're trying to get across is that our conversation should be yes and no. |
|
